Do incentives to industrial R&amp;amp;D enhance research productivity and firm growth? Evidence from the Italian case

Merito, Monica; Giannangeli, Silvia; Bonaccorsi, Andrea

doi:10.1504/ijtm.2010.029409

Cited by 23 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It seems that less productive firms benefited from the program, while firms with initially higher productivity tended to lag behind the control group after support. No significant effect of R&D support on value added in the manufacturing industry is documented in Merito [52], which deals with the Italian FSRA program. Also, Nam [53] finds no effect of the South Korean R&D program KTIPS on the sales of supported firms.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Support of Private R&D–Effects on Economic Sustainability

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A substantial part of contemporary R&D policy in developed countries is focused on the support of R&D in the private sector. Such intervention is theoretically justified by a higher propensity to innovation and consequently to higher competitiveness, which promotes sustainable economic growth. Most of the empirical research done so far focuses mainly on the leverage effect, the effect on innovation activity or on estimating the crowding out effect of public support. Although the outcomes of this research are quite contradictory, only a few studies focus on the effect of public support of private R&D on the private bodies’ performance indicators, which are naturally connected with a company’s economic sustainability. In this article we use counterfactual design and show that the R&D policy of supporting the private sector leads to higher innovation activity, but it does not lead to higher value added and productivity for supported subjects, at least in the short run. Such a finding suggests a possible flaw in R&D policy implementation—it is questionable if higher innovation activity is truly effective if it is not followed by a positive effect on production (value added) and productivity, and if it does not have a positive effect on competitiveness or lead to sustainable economic growth.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Support of Private R&D–Effects on Economic Sustainability

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, the more general consolidated evidence is that evaluating the impact of R&D loans, subsidies and grants is extremely complex, even when individual programmes are relatively simple in terms of policy design and implementation. Only a limited number of impact evaluation studies can directly trace the full range of policy effects; none can attribute these effects to specific features of the corresponding programme (on the case of Italy, see Bertamino, Bronzini, De Maggio, & Revelli, 2016;Bondonio & Greenbaum, 2012;Bronzini & Piselli, 2016;Corsino, Gabriele, & Giunta, 2015;Fantino & Cannone, 2013;and Merito, Giannangeli, & Bonaccorsi, 2010).…”

Section: Implementation Of the Smart Specialisation Strategy (S3): Kementioning

confidence: 99%

Cohesion Policy incentives for collaborative industrial research: evaluation of a Smart Specialisation forerunner programme

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper evaluates a programme of subsidies for collaborative industrial research (co-)funded by the European Union's Cohesion Policy in Italy mobilizing over €1 billion. In the 2007-13 funding cycle, the programme was a precursor to some of the key features of Smart Specialisation Strategy (S3) programmes, offering evidence-based insights into potential challenges of the practical application of the S3 approach. The programme was unsuccessful in boosting investments, value added or employment of beneficiary firms. The collaborative dimension of the projects added limited value and a more generous funding level would not have improved effectiveness. However, positive impacts emerged in low-tech sectors.

show abstract

“…Regarding public agencies, the selection process could favour innovation projects with high private returns or low risk, as their successful implementation might improve the image of the support programme (Callejón and García-Quevedo, 2005;Merito et al, 2010). Finally, asymmetric information between firms and public agencies could result in adverse selection of firms intending to use public funding to finance activities not related to innovation (Merito et al, 2010). David et al (2000) provide an extensive review of empirical evidence regarding the effect of public support on innovation and conclude that, although more empirical studies indicate complementarity than substitutability between public and private R&D funding, the overall conclusion is still ambiguous.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cerulli and Potí, 2008;Hussinger, 2008;Aschhoff, 2009;Garcia and Mohnen, 2010;Schneider and Veugelers, 2010;Hewitt-Dundas and Roper;2010;Marzucchi, 2011;Herrera and Sánchez-Gonzáles, 2012), the introduction of product innovation (e.g. Hujer Like evaluations focused on input additionality, those investigating output additionality yield heterogeneous results (Merito et al, 2010; for review see Antonioli and Marzucchi, 2012;Cunningham et al, 2012). 7 In addition, studies investigating the effectiveness of public support 7 Antonioli and Marzucchi (2012), in particular, focus on behavioural additionality.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It should be regarded as a complement, not a substitute, to input and output additionality (Clarysse et al, 2009;Cunningham et al, 2012). Compared to programmes on measures of innovation and firm performance other than R&D expenditure are scarce (Merito et al, 2010). Most studies report output additionality; see, for instance, Their results vary depending on the source of funding: EU support has no effect; but central government support has a positive effect on both product innovation and innovative sales.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation