PurposeThe paper investigates the closure mechanisms and strategies of exclusion concerning the establishment and subsequent functioning of the Collegio dei Rasonati, the professional body of accountants that was established in Venice in 1581 and operated until the end of the 18th century.Design/methodology/approachThe research design offers a critical longitudinal explanation of the emergence of the Collegio dei Rasonati as a professional body in the context of Venetian society by relying on the social closure theory elaborated by Collins (1975); Parkin (1979) and Murphy (1988).FindingseThe Collegio dei Rasonati was established to overcome the prerogatives of a social class in accessing the accounting profession. However, the pre-existing professional elites enacted a set of social closure strategies able to transform this professional body into a stronghold of their privileges.Research limitations/implicationsAs virtually all of the evidence concerning the admission examinations has been lost over time, the investigation is restricted to the study of the few examples that have survived. The main implication of the study concerns the understanding of some dynamics leading to neutralize attempts to replace class privileges with a meritocratic system.Originality/valueThe research investigates the structure of the rules of social closure revealing the possibility of an antagonistic relationship between different co-existing forms of exclusion within the same structure. Moreover, it highlights that a form of exclusion can be made of different hierarchical levels.
The article aims to study the effect of output additionality of public innovation funding on firm innovation, measured as economic returns of innovation, across firms of different sizes. A panel sample consisting of 4125 Spanish firms observed during years 2009–2014 has been analysed, using a treatment model. Robustness tests have also been used. The findings show the effects of output additionality of innovation funding support for small, medium and large firms, with a greater effect on large firms and a lower effect on medium firms. However, there has a weak effect for very large firms, which do not benefit in terms of output additionality. Since it is relatively easy for large firms to benefit from public support for innovation, some of the resources allocated to them should be passed on to small and medium firms. Medium firms seem to be less inclined to benefit from economies of scales than large firms and may be less affected by public innovation policy given the priority for small firms' development. Small and medium enterprises can benefit further from well‐designed targeting programmes, with a prevalence of demand‐side support measures compared to the supply‐side measures.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.