Do business and public sector research and development expenditures contribute to economic growth in Central and Eastern European Countries? A dynamic panel estimation
This paper empirically estimates the role of private and public research and development in explaining growth of Central and Eastern European Countries (CEE) during 1998–2008. We employ a dynamic panel model using the Arellano–Bond's Generalized Methods of Moments (GMM). Our findings suggest th...
Saved in:
Published in: | Economic modelling Vol. 36; pp. 108 - 119 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Amsterdam
Elsevier B.V
01-01-2014
Elsevier Science Ltd |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | This paper empirically estimates the role of private and public research and development in explaining growth of Central and Eastern European Countries (CEE) during 1998–2008. We employ a dynamic panel model using the Arellano–Bond's Generalized Methods of Moments (GMM). Our findings suggest that a 1% increase in business R&D intensity boosts economic growth by 0.050 (0.213) % in these countries in the short (long) run. Public R&D is found to be statistically insignificant. When introducing human capital in the regression, the contribution of business R&D to economic growth decreases, although it remains significant. We argue that part of its effect may be accounted for by human capital. While various robustness checks are performed (such as adding different control variables, sub-periods and dummies for the entrance years to the EU), most of the results imply significant business R&D coefficient. Some policy implications are addressed based on our results.
•We test the impact of R&D on economic growth in 10 CEE countries during 1998–2008.•We differentiate between public and private (business) R&D.•Business R&D has a strong and significant impact on growth.•Public R&D proves to have no effect on growth.•Results remain mainly the same when different robustness checks are applied. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 0264-9993 1873-6122 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.econmod.2013.08.035 |