IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v51y2022i6s0048733322000622.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the effects of a deliberate policy mix: The case of technology and innovation advisory services and innovation vouchers

Author

Listed:
  • Caloffi, Annalisa
  • Freo, Marzia
  • Ghinoi, Stefano
  • Mariani, Marco
  • Rossi, Federica

Abstract

While innovation policy mixes combining several policy instruments have been advocated as a response to complex problems, there is very little evidence of their effectiveness compared to that of individual instruments. By considering a set of Italian regional policy programmes implemented in 2011–2014, we analysed a policy mix composed of: (i) technology and innovation advisory services, the aim of which is to help small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to gain a better awareness of their innovation needs and of how to address them; and (ii) innovation vouchers, which are used to subsidise SME purchases of knowledge-intensive services. To draw causal inferences on their differential effectiveness, we adopted a propensity-score-matching approach extended to multiple treatment levels.

Suggested Citation

  • Caloffi, Annalisa & Freo, Marzia & Ghinoi, Stefano & Mariani, Marco & Rossi, Federica, 2022. "Assessing the effects of a deliberate policy mix: The case of technology and innovation advisory services and innovation vouchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:51:y:2022:i:6:s0048733322000622
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2022.104535
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733322000622
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104535?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Richard K. Crump & V. Joseph Hotz & Guido W. Imbens & Oscar A. Mitnik, 2009. "Dealing with limited overlap in estimation of average treatment effects," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 96(1), pages 187-199.
    2. Montmartin, Benjamin & Herrera, Marcos & Massard, Nadine, 2018. "The impact of the French policy mix on business R&D: How geography matters," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 2010-2027.
    3. Howells, Jeremy, 2006. "Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 715-728, June.
    4. Knockaert, Mirjam & Spithoven, André & Clarysse, Bart, 2014. "The impact of technology intermediaries on firm cognitive capacity additionality," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 376-387.
    5. Pim Den Hertog, 2000. "Knowledge-Intensive Business Services As Co-Producers Of Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(04), pages 491-528.
    6. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7rrsl07p559bjr85tr7hsft1o9 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Barbara Sianesi, 2004. "An Evaluation of the Swedish System of Active Labor Market Programs in the 1990s," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(1), pages 133-155, February.
    8. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/4ji8v7q9nt9q0rsm9mqn5dqrrp is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Paul Cunningham & Jakob Edler & Kieron Flanagan & Philippe Larédo, 2016. "The innovation policy mix," Chapters, in: Jakob Edler & Paul Cunningham & Abdullah Gök & Philip Shapira (ed.), Handbook of Innovation Policy Impact, chapter 17, pages 505-542, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Magro, Edurne & Wilson, James R., 2013. "Complex innovation policy systems: Towards an evaluation mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1647-1656.
    11. Giovanni Cerulli, 2022. "Econometric Evaluation of Socio-Economic Programs," Advanced Studies in Theoretical and Applied Econometrics, Springer, edition 2, number 978-3-662-65945-8, July-Dece.
    12. Michele Coletti & Paolo Landoni, 2018. "Collaborations for innovation: a meta-study of relevant typologies, governance and policies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(5-6), pages 493-509, August.
    13. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    14. Michael Howlett & Jeremy Rayner, 2013. "Patching vs Packaging in Policy Formulation: Assessing Policy Portfolio Design," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 1(2), pages 170-182.
    15. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    16. Borrás, Susana & Edquist, Charles, 2013. "The choice of innovation policy instruments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(8), pages 1513-1522.
    17. D’Este, Pablo & Iammarino, Simona & Savona, Maria & von Tunzelmann, Nick, 2012. "What hampers innovation? Revealed barriers versus deterring barriers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 482-488.
    18. Annalisa Caloffi & Marco Mariani, 2018. "Regional policy mixes for enterprise and innovation: A fuzzy-set clustering approach," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(1), pages 28-46, February.
    19. Montmartin, Benjamin & Herrera, Marcos & Massard, Nadine, 2018. "The impact of the French policy mix on business R&D: How geography matters," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 2010-2027.
    20. Raffaella Taddeo & Alberto Simboli & Giuseppe Ioppolo & Anna Morgante, 2017. "Industrial Symbiosis, Networking and Innovation: The Potential Role of Innovation Poles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, January.
    21. Michael Lechner, 2002. "Program Heterogeneity And Propensity Score Matching: An Application To The Evaluation Of Active Labor Market Policies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(2), pages 205-220, May.
    22. Raquel Ortega-Argilés & Marco Vivarelli & Peter Voigt, 2009. "R&D in SMEs: a paradox?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 3-11, June.
    23. Lanahan, Lauren & Feldman, Maryann P., 2015. "Multilevel innovation policy mix: A closer look at state policies that augment the federal SBIR program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1387-1402.
    24. Galia, Fabrice & Legros, Diego, 2004. "Complementarities between obstacles to innovation: evidence from France," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1185-1199, October.
