Abstract
This work aims to analyzing the relationship between the type of financing resources and growth of the manufacturing sectors, grouped according to technological regimes, and to relate this relationship to its degree of adequacy of the sources to the sectoral technological opportunities. Thus, panel data analysis was performed in order to asses the relationship between financial deepening and innovation. We gathered detailed data for each industrial sector, grouped according to its technological regimes, and ran a Granger causality test in panels. Results found report that more innovation-intense sectors, which boosted aggregated economic growth rather steeply, present inadequate financing dynamic to its own growth. Therefore, considering sectors with high technological opportunities and strong innovation persistence, it was observed a bank-based type of financing, whilst the ideal for its growth would be the market-based one. On the other hand, less innovative sectors are found in better situation of financing and better growth conditions. These (non-)satisfactory requirements present themselves in (higher) lower growth rates and industrial production share.References
AGHION, P.; HOWITT, P. A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, v. 60. n. 2, p. 323-351, 1992.
ARESTIS, P.; DEMETRIADES, P. Finance and growth: institutionals considerations and causality. London, University of East London, Department of Economics, 1996. (Working Paper, n. 5).
BALTAGI, B.H.; PESARAN, M.H. Heterogeneity and cross section dependence in panel data models: theory and applications introduction. Journal of Applied Econometrics, v. 22, n. 2, p. 229-232, 2007.
CORDER, S.; SALLES-FILHO, S. Aspectos conceituais do financiamento à inovação. Revista Brasileira de Inovação, v. 5, n. 1, p. 33-76, jan./jun. 2006.
DICKEY, D.A.; FULLER, W.A. Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, v. 74, n. 366, p. 427-431, 1979.
DOSI, G. Finance, Innovation and Industrial Change. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, v. 13, issue 3, p. 299-319, 1990.
FINK, G.; HAISS, P.; HRISTOFOROVA, S. Bond Markets and Economic Growth. Research Institute for European Affairs. Vienna, University of Economics and Business Administration Vienna. 2003. (IEF Working Paper, n. 49). Disponível em: http://fgr.wuwien.ac.at/institut/ef/wp/WP49.pdf.
IEF Working Paper Nr.49, Research Institute for European Affairs, University of Economics and Business Administration, Vienna, April, 2003
FREEMAN, C. The Kondratiev Long Waves, Technical Change and Unemployment. Structural Determinants of Employment, Paris, OECD, v. 2, p. 181-196, 1977.
HENRIQUES, T.R. O papel do sistema financeiro brasileiro no sistema nacional de inovação: introdução à discussão a partir dos dados da Pintec 2003. Prêmio Ipea-Caixa. 2007. Disponível em: http://www.ipea.gov.br/sites/000/2/ipea_caixa/2007/estudante_tema03_1lugar.pdf
IBGE. Pesquisa Industrial Anual – Empresa. Série Relatórios Metodológicos. Rio de Janeiro, v. 26. 2004a.
IBGE. Pesquisa Industrial – Produto. Rio de Janeiro, v. 23, n. 2, 2004b.
IM, K.; PESARAN, H.; SHIN, Y. Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels. Journal of Econometrics, v. 115, n. 1, p. 53-74, 2003.
KEYNES, J.M. Teoria geral do emprego, do juro e da moeda. Rio de Janeiro: Atlas, 1982.
KLETTE, T.J.; KORTUM, S. Innovating firms and aggregate innovation. Journal of Political Economy, v. 112, n. 5. p. 986-1018, 2004.
LEVIN, A.; LIN, C. Unit Root Tests in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite-Sample Properties. University of California, December, 1993. San Diego Discussion Paper.
MADDALA, G.S.; WU, S. A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, v. 61, p. 631-652, 1999.
MALERBA, F. Sectoral Systems and Innovation and Technology Policy. Revista Brasileira de Inovação, v. 2, n. 2, p. 329-375, 2003.
MARSILI, O.; VERSPAGEN, B. Technological Regimes and Innovation: Looking for Regularities in Dutch Manufacturing. Artigo apresentado em Nelson and Winter Conference in Aalborg, June 12-15, 2001. Disponível em: http://www.druid.dk/.
NELSON, R. Why do firms differ, and how does it matter?. Strategic Management Journal, n. 12, p. 61-74, Winter 1991.
NELSON, R.; SAMPAT, B. Making sense of institutions as a factor shaping economic performance. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, v. 44, p. 31-54, 2001.
NELSON, R.; WINTER, S. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1982.
O’SULLIVAN, M. Finance and innovation. In: FAGERBERG, J; MOWERY, D.C.; NELSON, R.R. (Ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2005. p. 240-265.
PAVITT, K. Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change: Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory. Research Policy, n. 13, p. 343-373, 1984.
PEDRONI, P. Critical Values for Cointegration Tests in Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple Regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, n. 61, p. 653-678, 1999. (Special Issue).
PEREZ, C. Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital. The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden-Ages. Cheltenham, Elgar, 2002.
PESARAN, H.; SHIN, Y.; SMITH, R. Pooled Mean Group Estimation and Dynamic Heterogeneous Panels. Journal of the American Statistical Association, v. 94, n. 446, p. 621-634, 1999.
SCHUMPETER, J. The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge Harvard: University Press, 1911.
ZYSMAN, J. Governments, Markets, and Growth: Financial Systems and the Politics of Industrial Growth. Oxford: Martin Robertson, 1983.
The content of the articles and reviews published in RBI are of absolute and exclusive responsibility of their authors.
Downloads
