Do innovative activities matter to Indian drug and pharmaceutical firms? An application to export performance

Abstract

This paper analyzes the R&D and exports profile of Indian drug and pharmaceutical industry during the period 2000–2014. The present paper examines how R&D expenditure and patent impact export performance of the Indian drug and pharmaceutical firms. The study period from 2000 to 2014 has been characterized by a rapid growth in industry’s innovative activity, as part of the strategic shift, induced by the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005. Using the real financial data for the top 91 publicly listed Indian domestic pharmaceutical companies, the study provides new evidence on firm-level export performance of the Indian drugs and pharmaceutical industry. Generalized Method of Movements estimator developed by Blundell and Bond is applied. The empirical findings of the study reveal that increased R&D intensity, higher patent count and firm’s size are important determinants of firm-level export performance.

Keywords

R&D patents exports Indian Pharmaceutical Industry TRIPS

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Esteve-Pérez

Rodríguez

. The dynamics of exports and R&D in SMEs. Small Bus Econ 2013; 41: 219–240.

Nevesa

Aurora

Teixeirab

et al.

Exports-R&D investment complementarity and economic performance of firms located in Portugal. InvestigaciónEconómica 2016; LXXV: 125–156.

Aw BY, Roberts MJ and Winston T. The complementary role of exports and R&D investments as sources of productivity growth. No. w11774.2005. USA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

Lachenmaier

Wössmann

. Does innovation cause exports? Evidence from exogenous innovation impulses and obstacles using German micro data. Oxf Econ Paper 2006; 58: 317–350.

Nauriyal DK and Sahoo D. The new IPR regime and Indian drug and pharmaceutical industry: an empirical analysis. In: Paper presented at the EPIP conference, Berne, Switzerland, 3–4 October 2008.

Chaudhuri

. The WTO and India’s Pharmaceuticals Industry, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Pradhan JP. Global competitiveness of Indian pharmaceutical industry: trends and strategies. In: MPRA Paper 12340, University Library of Munich, Germany, 2006.

GOI. Annual Report 2015-16, Department of Pharmaceuticals, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, GOI, http://pharmaceuticals.gov.in/sites/default/files/Chemical%20Pharma%20-2015-16%20English%20Final%20FOR%20PRINT.pdf (accessed 4 June 2017).

India Brand Equity Foundation (IBEF). Sectoral Report, www.ibef.org/industry/pharmaceutical-india.aspx (2016, accessed 12 July 2016).

10.

Pharmexil (2015) Annual Report 2015–2016. Pharmaceuticals Exports Promotion Council of India, New Delhi.

11.

Tyagi

Mahajan

Nauriyal

. Innovations in Indian drug and pharmaceutical industry: have they impacted exports? J Intellect Property Right 2014; 19: 243–252.

12.

Grace C. The effect of changing intellectual property on pharmaceutical industry prospects in India and China, DFID Health Systems Resource Centre. 2004; 1–68.

13.

DiPietro

Anoruo

. Creativity, innovation, and export performance. J Pol Model 2006; 28: 133–139.

14.

Fagerberg

. International competitiveness. Econ J 1988; 98: 355–374.

15.

Greenhalgh

. Innovation and trade performance in the United Kingdom. Econ J 1990; 100: 105–118.

16.

Harris R and Moffat J. R&D, innovation and exporting. In: SERC Discussion Paper 73. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/33593/1/sercdp0073.pdf (2011, accessed 02 September 2016).

17.

Leon-Ledesma

. Exports, product differentiation and knowledge spillovers. Open Econ Rev 2005; 16: 363–379.

18.

Narula

Wakelin

. Technological competitiveness, trade and foreign direct investment. Struct Change Econ Dynam 1998; 9: 373–387.

19.

Salim

Bloch

. Business expenditures on R&D and trade performances in Australia: is there a link? Appl Econ 2009; 41: 351–361.

20.

Verspagen

Wakelin

. International competitiveness and its determinants. Int J Appl Econ 1997; 11: 177–190.

21.

Nauriyal

. TRIPS-Compliant New Patents Act and Indian Pharmaceutical Sector Directions in Strategy and R&D. Indian J Econ Bus 2006; 22: 1–18.

22.