    25. Kosuke Imai & Marc Ratkovic, 2014. "Covariate balancing propensity score," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 76(1), pages 243-263, January.
    26. Kevin F Mole & Mark Hart & Stephen Roper & David S Saal, 2011. "Broader or Deeper? Exploring the Most Effective Intervention Profile for Public Small Business Support," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(1), pages 87-105, January.
    27. Guerzoni, Marco & Raiteri, Emilio, 2015. "Demand-side vs. supply-side technology policies: Hidden treatment and new empirical evidence on the policy mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 726-747.
    28. Muller, Emmanuel & Zenker, Andrea, 2001. "Business services as actors of knowledge transformation: the role of KIBS in regional and national innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1501-1516, December.
    29. Daniel Neicu & Peter Teirlinck & Stijn Kelchtermans, 2016. "Dipping in the policy mix: Do R&D subsidies foster behavioral additionality effects of R&D tax credits?," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 218-239, April.
    30. Huergo, Elena & Moreno, Lourdes, 2017. "Subsidies or loans? Evaluating the impact of R&D support programmes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1198-1214.
    31. Philip Shapira & Jan Youtie, 2016. "The impact of technology and innovation advisory services," Chapters, in: Jakob Edler & Paul Cunningham & Abdullah Gök & Philip Shapira (ed.), Handbook of Innovation Policy Impact, chapter 6, pages 161-195, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    32. Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Exogeneity: A Review," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(1), pages 4-29, February.
    33. Dumont, Michel, 2017. "Assessing the policy mix of public support to business R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1851-1862.
    34. Lori Rosenkopf & Atul Nerkar, 2001. "Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 287-306, April.
    35. Bessant, John & Rush, Howard, 1995. "Building bridges for innovation: the role of consultants in technology transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 97-114, January.
    36. Margherita Russo & Annalisa Caloffi & Federica Rossi & Riccardo Righi, 2019. "Innovation intermediaries and performance-based incentives: A case study of regional innovation poles," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-12.
    37. Shu Yang & Guido W. Imbens & Zhanglin Cui & Douglas E. Faries & Zbigniew Kadziola, 2016. "Propensity score matching and subclassification in observational studies with multi‐level treatments," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 72(4), pages 1055-1065, December.
    38. Sianesi, Barbara, 2008. "Differential effects of active labour market programs for the unemployed," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 370-399, June.
    39. Benjamin Montmartin & Marcos Herrera & Nadine Massard, 2018. "The impact of the French policy mix on business and R&D : how geography matters," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2018-12, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
    40. Laranja, Manuel & Uyarra, Elvira & Flanagan, Kieron, 2008. "Policies for science, technology and innovation: Translating rationales into regional policies in a multi-level setting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 823-835, June.
    41. Cristian Matti & Davide Consoli & Elvira Uyarra, 2017. "Multi level policy mixes and industry emergence: The case of wind energy in Spain," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(4), pages 661-683, June.
    42. Bakhshi, Hasan & Edwards, John S. & Roper, Stephen & Scully, Judy & Shaw, Duncan & Morley, Lorraine & Rathbone, Nicola, 2015. "Assessing an experimental approach to industrial policy evaluation: Applying RCT+ to the case of Creative Credits," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1462-1472.
    43. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881.
    44. Caniels, M.C.J. & Romijn, H.A., 2005. "What Works, and Why, in Business Services Provision for SMEs: Insights from evolutionary theory," Working Papers 05.03, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    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. Héloïse Berkowitz & Antoine Souchaud, 2024. "Filling successive technologically-induced governance gaps: meta-organizations as regulatory innovation intermediaries," Post-Print hal-04228083, HAL.
    2. Zhang, Shouguo & Zhang, Jianjun & Sha, Anmeng & Zhang, Yaping & Zhang, Di, 2023. "How to recognize the role of policy clusters in built-up land intensity: An empirical case of the Yangtze River Economic Belt of China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    3. Eduardo Gonçalves & Ademir Rocha & Raquel Reis, 2023. "The key to knowledge: evaluating the role of gatekeepers on regional inventive performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1274-1299, August.
    4. Chong, Zhaotian & Wang, Qunwei & Wang, Lei, 2023. "Is the photovoltaic power generation policy effective in China? A quantitative analysis of policy synergy based on text mining," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    5. Jiang, Zihao & Shi, Jiarong, 2023. "Government intervention and technological innovation in the wind power industry in China: The role of industrial environmental turbulence," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 344(C).
    6. Lenihahn, Helena & Mulligan, Kevin & Perez-Alaniz, Mauricio & Rammer, Christian, 2023. "Serving the right menu of R&D policy instruments to firms: An analysis of policy mix sequencing," ZEW Discussion Papers 23-009, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Xu, Le & Yang, Lili & Li, Ding & Shao, Shuai, 2023. "Asymmetric effects of heterogeneous environmental standards on green technology innovation: Evidence from China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    8. Hongqi Wang & Tianyi Zhao & Sarah Y. Cooper & Shanshan Wang & Richard T. Harrison & Zhongji Yang, 2023. "Effective policy mixes in entrepreneurial ecosystems: a configurational analysis in China," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 60(4), pages 1509-1542, April.

