Determinants of location of overseas R&D activity of multinational enterprises: the case of US and Japanese corporations

By Nagesh Kumar. 2001

336 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f17e35f4f3e663a3100031a81e3404de98255b88

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. Subash Sasidharan
2. Anabel Marin
3. Peter Gammeltoft
4. Bronwyn H Hall
5. S. Lundan
6. Joel Stiebale
7. Jieyin Zhang
8. Alberto Di Minin

In Strategy and Management

1. S. Lundan
2. John H. Dunning
3. Bronwyn H Hall
4. Peter Gammeltoft
5. Anabel Marin
6. Subash Sasidharan
7. Jieyin Zhang
8. Alberto Di Minin

Citations in the corpus

• The Internationalization of R&D (2011, background): “In some cases the authors have access to firm-level data, whereas in other they rely on industry or country level data (Kumar, 1996, 2001; Jones and Teegen, 2003; Hegde and Hicks, 2008; Erken and Kleijn, 2010).”
• Chinese foreign direct investment in R&D in Europe: A new model of R&D internationalization? (2012, background): “Moreover, the cost of the R&D human resource is also an important location determinant for overseas R&D activities (Kumar, 2001).”
• The Internationalization of Corporate R&D and the Automotive Industry R&D of East-Central Europe (2012, background): “…even though the processes of R&D internationalization have been geographically uneven, in terms of both the origins and destinations of FDI in R&D (Kumar 2001, Reger 2004), and that close to 70 percent of foreign-owned (henceforth foreign) R&D-oriented subsidiaries were located in developed core…”
• What factors determine the mode of overseas R&D by multinationals? Empirical evidence (2007, background): “Kumar (2001) found that the higher ratio of scientist and engineers has a positive effect on R&D expenditure of MNCs’ affiliates and the higher wage of R&D personnel has a negative effect on it.”
• Heterogeneous MNC subsidiaries and technological spillovers: Explaining positive and negative effects in India (2010, background): “…unit of analysis (see for instance, Ghoshal and Bartlett, 1990; Birkinshaw and Hood, 1998; Cantwell and Janne, 1999; Kuemmerle, 1999; Papanastassiou and Pearce, 1999; Pearce, 1999; Zander, 1999; Kumar, 2001; Le Bas and Sierra, 2002; von Zedwitz and Gassman, 2002; Cantwell and Iammarino, 2003).”
• What determines the location choice of R&D activities by multinational firms? (2013, background): “16 expenditure intensity, which has been also extensively used to proxy innovation activity and the level of technological development (Kumar, 2001; Shimituzani and Todo, 2008).”
• Cross-Border M&As and Innovative Activity of Acquiring and Target Firms (2016, background): “Sanna-Raddacio and Veugelers (2007) argue that there ar further benefits to centralizing R&D due economies of scale and a reduced risk of technology spillovers to competitors (see also Kumar, 2001).”
• Foreign Direct Investment and R&D: Substitutes or Complements—A Case of Indian Manufacturing after 1991 Reforms (2011, background): “This is entirely different than what Kumar and Siddharthan (1994) found.”
• The Internationalization of Corporate R&D: A Review of the Evidence and Some Policy Implications for Home Countries1 (2009, methodology): “Other estimates presented by Kumar (2001) using MITI data indicate that between 1989 and 1997, the R&D expenditures of foreign affiliates of Japanese firms grew from 1.4 to 2.3 percent of the R&D expenditures of their parent group.”