The effectiveness of R&amp;D subsidies: A meta-regression analysis of the evaluation literature

Dimos, Christos; Pugh, Geoff

doi:10.1016/j.respol.2016.01.002

Cited by 296 publications

(247 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

228

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The most frequently discussed is the possibility of opportunistic behaviors by firms that can lead to windfall effects [12]. Different policy designs are compared according to their risk of giving rise to substitution strategies between public and private financing.…”

Section: Recent Advances In the Evaluation Of The Direct Impact Of Fimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This argument is the starting point of most of the empirical studies evaluating the direct impact of financial support for business R&D in different countries and periods. Reviews from Zúñiga-Vicente et al [48], Castellacci and Lie [8], Gaillard-Ladinska et al [22] and Dimos and Pugh [12] show that although the additionality hypothesis prevails (or at least there is no evidence of crowding-out), no clear global feature emerges. Important differences remain between instruments (tax credits, subsidies or others forms of public support), and there is also considerable heterogeneity in the effects depending on the characteristics of firms or on the context.…”

Section: Recent Advances In the Evaluation Of The Direct Impact Of Fimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To date, reviews of studies evaluating the impact of R&D subsidies [48,12] or tax credits [8,22] yield mixed results and are therefore inconclusive. On the whole, it seems that, much more than the econometric methodology employed, it is the sectoral or national context and the specific design and implementation of the instruments that can explain the heterogeneity of extant empirical results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The impact of the French policy mix on business R&D: How geography matters

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on a spatial extension of an R&D investment model, this paper measures the macroeconomic impact of the French R&D policy mix on business R&D using regional data. Our measure takes into account not only the direct effect of policies but also indirect effects generated by the existence of spatial interaction between regions. Using a unique database containing information on the levels of various R&D policy instruments received by firms in French NUTS3 regions over the period 2001-2011, our estimates of a spatial Durbin model with structural breaks and fixed effects reveal the existence of a negative spatial dependence among R&D investments in regions. In this context, while a-spatial estimates would conclude that all instruments have a crowding-in effect, we show that national subsidies are the only instrument that is able to generate significant crowding-in effects. On the contrary, it seems that the design, size and spatial allocation of funds from the other instruments (tax credits, local subsidies, European subsidies) lead them to act (in the French context) as beggar-thy-neighbor policies. KEY WORDSPolicy mix evaluation, R&D investment, Spatial panel, French NUTS3 regions. JELH25, O31, O38.

show abstract

Section: Recent Advances In the Evaluation Of The Direct Impact Of Fimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recent Advances In the Evaluation Of The Direct Impact Of Fimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The impact of the French policy mix on business R&D: How geography matters

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ключевым на сегодняшний день методом решения данной проблемы является метарегрессионный ана-лиз публикаций по определенной тематике. Однако результаты имею-щихся исследований, где подобным образом анализируются работы по оценке результативности государственной поддержки, также весьма неоднозначны: в некоторых из них авторы приходят к выводу о нали-чии позитивного влияния государственной поддержки (см., например, (Negassi, Sattin, 2014)), в других - напротив, об отсутствии значимых дополнительных эффектов (Dimos, Pugh, 2016). Чаще же всего резуль-таты подобных исследований свидетельствуют о гетерогенности результатов оценки по странам, характеристикам компаний-реципиен-тов и, что немаловажно, анализируемым показателям и используемым методам оценки (Correa et al, 2013;.…”

Section: рисunclassified

The Impact of Public Funding and Tax Incentives on Russian Firms: Additionality Effects Evaluation

Simachev¹,

Kuzyk²,

Zudin³

2017

JNEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In academia, the ex-post evaluation of the impact of, for example, R&D public policies on various outcome variables has long been attracting a substantial amount of research focusing on both various national levels and crosscountry comparisons (see, e.g., Bronzini and Piselli, 2016, Czarnitzki and Lopes-Bento, 2012, 2013, Dimos and Pugh, 2016, as well as Zúñiga-Vicente et al, 2012, and the respective literature cited there). In practice, the European Commission itself commissioned studies evaluating the impact of its R&D aid (see CERES, 2005) or its regional aid (see Ramboll & Matrix, 2013) Limiting ourselves to a review of the former set of articles, in an early contribution, Glowicka (2006) studies the effectiveness of bailouts in preventing bankruptcy.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of State Aid on the Survival and Financial Viability of Aided Firms

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Die Dis cus si on Pape rs die nen einer mög lichst schnel len Ver brei tung von neue ren For schungs arbei ten des ZEW. Die Bei trä ge lie gen in allei ni ger Ver ant wor tung der Auto ren und stel len nicht not wen di ger wei se die Mei nung des ZEW dar.Dis cus si on Papers are inten ded to make results of ZEW research prompt ly avai la ble to other eco no mists in order to encou ra ge dis cus si on and sug gesti ons for revi si ons. The aut hors are sole ly respon si ble for the con tents which do not neces sa ri ly repre sent the opi ni on of the ZEW. Keywords Government policy, state aid, ex-post evaluation, survival, European Union JEL Class C41, D62, D73, G33, G38, H23, L52, L98, O52 * The paper is based on a study with the title "Ex-post evaluation of the impact of restructuring aid decisions on the viability of aided (non-financial) firms" produced within a framework contract with the European Union by a consortium consisting of WIFO (Vienna), ECORYS (Rotterdam), Idea Consult (Brussels), SPI (Coimbra) and ZEW (Mannheim). The opinions expressed are ours only and do not represent the European Commission's official position. The European Commission has the rights to the results of the study which can be downloaded here: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/ publications/reports/kd0116104enn.pdf. We are grateful to the entire project team and the European Commission for helpful discussions in the course of the project. We are further indebted to Wolfgang Briglauer, Dirk Czarnitzki, Martin Hud, Ulrich Laitenberger, Eva Pichler, Christian Rammer, Michael Schröder and Douglas Thompson for helpful remarks on earlier versions of the paper. †

show abstract

The effectiveness of R&D subsidies: A meta-regression analysis of the evaluation literature

Cited by 296 publications

References 29 publications

The impact of the French policy mix on business R&D: How geography matters

The impact of the French policy mix on business R&D: How geography matters

The Impact of Public Funding and Tax Incentives on Russian Firms: Additionality Effects Evaluation

The Impact of State Aid on the Survival and Financial Viability of Aided Firms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About