IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/zbw/zewexp/110559.html
   My bibliography  Save this book

Ex-post-Evaluierung der Fördermaßnahmen BioChance und BioChancePlus im Rahmen der Systemevaluierung "KMU-innovativ": Begleit- und Wirkungsforschung zur Hightech-Strategie

Author

Listed:
  • Licht, Georg
  • Crass, Dirk
  • Eckert, Thomas
  • Sellenthin, Mark O.
  • Pfirrmann, Oliver
  • Heinrich, Stephan
  • Strohmeyer, Robert
  • Tonoyan, Vartuhi
  • Woywode, Michael

Abstract

Der vorliegende Bericht stellt die Ergebnisse der Evaluation der BMBF-Fördermaßnahmen BioChance und BioChancePlus dar. Beide zielten als Vorläufer der Förderinitiative KMUinnovativ: Biotechnologie darauf ab, innovative und anspruchsvolle Forschungsvorhaben von kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen in der Biotechnologie zu ermöglichen. Die beiden Fördermaßnahmen unterschieden sich in Förderziel und Design: Während BioChance ab 1999 darauf abzielte, neu gegründete Firmen zu unterstützen, ging es in BioChancePlus ab 2003 darum, die weitere Entwicklung junger Biotechnologie-Unternehmen und deren risikoreichen Projekte voranzutreiben. Die vorliegende Analyse zeigt, dass BioChance und BioChancePlus eine angemessene Reaktion auf die Schwierigkeiten waren, mit denen die dedizierten Biotechnologie-Unternehmen in Deutschland in den Jahren 1999-2009 zu kämpfen hatten. Die Fördermaßnahmen wurden in ihrem Design jeweils adäquat weiterentwickelt und den Erfordernissen der Zielgruppe entsprechend angepasst. BioChance und BioChancePlus haben ihre Zielgruppen in hohem Maße erreicht: Von BioChance profitierten 15% der jungen Biotechnologiefirmen in Deutschland, der Nachfolger BioChancePlus erreichte 40% seiner Zielgruppe. Insgesamt erhielten 260 Unternehmen eine Zuwendung. 85% davon wurden nur einmal gefördert. Die öffentliche Förderung stellte eine wichtige, jedoch keineswegs die dominierende Finanzierungsquelle für die Unternehmen dar. So flossen im Zeitraum 2000-2009 rund 3 Mrd. Euro an VC-Investitionen in die Biotechnologie-Branche, während sich die öffentliche Förderung auf ca. 5% dieser Summe belief. Bei BioChance erhielten 17% der eingereichten Anträge eine Förderung, bei BioChancePlus waren es 29%. Insgesamt wurden durch die Maßnahme BioChance etwa 36 Millionen Euro und durch BioChancePlus 133 Millionen Euro an Fördergeldern gewährt.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Licht, Georg & Crass, Dirk & Eckert, Thomas & Sellenthin, Mark O. & Pfirrmann, Oliver & Heinrich, Stephan & Strohmeyer, Robert & Tonoyan, Vartuhi & Woywode, Michael, 2012. "Ex-post-Evaluierung der Fördermaßnahmen BioChance und BioChancePlus im Rahmen der Systemevaluierung "KMU-innovativ": Begleit- und Wirkungsforschung zur Hightech-Strategie," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 110559, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewexp:110559
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/110559/1/717590232.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xulia González & Jordi Jaumandreu & Consuelo Pazo, 2005. "Barriers to Innovation and Subsidy Effectiveness," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(4), pages 930-949, Winter.
    2. Tuomas Takalo & Tanja Tanayama, 2010. "Adverse selection and financing of innovation: is there a need for R&D subsidies?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 16-41, February.
    3. Harhoff, Dietmar & Reitzig, Markus, 2004. "Determinants of opposition against EPO patent grants--the case of biotechnology and pharmaceuticals," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 443-480, April.
    4. Aschhoff, Birgit & Astor, Michael & Crass, Dirk & Eckert, Thomas & Heinrich, Stephan & Licht, Georg & Rammer, Christian & Riesenberg, Daniel & Rüffer, Niclas & Strohmeyer, Robert & Tonoyan, Vartuhi & , 2012. "Systemevaluierung "KMU-innovativ"," ZEW Dokumentationen 12-04, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Lazonick, William & Tulum, Öner, 2011. "US biopharmaceutical finance and the sustainability of the biotech business model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1170-1187.
