IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v88y2011i1d10.1007_s11192-011-0378-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the scientific and technological output of EU Framework Programmes: evidence from the FP6 projects in the ICT field

Author

Listed:
  • Stefano Breschi

    (Università Commerciale L. Bocconi)

  • Franco Malerba

    (Università Commerciale L. Bocconi)

Abstract

This paper provides a quantitative assessment of the scientific and technological productivity of FP6 projects by exploiting a new database on articles and patents resulting from EU funded projects. Starting from the FP6, the design of the European technology policy has undergone significant changes with the introduction of new funding instruments aimed at achieving a “critical mass” of resources. Our empirical results provide support to the concerns, expressed by several observers, regarding the fact that the new funding instruments may have resulted in artificially “too large” research consortia. The available empirical evidence shows that scientific productivity increases with the number of participants following a U-inverted shape, thereby indicating the existence of decreasing marginal returns to an increase in the size of research consortia. A second key result of the paper is related to the existence of significant differences of performance among funding instruments. In particular, after accounting for the larger amount of resources allocated to them, Integrated Projects perform less well in terms of scientific output than both STRePs and Networks of Excellence and they do not exhibit a superior performance than STRePs in terms of patent applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefano Breschi & Franco Malerba, 2011. "Assessing the scientific and technological output of EU Framework Programmes: evidence from the FP6 projects in the ICT field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 239-257, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:88:y:2011:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-011-0378-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0378-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-011-0378-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-011-0378-x?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. Greene, William, 2008. "Functional forms for the negative binomial model for count data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 99(3), pages 585-590, June.
    2. Wolfgang Glänzel & Balázs Schlemmer & András Schubert & Bart Thijs, 2006. "Proceedings literature as additional data source for bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(3), pages 457-473, September.
    3. Henri Delanghe & Ugur Muldur & Luc Soete (ed.), 2009. "European Science and Technology Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13427.
    4. Erik Arnold & John Clark & Alessandro Muscio, 2005. "What the evaluation record tells us about European Union Framework Programme performance," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(5), pages 385-397, October.
    5. Winkelmann, Rainer & Zimmermann, Klaus F, 1995. "Recent Developments in Count Data Modelling: Theory and Application," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, March.
    6. Erik Arnold, 2004. "Evaluating research and innovation policy: a systems world needs systems evaluations," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 3-17, April.
    7. Linda Butler, 2008. "ICT assessment: Moving beyond journal outputs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(1), pages 39-55, January.
    8. Jiri Vanecek & Martin Fatun & Vladimir Albrecht, 2010. "Bibliometric evaluation of the FP-5 and FP-6 results in the Czech Republic," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(1), pages 103-114, April.
    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. Kosztyán, Zsolt T. & Katona, Attila I. & Kuppens, Kurt & Kisgyörgy-Pál, Mária & Nachbagauer, Andreas & Csizmadia, Tibor, 2022. "Exploring the structures and design effects of EU-funded R&D&I project portfolios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    2. Jordi Ardanuy & Llorenç Arguimbau & Ángel Borrego, 2022. "Social sciences and humanities research funded under the European Union Sixth Framework Programme (2002–2006): a long-term assessment of projects, acknowledgements and publications," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    3. Ping Zhou & Huibao Tian, 2014. "Funded collaboration research in mathematics in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 695-715, June.
    4. Daniel Nepelski & Vincent Roy & Annarosa Pesole, 2019. "The organisational and geographic diversity and innovation potential of EU-funded research networks," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 359-380, April.
    5. Stephen Roper & James H. Love, 2018. "Knowledge context, learning and innovation: an integrating framework," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(4), pages 339-364, April.
    6. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jae Young Choi, 2012. "The taxonomy of research collaboration in science and technology: evidence from mechanical research through probabilistic clustering analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 719-735, June.
    7. María-Antonia Ovalle-Perandones & Juan Gorraiz & Martin Wieland & Christian Gumpenberger & Carlos Olmeda-Gómez, 2013. "The influence of European Framework Programmes on scientific collaboration in nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(1), pages 59-74, October.
    8. Star X. Zhao & Wen Lou & Alice M. Tan & Shuang Yu, 2018. "Do funded papers attract more usage?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 153-168, April.
    9. Zhou Mo & Zhang Yujie & Lei Jiasu & Tan Xiaowen, 2022. "Early firm engagement, government research funding, and the privatization of public knowledge," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4797-4826, August.