Hirsch

Bijaoui

. R&D intensity and export performance: a micro view. Weltwirtschaftlichesarchive 1985; 121: 238–251.

23.

Bonnal

. Economic growth and labor standards: evidence from a dynamic panel data model. Rev Dev Econ 2010; 14: 20–33.

24.

Golovko

Valentini

. Exploring the complementarity between innovation and export for SMEs growth. J Int Bus Stud 2011; 42: 362–380.

25.

Santos-Paulino

. Trade liberalisation and export performance in selected developing countries. J Dev Stud 2002; 39: 140–164.

26.

Blundell R and Bond S. Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. J Econom 1998; 87: 115–143.

27.

Bond S, Elston JA, Mairesse J, et al. Financial factors and investment in Belgium, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom: A comparison using company panel data. Rev Econ Stat 2003; 85: 153–165.

28.

Bond SR and Windmeijer F. Finite sample inference for gmm estimators in linear panel data models. cemmap Working Paper No. CWP04/02, https://ssrn.com/abstract=311061 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.311061 (May, 2002).

29.

Arellano

Bond

. Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev Econ Stud 1991; 58: 277–297.

30.

Behr A. A comparison of dynamic panel data estimators: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to the investment function. Discussion Paper Series 1/Volkswirtschaftliches Forschungszentrum der Deutschen Bundesbank, 2003.

31.

Wakelin K. Innovation and export behaviour at the firm level. Res Policy 1998; 26: 829–841.

32.

Caldera A. Review of world economics, Vol. 146, Springer, USA, 2010, p.657. DOI: 10.1007/s10290-010-0065-7.

33.

Labeaga

Martínez-Ros

. Estimación de unmodelo de ecuacionessimultáneas con variables dependienteslimitadas: Una aplicacióncondatos de la industriaespañola. InvestigacionesEconómicas 1994; 18: 465–490.

34.

Martin

Velázquez

. El capital extranjero y el comercio exterior de las empresasmanufactureras. Papeles de Economía Española 1993; 56: 221–234.

35.

Rodil O and Vence X. Tipo de innovación y comportamientoexportador de las empresasgallegas. Vol. XXXIV, reunión de estudiosregionales. Jaén: asociaciónandaluza de ciencia regional, 2008.

36.

Rodríguez

. Relación entre innovación y exportaciones de las empresas: Unestudioempírico. Papeles de Economía Española 1999; 81: 167–180.

37.

Becker SO and Egger PH. Endogeneous product versus process innovation and a firm’s propensity to export. In: Working Paper 1906, Munich, Germany: CESIFO, 2007.

38.

Suárez-Porto

Guisado-González

. Analysis of the determinants of exporting intensity in the field of innovation. InvestigacionesEuropeas de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa 2014; 20: 79–86.

39.

Harris

. Exporting, R&D, and absorptive capacity in UK establishments. Oxf Econ Paper 2009; 61: 74–103.

40.

Van Beveren I and Vandenbussche H. Product and process innovation and the decision to export: firm-level evidence for Belgium. LICOS Discussion Paper No. 247/2009, https://ssrn.com/abstract=1512427 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1512427 (2009).

41.

Zimmerman

. Trade and dynamic efficiency. Kyklos 1987; 40: 73–87.

42.

Goldar

. R&D intensity and exports: a study of Indian pharmaceutical firms. Innov Dev 2013; 3: 151–167.

43.

Wagner J. Exports, R&D and productivity: A test of the Bustos-model with German enterprise data. University of Lüneburg Working Paper Series in Economics, 2012.

44.

Andersson

Lööf

. Learning‐by‐exporting revisited: the role of intensity and persistence. Scand J Econ 2009; 111: 893–916.

45.

Hahn CH and Park CG. Direction of causality in innovation-exporting linkage: evidence on Korean manufacturing. In: ERIA Discussion Paper, 2012. Jakarta, Indonesia: Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).

46.

Salmon

Shaver

. Learning by exporting: new insights from examining firm innovation. J Econ Manag Strat 2005; 14: 431–460.

47.

Girma

Görg

Hanley

. R&D and exporting: a comparison of British and Irish firms. Rev World Econ 2008; 144: 750–773.

48.

Kostevc C and Damijan J. Causal link between exporting and innovation activity. Evidence from Slovenian Firms, http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/gep/documents/conferences/2008/, spfeb2008conf/damijan-feb2008.pdf (2008).