    6. Kleer, Robin, 2010. "Government R&D subsidies as a signal for private investors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1361-1374, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Chen, Jin & Heng, Cheng Suang & Tan, Bernard C.Y. & Lin, Zhijie, 2018. "The distinct signaling effects of R&D subsidy and non-R&D subsidy on IPO performance of IT entrepreneurial firms in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 108-120.
    2. Weiwei Gao & Ting Cao & Zhen Huang, 2021. "Do outsiders listen to insiders? The role of government support in market reactions to earnings announcements," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(4), pages 781-795, June.
    3. Wu, Aihua, 2017. "The signal effect of Government R&D Subsidies in China: Does ownership matter?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 339-345.
    4. Shiyuan Liu & Jiang Du & Weike Zhang & Xiaoli Tian, 2021. "Opening the box of subsidies: which is more effective for innovation?," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(3), pages 421-449, September.
    5. Demeulemeester, Sarah & Hottenrott, Hanna, 2015. "R&D subsidies and firms' cost of debt," DICE Discussion Papers 201, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    6. Hünermund, Paul & Licht, Georg & Rammer, Christian, 2016. "Evaluierung der nationalen Förderung im Förderprogramm Eurostars 1 (2008-2013)," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 155368, September.
    7. Busom, Isabel & Corchuelo, Beatriz & Martínez Ros, Ester, 2011. "Tax incentives and direct support for R&D : what do firms use and why?," INDEM - Working Paper Business Economic Series id-11-03, Instituto para el Desarrollo Empresarial (INDEM).
    8. Silva Filipe & Carreira Carlos, 2017. "Financial Constraints: Do They Matter to Allocate R&D Subsidies?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 17(4), pages 1-26, October.
    9. Toivanen, Otto & Takalo, Tuomas & Tanayama, Tanja, 2017. "Welfare Effects of R&D Support Policies," CEPR Discussion Papers 12155, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Giebel, Marek & Kraft, Kornelius, 2021. "Subsidies and innovation in the recent financial crisis," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-097, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    13. Ensthaler, Ludwig & Giebe, Thomas, 2014. "A dynamic auction for multi-object procurement under a hard budget constraint," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 179-189.
    14. Xiang, Xiaojian & Liu, Chuanjiang & Yang, Mian, 2022. "Who is financing corporate green innovation?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 321-337.
    15. 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.
    16. Desiderio Romero-Jordán & María Delgado-Rodríguez & Inmaculada Álvarez-Ayuso & Sonia Lucas-Santos, 2014. "Assessment of the public tools used to promote R&D investment in Spanish SMEs," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 959-976, December.
    17. Shuang Huang & Abraham Y. Nahm & Zengji Song, 2023. "Government subsidies of new energy vehicle industry and enterprise innovation: Moderating role of chief executive officers' technical background," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(4), pages 2137-2147, June.
    18. Isabel Busom & Beatriz Corchuelo & Ester Martínez-Ros, 2014. "Tax incentives… or subsidies for business R&D?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 571-596, October.
    19. Edina Berlinger & Anita Lovas & Péter Juhász, 2017. "State subsidy and moral hazard in corporate financing," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 25(4), pages 743-770, December.
    20. Serenella Caravella & Francesco Crespi, 2021. "The role of public procurement as innovation lever: evidence from Italian manufacturing firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(7), pages 663-684, October.

    More about this item

    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:zbw:zewexp:110559. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zemande.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.