IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unm/unumer/2014033.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The impact of innovation support programmes on SME innovation in traditional manufacturing industries: an evaluation for seven EU regions

Author

Listed:
  • Wintjes, R.

    (UNU-MERIT)

  • Douglas, D.

    (Centre for Applied Business Research, Faculty of Business, Education and Law, Staffordshire University)

  • Fairburn, J.

    (Centre for Applied Business Research, Faculty of Business, Education and Law, Staffordshire University)

  • Hollanders, H.

    (UNU-MERIT)

  • Pugh, G.

    (Centre for Applied Business Research, Faculty of Business, Education and Law, Staffordshire University)

Abstract

This study investigates the impact of innovation support programmes on SME innovation in traditional manufacturing industries in seven EU regions. Recent literature identifying sources of potential government failure in innovation policy suggests that the effects of public support measures to increase private innovation may be disappointing. Our results are consistent with this hypothesis, yet also suggest a direction for policy reform to overcome government failure and, thereby, to increase the potential additionality of innovation support programmes. Innovation support programmes in the EU typically adopt a cream skimming selection strategy namely, programme managers systematically select firms on the basis of observable characteristics conducive to innovation. The econometric analysis of a new survey database reported in this paper suggests that cream skimming leads to firms being selected for programme participation that benefit less than would randomly selected firms. The policy corollary is that, subject to due diligence checking, allocation of innovation support by lottery should give rise to greater programme additionality than does the prevalent cream skimming approach. We conclude with some practical guidelines for allocation by lottery, which were developed for a recently launched innovation support programme for SMEs.

Suggested Citation

  • Wintjes, R. & Douglas, D. & Fairburn, J. & Hollanders, H. & Pugh, G., 2014. "The impact of innovation support programmes on SME innovation in traditional manufacturing industries: an evaluation for seven EU regions," MERIT Working Papers 2014-033, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    • Handle: RePEc:unm:unumer:2014033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.merit.unu.edu/publications/wppdf/2014/wp2014-033.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Florencia Fiorentin & Mariano Pereira & Diana Suárez, 2020. "The relationship between public funds, innovation and employment among Argentinean manufacturing firms," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 773-791, July.
    2. Parrilli, Mario Davide & Balavac, Merima & Radicic, Dragana, 2020. "Business innovation modes and their impact on innovation outputs: Regional variations and the nature of innovation across EU regions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    3. Dimos, Christos & Pugh, Geoff, 2016. "The effectiveness of R&D subsidies: A meta-regression analysis of the evaluation literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 797-815.
    4. Dragana Radicic & Geoffrey Pugh & David Douglas, 2020. "Promoting cooperation in innovation ecosystems: evidence from European traditional manufacturing SMEs," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 257-283, January.
    5. Dragana Radicic & David Douglas & Geoff Pugh & Ian Jackson, 2019. "Cooperation For Innovation And Its Impact On Technological And Non-Technological Innovations: Empirical Evidence For European Smes In Traditional Manufacturing Industries," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(05), pages 1-41, June.
    6. Dragana Radicic & Geoffrey Pugh, 2017. "R&D Programmes, Policy Mix, and the ‘European Paradox’: Evidence from European SMEs," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(4), pages 497-512.
    7. Dragana Radicic & Geoffrey Pugh & Hugo Hollanders & René Wintjes & Jon Fairburn, 2016. "The impact of innovation support programs on small and medium enterprises innovation in traditional manufacturing industries: An evaluation for seven European Union regions," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(8), pages 1425-1452, December.
    8. Wang, Yanbo & Li, Jizhen & Furman, Jeffrey L., 2017. "Firm performance and state innovation funding: Evidence from China’s innofund program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1142-1161.
    9. El¿bieta Roszko-Wójtowicz & Jacek Bia³ek, 2016. "The goal of this research is to propose a procedure of innovativeness measurement, taking Summary Innovation Index methodology as a starting point. In contemporary world, innovative activity is percei," Zbornik radova Ekonomskog fakulteta u Rijeci/Proceedings of Rijeka Faculty of Economics, University of Rijeka, Faculty of Economics and Business, vol. 34(2), pages 443-479.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    innovation; SMEs; traditional manufacturing industry; public innovation support; government failure; evaluation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General
    • C34 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Truncated and Censored Models; Switching Regression Models

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:unm:unumer:2014033. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Ad Notten (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/meritnl.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.