Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Assessing the assignation of public subsidies: Do the experts choose the most efficient R&D projects?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Néstor Duch-Brown

    ()
    (IEB & Universitat de Barcelona)

  • José García-Quevedo

    ()
    (IEB & Universitat de Barcelona)

  • Daniel Montolio

    ()
    (IEB & Universitat de Barcelona)

Abstract

The implementation of public programs to support business R&D projects requires the establishment of a selection process. This selection process faces various difficulties, which include the measurement of the impact of the R&D projects as well as selection process optimization among projects with multiple, and sometimes incomparable, performance indicators. To this end, public agencies generally use the peer review method, which, while presenting some advantages, also demonstrates significant drawbacks. Private firms, on the other hand, tend toward more quantitative methods, such as Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), in their pursuit of R&D investment optimization. In this paper, the performance of a public agency peer review method of project selection is compared with an alternative DEA method.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://ieb.ub.edu/aplicacio/fitxers/2009/3/Doc2008-5.pdf
Our checks indicate that this address may not be valid because: 403 FORBIDDEN. If this is indeed the case, please notify ()
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB) in its series Working Papers with number 2008/5.

as in new window
Length: 22 pages
Date of creation: 2008
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ieb:wpaper:2009/3/doc2008-5

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Carrer del Tinent Coronel Valenzuela 1-11, 08034 Barcelona
Phone: 93 403 46 46
Fax: 93 403 98 32
Email:
Web page: http://www.ieb.ub.edu
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Subsidies; R&D; DEA; Multi Criteria Decision Analysis; “peer review”.;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. José García-Quevedo, 2004. "Do Public Subsidies Complement Business R&D? A Meta-Analysis of the Econometric Evidence," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 87-102, 02.
  2. Paul A. David & Bronwyn H. Hall & Andrew A. Toole, 1999. "Is Public R&D a Complement or Substitute for Private R&D? A Review of the Econometric Evidence," Working Papers 99023, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
  3. Mariam Camarero & Josep Lluis Carrion-i-Silvestre & Cecilio Tamarit, 2006. "New evidence of the real interest rate parity for OECD countries using panel unit root tests with breaks," Working Papers CREAP2006-14, Xarxa de Referència en Economia Aplicada (XREAP), revised Dec 2006.
  4. Néstor Duch & Daniel Montolio & Mauro Mediavilla, 2007. "Evaluating the impact of public subsidies on a firm's performance: A quasi-experimental approach," Working Papers 2007/3, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
  5. Klette, T.J. & Moen, J. & Griliches, Z., 1999. "Do Subsidies to Commercial R&D Reduce Market Failures? Microeconometric Evaluation Studies," Papers 16/99, Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration-.
  6. Klette, Tor Jakob & Moen, Jarle & Griliches, Zvi, 2000. "Do subsidies to commercial R&D reduce market failures? Microeconometric evaluation studies1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 471-495, April.
  7. Almus, Matthias & Czarnitzki, Dirk, 2001. "The effects of public R&D subsidies on firms' innovation activities: the case of Eastern Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 01-10, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  8. 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.
  9. Elise Brezis, 2006. "Focal Randomization: An optimal mechanism for the evaluation of R&D," DEGIT Conference Papers c011_035, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
  10. J. Vicente Blanes & Isabel Busom, 2004. "WHO PARTICIPATES IN R&D SUBSIDY PROGRAMS?. The case of Spanish Manufacturing Firms," Working Papers wpdea0407, Department of Applied Economics at Universitat Autonoma of Barcelona.
  11. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Antonio Manresa & Ferran Sancho, 2012. "Leontief versus Ghosh: two faces of the same coin," Working Papers XREAP2012-18, Xarxa de Referència en Economia Aplicada (XREAP), revised Oct 2012.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ieb:wpaper:2009/3/doc2008-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.