IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecmode/v27y2010i3p687-696.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effect of subsidy policies on the product quality improvement

Author

Listed:
  • Shin, Inyong
  • Kim, Hyunho

Abstract

This paper analyzes the effect of government subsidy policies on creating an incentive for domestic firms to improve their product quality before exporting to an outside market. The goal of the government is to minimize the time it takes to reach the appropriate product quality level at low costs. We simulate a dynamic profit maximization problem of the firm and derive the optimal path of the product quality development, then test the efficiency of the three types of subsidy methods: Constant Subsidy, Quality Matching Subsidy and Time-limited Subsidy methods. Our model yields a number of intriguing results: (i) not every subsidy methods guarantee product quality development, although the same amount is subsidized. (ii) the matching fund style subsidy is more efficient than providing constant amount of subsidy. (iii) Time-limited Subsidy improves product quality faster than the unlimited subsidy method. (iv) Time-limited Subsidy improves quality much faster than other methods with less subsidy cost. (v) there is an optimal combination between the subsidy and the time limits.

Suggested Citation

  • Shin, Inyong & Kim, Hyunho, 2010. "The effect of subsidy policies on the product quality improvement," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 687-696, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecmode:v:27:y:2010:i:3:p:687-696
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264-9993(10)00009-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James R. Tybout, 2000. "Manufacturing Firms in Developing Countries: How Well Do They Do, and Why?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(1), pages 11-44, March.
    2. Miyagiwa, Kaz & Ohno, Yuka, 1995. "Closing the Technology Gap under Protection," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 755-770, September.
    3. Criscuolo, Chiara & Haskel, Jonathan E. & Slaughter, Matthew J., 2010. "Global engagement and the innovation activities of firms," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 191-202, March.
    4. James A. Brander & Barbara J. Spencer, 1981. "Tariffs and the Extraction of Foreign Monopoly Rents under Potential Entry," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 14(3), pages 371-389, August.
    5. Bagwell, Kyle, 1991. "Optimal Export Policy for a New-Product Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1156-1169, December.
    6. Barbara J. Spencer & James A. Brander, 1983. "International R & D Rivalry and Industrial Strategy," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 50(4), pages 707-722.
    7. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Saul Lach, 2002. "Do R&D Subsidies Stimulate or Displace Private R&D? Evidence from Israel," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(4), pages 369-390, December.
    9. Isabel Busom, 2000. "An Empirical Evaluation of The Effects of R&D Subsidies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 111-148.
    10. Richard Arnott & Joseph Stiglitz, 1986. "The Welfare Economics of Moral Hazard," Working Paper 635, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    11. David, Paul A. & Hall, Bronwyn H. & Toole, Andrew A., 2000. "Is public R&D a complement or substitute for private R&D? A review of the econometric evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 497-529, April.
    12. Wagner, Joachim, 2006. "International Firm Activities and Innovation: Evidence from Knowledge Production Functions for German Firms," HWWA Discussion Papers 344, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
    13. Braga, Helson & Willmore, Larry, 1991. "Technological Imports and Technological Effort: An Analysis of Their Determinants in Brazilian Firms," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 421-432, June.
    14. Knut Blind & Andre Jungmittag, 2004. "Foreign Direct Investment, Imports and Innovations in the Service Industry," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 25(2), pages 205-227, June.
    15. Bagwell, Kyle & Staiger, Robert W., 1989. "The role of export subsidies when product quality is unknown," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1-2), pages 69-89, August.
    16. Arvind Panagariya, 1999. "Trade Policy in South Asia: Recent Liberalisation and Future Agenda," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 353-378, May.
    17. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2002. "R&D Cooperation and Spillovers: Some Empirical Evidence from Belgium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1169-1184, September.
    18. Oz Shy, 2000. "Exporting as a Signal for Product Quality," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 67(265), pages 79-90, February.
    19. Brander, James A. & Spencer, Barbara J., 1985. "Export subsidies and international market share rivalry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1-2), pages 83-100, February.
    20. Bhagwati, Jagdish N, 1988. "Export-Promoting Trade Strategy: Issues and Evidence," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 3(1), pages 27-57, January.
    21. Roberto Alvarez & Raymond Robertson, 2004. "Exposure to foreign markets and plant-level innovation: evidence from Chile and Mexico," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 57-87.
    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. Ram Kumar Phuyal, 2016. "Imposition of R&D Subsidy in a Product Differentiated Duopolistic Industry," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 6(6), pages 336-351, June.
    2. Chen, Meng-Wei & Lu, Cuicui & Tian, Yuan, 2021. "Export price and quality adjustment: The role of financial stress and exchange rate," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 336-345.
    3. Song, Xueyin & Huang, Xianhai & Qing, Tao, 2021. "Intellectual property rights protection and quality upgrading: Evidence from China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    4. Yan, Xinghao & Zaric, Gregory S., 2016. "Families of supply chain coordinating contracts in the presence of retailer effort," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 213-225.
    5. Ayob, Abu H. & Freixanet, Joan, 2014. "Insights into public export promotion programs in an emerging economy: The case of Malaysian SMEs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 38-46.
    6. You-hua Chen & Zhuang Zhang & Ashok K. Mishra, 2023. "A flexible and efficient hybrid agricultural subsidy design for promoting food security and safety," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-8, December.

