IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipt/iptwpa/jrc99564.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Counterfactual Impact Evaluation of Public Funding of Innovation, Investment and R&D

Author

Listed:

Abstract

This report uses data from Efige and from Bureau Van Dijk’s Amadeus and Orbis to estimate the effect of funding from the EU and national programmes on firms’ employment, sales, added value, productivity and innovativeness. It also looks at the impact of subsidies to investment and R&D (irrespective of the source of funding) on the same variables. In the first part of the report we use only the Efige dataset (covering the years 2007- 2009) and we look at (contemporaneous) correlation between public support (from national and EU sources) and product and process innovation. Our results indicate that national and EU funding are equally important in stimulating product innovation. However, EU funding has a higher correlation with process innovation. We also find a positive correlation between public support to private R&D and product innovation (but no significant correlation between the former and process innovation). On the other hand, public support to private investment (including ICT capital) is positively associated with process innovation but not with product innovation. In the second part of the report we perform a proper counterfactual analysis, where we merge the Efige dataset with the Bureau Van Dijk’s Amadeus (years 2001-2012) and Orbis (2006-2012) databases. This allows us to test whether firms funded between years 2007 and 2009 have a significantly different economic performance (measured in terms of employment, sales, and value added) in the years 2009-2012, while controlling for firms characteristics measured prior to 2007 (i.e. in the pre-treatment period). Our results indicate that receiving public support from national funds generates positive increments in employment, sales and added value, compared to the counterfactual status of the absence of public intervention. We do not find evidence that EU funds have additional impacts on employment, sales or value added (relative to firms receiving only national funding or no funding). This result is most likely due to the small sample size of firms receiving EU funds, which does not allow us to precisely estimate the impact of EU funding alone or in conjunction with national funding. It is also likely to depend upon the features of EU funding, which is geared towards research that produces results over a longer time horizon than the one observable in our data. We also find that generic support to firm-level investment projects has positive impacts on employment and added value. However, no statistically significant impacts are estimated for subsidies which support R&D expenditures exclusively (possibly due to the nature of R&D support policies, which often require more time to yield noticeable impacts on general firm-level performance).