    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. Ebersberger, Bernd & Edler, Jakob & Lo, Vivien, 2006. "Improving policy understanding by means of secondary analyses of policy evaluation: a concept development," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 12, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    2. Riithi, Alexander Njuguna & Irungu, Patrick & Munei , Kimpei, 2015. "Determinants Of Choice Of Alternative Livelihood Diversification Strategies In Solio Resettlement Scheme, Kenya," Dissertations and Theses 269714, University of Nairobi, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    3. Mwololo, H. & Nzuma, J. & Ritho, C., 2018. "Is Agricultural Extension a Determinant of Farm Diversification - Evidence from Kenya," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277357, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Yiannis Spanos, 2012. "Conditionally-mediated effects of scale in collaborative R&D," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 696-714, October.
    5. Yee, Thomas W., 2014. "Reduced-rank vector generalized linear models with two linear predictors," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 889-902.
    6. Polat, Zeynel Abidin & Alkan, Mehmet & Paulsson, Jenny & Paasch, Jesper M. & Kalogianni, Eftychia, 2022. "Global scientific production on LADM-based research: A bibliometric analysis from 2012 to 2020," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    7. Zhang, Lin & Glänzel, Wolfgang, 2012. "Proceeding papers in journals versus the “regular” journal publications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 88-96.
    8. Senator Jeong & Hong-Gee Kim, 2010. "Intellectual structure of biomedical informatics reflected in scholarly events," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(2), pages 541-551, November.
    9. Carlos Pestana Barros & Zhongfei Chen & Peter Wanke, 2016. "Efficiency in Chinese seaports: 2002–2012," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 18(3), pages 295-316, September.
    10. Barge-Gil, Andrés & López, Alberto, 2014. "R&D determinants: Accounting for the differences between research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1634-1648.
    11. Greene, William, 2007. "Functional Form and Heterogeneity in Models for Count Data," Foundations and Trends(R) in Econometrics, now publishers, vol. 1(2), pages 113-218, August.
    12. Michael Fritsch, 2003. "Does R&D-Cooperation Behavior Differ between Regions?," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 25-39.
    13. Andrés Barge-Gil & Alberto López, 2015. "R versus D: estimating the differentiated effect of research and development on innovation results," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(1), pages 93-129.
    14. Niklas Elert, 2014. "What determines entry? Evidence from Sweden," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 53(1), pages 55-92, August.
    15. Esparza Masana, Ricard & Fernández, Tatiana, 2019. "Monitoring S3: Key dimensions and implications," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    16. Sara Amoroso & Alex Coad & Nicola Grassano, 2017. "European R&D networks: A snapshot from the 7th EU Framework Programme," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation JRC107546, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    17. Raguragavan, Jananee & Hailu, Atakelty & Burton, Michael, 2013. "Economic Valuation of Recreational Fishing in Western Australia: Statewide Random Utility Modelling of Fishing Site Choice Behaviour," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 57(4), pages 1-20.
    18. Carlos García-Serrano & Virginia Hernanz & Luis Toharia, 2010. "Mind the Gap, Please! The Effect of Temporary Help Agencies on the Consequences of Work Accidents," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 162-182, June.
    19. Niamh Brennan & Claire Marston, 1999. "A comparative analysis of required financial disclosures in US, UK and international accounting standards," Open Access publications 10197/2969, Research Repository, University College Dublin.
    20. González-Albo, Borja & Bordons, María, 2011. "Articles vs. proceedings papers: Do they differ in research relevance and impact? A case study in the Library and Information Science field," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 369-381.

    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:spr:scient:v:88:y:2011:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-011-0378-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.