IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwppe/0411007.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are R&D subsidies a substitute or a complement to privately funded R&D? Evidence from France using propensity score methods for non- experimental data

Author

Listed:
  • DUGUET Emmanuel

    (EPEE - University of Evry)

Abstract

This study examines the effect of research and development subsidies on the private funding of R&D in France. We address this issue from the annual R&D survey over 1985-1997, which provides information about the R&D subsidies given by all the ministries to the firms having at least one full-time person working on R&D. In order to determine whether the supported firms would have invested the same amount of private R&D without the subsidies, we use matching methods. We show that the use of these methods is important because the global evaluations, in this paper, more often give a potential effect among the non-supported firms than a real effect among the supported firms. We first study the probability to get a subsidy. We find that this probability is increasing with size, the debt ratio and the importance of privately funded R&D. In a second step, controlling for the past public support the firms benefited from, we find that, on average, public funds add to private funds, so that there would be no significant crowding out effect.

Suggested Citation

  • DUGUET Emmanuel, 2004. "Are R&D subsidies a substitute or a complement to privately funded R&D? Evidence from France using propensity score methods for non- experimental data," Public Economics 0411007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwppe:0411007
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 38
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/pe/papers/0411/0411007.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Crepon, B. & Duguet, E. & Mairesse, J., 1998. "Research Investment, Innovation and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level," Papiers d'Economie Mathématique et Applications 98.15, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    2. Crepon, B. & Duguet, E. & Kabla, I., 1995. "A Moderate Support to Schumpeterian Conjectures from Various Innovation Measures," Papiers d'Economie Mathématique et Applications 95.06, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    3. Spyros Arvanitis & Heinz Hollenstein, 2002. "The Impact of Spillovers and Knowledge Heterogeneity on Firm Performance: Evidence from Swiss Manufacturing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht & Pierre Mohnen (ed.), Innovation and Firm Performance, chapter 10, pages 225-252, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Emmanuel Duguet, 2006. "Innovation height, spillovers and tfp growth at the firm level: Evidence from French manufacturing," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 415-442.
    5. 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.
    6. Isabel Busom, 2000. "An Empirical Evaluation of The Effects of R&D Subsidies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 111-148.
    7. David, Paul A. & Hall, Bronwyn H. & Toole, Andrew A., 2000. "Is public R&D a complement or substitute for private R&D? A review of the econometric evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 497-529, April.
    8. Cohen, Wesley M & Klepper, Steven, 1996. "A Reprise of Size and R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 925-951, July.
    9. Bruno Crepon & Emmanuel Duguet & Jacques Mairesse, 1998. "Research, Innovation And Productivity: An Econometric Analysis At The Firm Level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 115-158.
    10. Bruno Crepon & Emmanuel Duguet & Isabelle Kabla, 1996. "Schumpeterian Conjectures: A Moderate Support from Various Innovation Measures," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht (ed.), Determinants of Innovation, chapter 3, pages 63-98, Palgrave Macmillan.
    11. Donald W. K. Andrews & Moshe Buchinsky, 2000. "A Three-Step Method for Choosing the Number of Bootstrap Repetitions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(1), pages 23-52, January.
    12. Andrews, Donald W. K. & Buchinsky, Moshe, 2001. "Evaluation of a three-step method for choosing the number of bootstrap repetitions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 103(1-2), pages 345-386, July.
    13. Alfred Kleinknecht & Pierre Mohnen (ed.), 2002. "Innovation and Firm Performance," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-230-59588-0.
    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. Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre, 2010. "Using Innovation Surveys for Econometric Analysis," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1129-1155, Elsevier.
    2. Fassio Claudio, 2011. "Sectoral invariances or distance-from-the-frontier effect among European mid-low tech sectors," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201115, University of Turin.
    3. Chudnovsky, Daniel & Lopez, Andres & Pupato, German, 2006. "Innovation and productivity in developing countries: A study of Argentine manufacturing firms' behavior (1992-2001)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 266-288, March.
    4. Dirk Czarnitzki & Julie Delanote, 2017. "Incorporating innovation subsidies in the CDM framework: empirical evidence from Belgium," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1-2), pages 78-92, February.
    5. Bruno Crépon & Emmanuel Duguet & Jacques Mairesse, 2000. "Mesurer le rendement de l'innovation," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 334(1), pages 65-78.
    6. Peters, Bettina & Lööf, Hans & Janz, Norbert, 2003. "Firm Level Innovation and Productivity: Is there a Common Story Across Countries?," ZEW Discussion Papers 03-26, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Sabourin, David & Baldwin, John R., 1999. "Innovative Activity in Canadian Food Processing Establishments: the Importance of Engineering Practices," Analytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series 1999101e, Statistics Canada, Analytical Studies Branch.
    8. Bronzini, Raffaello & Piselli, Paolo, 2016. "The impact of R&D subsidies on firm innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 442-457.
    9. Gabriele Pellegrino & Mariacristina Piva, 2020. "Innovation, industry and firm age: are there new knowledge production functions?," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 10(1), pages 65-95, March.
    10. Chudnovsky, Daniel & López, Andrés & Rossi, Martín & Ubfal, Diego, 2006. "Evaluating a Program of Public Funding of Private Innovation Activities: An Econometric Study of FONTAR in Argentina," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 2829, Inter-American Development Bank.
    11. Emmanuel Duguet & Stéphanie Monjon, 2004. "Is innovation persistent at the firm Level. An econometric examination comparing the propensity score and regression methods," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques v04075, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    12. Wadho, Waqar & Chaudhry, Azam, 2018. "Innovation and firm performance in developing countries: The case of Pakistani textile and apparel manufacturers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1283-1294.
    13. Beom Cheol Cin & Young Jun Kim & Nicholas S. Vonortas, 2017. "The impact of public R&D subsidy on small firm productivity: evidence from Korean SMEs," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 345-360, February.
    14. Fassio, Claudio, 2014. "Sectoral Systems or Distance-to-the-Frontier Effects in Innovation? A Comparison of Three Medium-Technology Sectors in Germany, Italy and Spain," LEAP Working Papers 2014/3, Luiss Institute for European Analysis and Policy.
    15. 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.
    16. Bronwyn Hall & Alessandro Maffioli, 2008. "Evaluating the impact of technology development funds in emerging economies: evidence from Latin America," The European Journal of Development Research, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 172-198.
    17. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2017. "Digital knowledge generation and the appropriability trade-off," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 991-1002.
    18. Jaan Masso & Priit Vahter, 2008. "Technological innovation and productivity in late-transition Estonia: econometric evidence from innovation surveys," The European Journal of Development Research, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 240-261.
    19. Emmanuel Duguet, 2004. "Are RαD subsidies a substitute or a complement to privately funded RαD ?. An econometric analysis at the firm level," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 114(2), pages 245-274.
    20. Justin Doran & Geraldine Ryan, 2016. "The Importance of the Diverse Drivers and Types of Environmental Innovation for Firm Performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 102-119, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    propensity score; non-experimental data; policy evaluation; research and development; subsidies;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General
    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • L98 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Government Policy
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:wpa:wuwppe:0411007. 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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.