49.

Czarnitzki, D. and Wastyn, A. Competing internationally: On the importance of R&D for export activity. Discussion Paper No. 10-071. Mannheim, Germany: ZEW – Centre for European Economic Research, https://ssrn.com/abstract=1692648 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1692648 (2010).

50.

Ebling G and Norbert J. Export and innovation activities in the german service sector: Empirical evidence at the firm level. Discussion Paper No. 99-53. Mannheim, Germany: ZEW – Centre for European Economic Research, https://ssrn.com/abstract=376220 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.376220 (1999).

51.

Soete

LLG

. A general test of the technological gap trade theory. WeltwirtschaftlichesArchiv 1981; 117: 638–666.

52.

Dosi

Pavitt

KLR

Soete

LLG

. The economics of technical change and international trade, Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1990.

53.

Sterlacchini

. Do innovative activities matter to small firms in non-R&D-intensive industries? An application to export performance. Res Pol 1999; 28: 819–832.

54.

Verspagen

. Uneven growth between interdependent economies: an evolutionary view on technology gaps, trade and growth, Maastricht: UniversitairePers Maastricht, 1992.

55.

WIPO. Study on the use of intellectual property and export performance of Brazilian firms. CDIP/14/INF/5, Committee on Development and Intellectual Property (CDIP), Geneva, 2014.

56.

Innovation in India. 2007 Report of National Knowledge Commission, Government of India, New Delhi, http://knowledgecommission.gov.in/NKC_Innovation.pdf (accessed 1 February 2014).

57.

Vernon

. International investments and international trade in the product life cycle. Q J Econ 1966; 80: 190–207.

58.

Grossman GM and Helpman E. Technological determinants of trade. In: Papers: 44–95, Tel Aviv, 1995.

59.

Di Masi

Grabowski

Vernon

. R&D costs, innovative output and firm size in the pharmaceutical industry. Int J Econ Bus 1995; 2: 201–219.

60.

Kumar

Saqib

. Firm size, opportunities for adaptation and in-house R&D activity in developing countries: the case of Indian Manufacturing. Res Pol 1996; 25: 713–722.

61.

Pradhan JP. Liberalization, firm size and R&D performance: a firm level study of Indian Pharmaceutical Industry. In: MPRA Paper No. 17079, University Library of Munich, Germany, 2003.

62.

Arias-Aranda

Minguela-Rata

Rodríguez-Duarte

. Innovation and firm size: an empirical study for Spanish engineering consulting companies. Eur J Innov Manag 2001; 4: 133–142.

63.

Salomon

Shaver

. Export and domestic sales: their interrelationship and determinants. Strat Manag J 2005; 26: 855–871.

64.

Bhat S and Narayanan K. Technological efforts, firm size and exports in the basic chemical industry in India. Oxford Dev Stud 2009; 37: 145–169.

65.

Pradhan JP and Sahu PP. Defining the role of government in transnationalization efforts of Indian SMEs: a case study of Indian pharmaceutical industry, www.dsir.gov.in/reports/ittp_sme/PharmaReport2008.pdf (2008, accessed 20 May 2013).

66.

Williams

. Impact of firm size and age on the export behaviour of small locally owned firms: fresh insights. J Int Entrepren 2011; 9: 152–174.

67.

Abdelmoula

Etienne

. Determination of R&D investment in French firms: a two-part hierarchical model with correlated random effects. Econ Innovat New Tech 2010; 19: 53–70.

68.

Lall

. Technological development and export performance in LDCs: leading engineering and chemical firms in India. Rev World Econ 1986; 122: 80–92.

69.

Cassiman

Martinez-Ros

. Product innovation and exports. Evidence from Spanish manufacturing, Barcelona: IESE Business School, 2007, pp. 1–36.

70.

Gabbitas O and Gretton P. Firm size and export performance: Some empirical evidence. Working Paper No. 1739, Productivity Commission, https://ssrn.com/abstract=401401 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.401401.

71.

Patibandla

. Firm size and export behaviour: an Indian case study. J Dev Stud 1995; 31: 868–888.

72.

Stoian

Rialp

. Export performance under the microscope: a glance through Spanish lenses. Int Bus Rev 2011; 20: 117–135.