Suggested Citation

  • Daniele Bondonio & Federico Biagi & Juraj Stancik, 2016. "Counterfactual Impact Evaluation of Public Funding of Innovation, Investment and R&D," JRC Research Reports JRC99564, Joint Research Centre.
  • Handle: RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc99564
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC99564
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bondonio, Daniele, 2009. "Impact identification strategies for evaluating business incentive programs," POLIS Working Papers 129, Institute of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS.
    2. Ho, Daniel E. & Imai, Kosuke & King, Gary & Stuart, Elizabeth A., 2007. "Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 199-236, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jan Cadil & Karel Mirosnik & Ludmila Petkovova & Michal Mirvald, 2018. "Public Support of Private R&D–Effects on Economic Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-14, December.
    2. Peter Mayerhofer, 2016. "Unternehmensinvestitionen in den österreichischen Bundesländern. Entwicklung – Struktur – Funktion regionaler Förderung," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 58936, March.
    3. Ondřej Dvouletý & Ivana Blažková, 2019. "Assessing the microeconomic effects of public subsidies on the performance of firms in the czech food processing industry: A counterfactual impact evaluation," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(3), pages 394-422, July.
    4. Costantiello, Alberto & Laureti, Lucio & Leogrande, Angelo & Marco, Matarrese, 2021. "The Innovation Linkages in Europe," MPRA Paper 111038, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Meda Andrijauskiene & Daiva Dumciuviene & Alina Stundziene, 2021. "EU framework programmes: positive and negative effects on member states' innovation performance," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 16(3), pages 471-502, September.
    6. Daniel Nepelski & Marc Bogdanowicz & Federico Biagi & Paul Desruelle & Giuditta De Prato & Garry Gabison & Giuseppe Piroli & Annarosa Pesole & Nikolaus Thumm & Vincent Van Roy, 2017. "7 ways to boost digital innovation and entrepreneurship in Europe. Key messages from the European innovation policies for the digital shift project," JRC Research Reports JRC104899, Joint Research Centre.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Augusto Cerqua & Guido Pellegrini, 2013. "Beyond the SUTVA: how industrial policy evaluations change when we allow for interaction among firms," ERSA conference papers ersa13p340, European Regional Science Association.
    2. Federico Biagi & Daniele Bondonio & Alberto Martini, 2015. "Counterfactual Impact Evaluation of Enterprise Support Programmes. Evidence from a Decade of Subsidies to Italian Firm," ERSA conference papers ersa15p1619, European Regional Science Association.
    3. Augusto Cerqua & Guido Pellegrini, 2014. "Beyond the SUTVA: how policy evaluations change when we allow for interactions among firms," Working Papers 2/14, Sapienza University of Rome, DISS.
    4. Zichen Deng & Maarten Lindeboom, 2021. "Early-life Famine Exposure, Hunger Recall and Later-life Health," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 21-054/V, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. Leah Warfield Smith & Randall Lee Rose & Alex R. Zablah & Heath McCullough & Mohammad “Mike” Saljoughian, 2023. "Examining post-purchase consumer responses to product automation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 530-550, May.
    6. Baron, Opher & Callen, Jeffrey L. & Segal, Dan, 2023. "Does the bullwhip matter economically? A cross-sectional firm-level analysis," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    7. Jian Jiu Chen & Sai Yin Ho & Wing Man Au & Man Ping Wang & Tai Hing Lam, 2015. "Family Smoking, Exposure to Secondhand Smoke at Home and Family Unhappiness in Children," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-14, November.
    8. Kube, Roland & von Graevenitz, Kathrine & Löschel, Andreas & Massier, Philipp, 2019. "Do voluntary environmental programs reduce emissions? EMAS in the German manufacturing sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(S1).
    9. K. Poehlmann & R. Helm & O. Mauroner & J. Auburger, 2021. "Corporate spin-offs’ success factors: management lessons from a comparative empirical analysis with research-based spin-offs," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 1767-1796, August.
    10. Renata Baborska & Emilio Hernandez & Emiliano Magrini & Cristian Morales-Opazo, 2020. "The impact of financial inclusion on rural food security experience: A perspective from low-and middle-income countries," Review of Development Finance Journal, Chartered Institute of Development Finance, vol. 10(2), pages 1-18.
    11. Elaine M. Wolf & Douglas A. Wolf, 2008. "Mixed Results in a Transitional Planning Program for Alternative School Students," Evaluation Review, , vol. 32(2), pages 187-215, April.
    12. Matilde Cappelletti & Leonardo M. Giuffrida, 2024. "Targeted Bidders in Government Tenders," CESifo Working Paper Series 11142, CESifo.
    13. Chervier, Colas & Le Velly, Gwenolé & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2019. "When the Implementation of Payments for Biodiversity Conservation Leads to Motivation Crowding-out: A Case Study From the Cardamoms Forests, Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 499-510.
    14. Gabriele Spilker & Tobias Böhmelt, 2013. "The impact of preferential trade agreements on governmental repression revisited," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 343-361, September.
    15. Michael Funke & Kadri Männasoo & Helery Tasane, 2023. "Regional Economic Impacts of the Øresund Cross-Border Fixed Link: Cui Bono?," CESifo Working Paper Series 10557, CESifo.
    16. Reed, Deborah K. & Aloe, Ariel M., 2020. "Interpreting the effectiveness of a summer reading program: The eye of the beholder," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    17. Cauê Carrilho & Gabriela Demarchi & Amy Duchelle & Sven Wunder & Carla Morsello, 2022. "Permanence of avoided deforestation in a Transamazon REDD+ initiative (Pará, Brazil)," CEE-M Working Papers hal-03614704, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    18. Carrilho, Cauê D. & Demarchi, Gabriela & Duchelle, Amy E. & Wunder, Sven & Morsello, Carla, 2022. "Permanence of avoided deforestation in a Transamazon REDD+ project (Pará, Brazil)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    19. Jasjeet Singh Sekhon & Richard D. Grieve, 2012. "A matching method for improving covariate balance in cost‐effectiveness analyses," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 695-714, June.
    20. Jennifer M. Alix-Garcia & Elizabeth N. Shapiro & Katharine R. E. Sims, 2012. "Forest Conservation and Slippage: Evidence from Mexico’s National Payments for Ecosystem Services Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 613-638.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Counterfactual impact evaluation; public funding; innovation; Framework programme;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc99564. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Publication Officer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipjrces.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.