    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. Jože P. Damijan & Andreja Jaklič & Matija Rojec, 2006. "Do External Knowledge Spillovers Induce Firms’ Innovations? Evidence from Slovenia," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Ana Teresa Tavares & Aurora Teixeira (ed.), Multinationals, Clusters and Innovation, chapter 3, pages 27-47, Palgrave Macmillan.
    2. Bronzini, Raffaello & Piselli, Paolo, 2016. "The impact of R&D subsidies on firm innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 442-457.
    3. Bettina Becker, 2013. "The Determinants of R&D Investment: A Survey of the Empirical Research," Discussion Paper Series 2013_09, Department of Economics, Loughborough University, revised Sep 2013.
    4. Damijan, Jože P. & Kostevc, Crt, 2007. "Knowledge Transfer, Innovation and Growth," Papers DYNREG06, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    5. Armando Silva & Ana Paula Africano & Oscar Afonso, 2009. "Which Portuguese firms are more innovative? The importance of multinationals and exporters," FEP Working Papers 326, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    6. Ali-Yrkkö, Jyrki, 2004. "Impact of Public R&D Financing on Private R&D - Does Financial Constraint Matter?," Discussion Papers 943, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    7. Dirk Czarnitzki & Cindy Lopes-Bento, 2014. "Innovation Subsidies: Does the Funding Source Matter for Innovation Intensity and Performance? Empirical Evidence from Germany," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(5), pages 380-409, July.
    8. Dirk Czarnitzki & Julie Delanote, 2017. "Incorporating innovation subsidies in the CDM framework: empirical evidence from Belgium," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1-2), pages 78-92, February.
    9. González, Xulia & Pazó, Consuelo, 2008. "Do public subsidies stimulate private R&D spending?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 371-389, April.
    10. Cristiano Antonelli, 2020. "Knowledge exhaustibility public support to business R&D and the additionality constraint," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 649-663, June.
    11. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Lopes-Bento, Cindy, 2013. "Value for money? New microeconometric evidence on public R&D grants in Flanders," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 76-89.
    12. Fier, Andreas & Heger, Diana & Hussinger, Katrin, 2005. "Die Wirkungsanalyse staatlicher Förderprogramme durch den Einsatz von Matching- und Selektionsmodellen am Beispiel der Fertigungstechnik," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-09, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    13. Ugur, Mehmet & Trushin, Eshref & Solomon, Edna, 2015. "UK and EU subsidies and private R&D investment: Is there input additionality?," MPRA Paper 68009, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 16 Nov 2015.
    14. Panagariya, Arvind, 2000. "Evaluating the case for export subsidies," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2276, The World Bank.
    15. Kwangsoo Shin & Minkyung Choy & Chul Lee & Gunno Park, 2019. "Government R&D Subsidy and Additionality of Biotechnology Firms: The Case of the South Korean Biotechnology Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-22, March.
    16. Liu, Xiaolu & Li, Xiaoyu & Li, Honglin, 2016. "R&D subsidies and business R&D: Evidence from high-tech manufacturing firms in Jiangsu," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1-22.
    17. Takalo, Tuomas & Tanayama, Tanja & Toivanen, Otto, 2013. "Market failures and the additionality effects of public support to private R&D: Theory and empirical implications," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 634-642.
    18. Giovanni Cerulli & Bianca Potì, 2010. "The differential impact of privately and publicly funded R&D on R&D investment and innovation: The Italian case," Working Papers 10, Doctoral School of Economics, Sapienza University of Rome, revised 2010.
    19. Huergo, Elena & Trenado, Mayte & Ubierna, Andrés, 2016. "The impact of public support on firm propensity to engage in R&D: Spanish experience," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 113(PB), pages 206-219.
    20. Thomas H. W. Ziesemer, 2021. "The Effects of R&D Subsidies and Publicly Performed R&D on Business R&D: A Survey," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 236(1), pages 171-205, March.

    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:eee:ecmode:v:27:y:2010:i:3:p:687-696. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30411 .

    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.