Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
An unusually rich data set was tapped to explore the relationship between research and development (R and D) and productivity growth. The most-important finding is that, with disaggregated data, the wrong lag hypothesis is not supported: there is no clear indication that the productivity slump of the 1970s resulted from a decrease in the marginal productivity of R and D. Also important is the evidence of substantial returns to used R and D, i.e., from internal-process work and the purchase of R and D-embodying products, but not (at least in industries with productivity indices based upon physical output or comprehensive price deflators) to the performance of product R and D. Given the fact that three-fourths of all industrial R and D is product-oriented, studies that fail to distinguish between the origination and use of R and D may suffer from appreciable specification errors. Further research using improved R and D and (especially) productivity data is plainly needed, among other things, to clarify the mystery of why estimated R and D-productivity relationships differ for productivity-data subsets of varying quality. 15 references, 3 tables.
F. M. Scherer (Mon,) studied this question.