    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. Caloffi, Annalisa & Mariani, Marco & Rossi, Federica & Russo, Margherita, 2018. "A comparative evaluation of regional subsidies for collaborative and individual R&D in small and medium-sized enterprises," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1437-1447.
    2. Tether, Bruce S. & Tajar, Abdelouahid, 2008. "Beyond industry-university links: Sourcing knowledge for innovation from consultants, private research organisations and the public science-base," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1079-1095, July.
    3. Magro, Edurne & Wilson, James R., 2019. "Policy-mix evaluation: Governance challenges from new place-based innovation policies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    4. 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.
    5. Caloffi, Annalisa & Colovic, Ana & Rizzoli, Valentina & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Innovation intermediaries' types and functions: A computational analysis of the literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    6. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2017. "The State of Applied Econometrics: Causality and Policy Evaluation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 3-32, Spring.
    7. Huber, Martin, 2019. "An introduction to flexible methods for policy evaluation," FSES Working Papers 504, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    8. Ganesh Karapakula, 2023. "Stable Probability Weighting: Large-Sample and Finite-Sample Estimation and Inference Methods for Heterogeneous Causal Effects of Multivalued Treatments Under Limited Overlap," Papers 2301.05703, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2023.
    9. Tamara Bischof & Boris Kaiser, 2021. "Who cares when you close down? The effects of primary care practice closures on patients," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(9), pages 2004-2025, September.
    10. Hugo Bodory & Lorenzo Camponovo & Martin Huber & Michael Lechner, 2020. "The Finite Sample Performance of Inference Methods for Propensity Score Matching and Weighting Estimators," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1), pages 183-200, January.
    11. Acciai, Claudia, 2021. "The politics of research and innovation: Understanding instrument choices in complex governance environments – the case of France and Italy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    12. Shoulin Pang & Shiting Dou & Huan Li, 2020. "Synergy effect of science and technology policies on innovation: Evidence from China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-19, October.
    13. Margherita Russo & Annalisa Caloffi & Federica Rossi & Riccardo Righi, 2016. "Designing performance-based incentives for innovation intermediaries: Evidence from regional innovation poles," Working Papers 34, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Nov 2016.
    14. Michel Dumont, 2019. "Working Paper 04-19 - Tax incentives for business R&D in Belgium - Third evaluation," Working Papers 1904, Federal Planning Bureau, Belgium.
    15. Rossi, Federica & Caloffi, Annalisa & Colovic, Ana & Russo, Margherita, 2022. "New business models for public innovation intermediaries supporting emerging innovation systems: The case of the Internet of Things," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    16. Dai, Xiaoyong & Chapman, Gary, 2022. "R&D tax incentives and innovation: Examining the role of programme design in China," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    17. Dettmann, E. & Becker, C. & Schmeißer, C., 2011. "Distance functions for matching in small samples," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 1942-1960, May.
    18. Daniel Burkhard & Christian P. R. Schmid & Kaspar Wüthrich, 2019. "Financial incentives and physician prescription behavior: Evidence from dispensing regulations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(9), pages 1114-1129, September.
    19. Flores, Carlos A. & Mitnik, Oscar A., 2009. "Evaluating Nonexperimental Estimators for Multiple Treatments: Evidence from Experimental Data," IZA Discussion Papers 4451, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Tea Petrin & Dragana Radicic, 2023. "Instrument policy mix and firm size: is there complementarity between R&D subsidies and R&D tax credits?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 181-215, February.

    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:respol:v:51:y:2022:i:6:s0048733322000622. 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/respol .

    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.