IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/hohdps/102015.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The effect of project funding on innovative performance: An agent-based simulation model

Author

Listed:
  • Bogner, Kristina

Abstract

Analyzing the effect of Direct Project Funding (DPF) on innovative performance of economic agents is a major challenge for innovation economists and policy makers who must give valid policy recommendations and decide on the allocation of financial resources. An approach that becomes more and more important is the use of agent-based modeling in analyzing innovative performance of market players. In this paper, an agentbased percolation model is used to investigate the effects of project funding on innovative performance in terms of the maximum technological frontier that can be reached as well as in terms of the number of innovations generated by firms. The model results show that firms which participate in subsidized projects outperform firms that do not participate in subsidized projects, especially in increasingly complex technological fields. However, the worse performance of firms that do not participate in subsidized projects can be offset by an increase in the firms' financial resources. Hence, the model indicates, the effect of project funding is a purely financial one and might even have negative effects on innovative performance. This is the case if, for instance, a high number of funded research projects disturbs firms' paths through the technology space. Following the results of the model, project funding is most effective and important in increasingly complex technology spaces and less effective and important in less complex technology spaces. Moreover, the model results show, other financial resources as venture capital can substitute for direct project funding.

Suggested Citation

  • Bogner, Kristina, 2015. "The effect of project funding on innovative performance: An agent-based simulation model," Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 10-2015, University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:hohdps:102015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/121861/1/838724817.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. G. Fagiolo & C. Birchenhall & P. Windrum, 2007. "Empirical Validation in Agent-based Models: Introduction to the Special Issue," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 30(3), pages 189-194, October.
    2. Gerald Silverberg & Bart Verspagen, 2007. "Self-organization of R&D search in complex technology spaces," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 2(2), pages 211-229, December.
    3. Aschhoff, Birgit & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2009. "Innovation on demand--Can public procurement drive market success of innovations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1235-1247, October.
    4. Paolo Zeppini & Koen Frenken & Luis R. Izquierdo, 2013. "Innovation diffusion in networks: the microeconomics of percolation," Working Papers 13-02, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies, revised Feb 2013.
    5. Silverberg, Gerald & Verspagen, Bart, 2005. "A percolation model of innovation in complex technology spaces," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 29(1-2), pages 225-244, January.
    6. Kluger, Brian D. & McBride, Mark E., 2011. "Intraday trading patterns in an intelligent autonomous agent-based stock market," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 226-245, August.
    7. Dawid, Herbert, 2006. "Agent-based Models of Innovation and Technological Change," Handbook of Computational Economics, in: Leigh Tesfatsion & Kenneth L. Judd (ed.), Handbook of Computational Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 25, pages 1235-1272, Elsevier.
    8. Richard Arena & Agnès Festré & Nathalie Lazaric, 2012. "Handbook of Knowledge and Economics," Post-Print halshs-00721485, HAL.
    9. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Hussinger, Katrin, 2004. "The Link Between R&D Subsidies, R&D Spending and Technological Performance," ZEW Discussion Papers 04-56, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Colombo, Massimo G. & Grilli, Luca & Murtinu, Samuele, 2011. "R&D subsidies and the performance of high-tech start-ups," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 112(1), pages 97-99, July.
    11. Dirk Czarnitzki & Bernd Ebersberger & Andreas Fier, 2007. "The relationship between R&D collaboration, subsidies and R&D performance: Empirical evidence from Finland and Germany," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(7), pages 1347-1366.
    12. Dirk Fornahl & Tom Broekel & Ron Boschma, 2011. "What drives patent performance of German biotech firms? The impact of R&D subsidies, knowledge networks and their location," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 90(2), pages 395-418, June.
    13. Popescul, Daniela, 2012. "Knowledge flows percolation model – a new model for the relation between knowledge and innovation," MPRA Paper 51746, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Fier, Andreas, 2001. "Do R&D subsidies matter? Evidence for the German service sector," ZEW Discussion Papers 01-19, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    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. Dirk Czarnitzki & Julie Delanote, 2015. "R&D policies for young SMEs: input and output effects," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 465-485, October.
    2. Brüggemann Julia & Proeger Till, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Public Subsidies for Private Innovations. An Experimental Approach," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 17(4), pages 1-21, October.
    3. 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.
    4. Brüggemann, Julia & Proeger, Till, 2017. "The effectiveness of public subsidies for private innovations: An experimental approach," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 266, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics, revised 2017.
    5. Stefania Vitali & Gabriele Tedeschi & Mauro Gallegati, 2013. "The impact of classes of innovators on technology, financial fragility, and economic growth," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 22(4), pages 1069-1091, August.
    6. Cantner, Uwe & Graf, Holger & Herrmann, Johannes & Kalthaus, Martin, 2016. "Inventor networks in renewable energies: The influence of the policy mix in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1165-1184.
    7. Tom Broekel & Matthias Brachert & Matthias Duschl & Thomas Brenner, 2015. "Joint R and D subsidies, related variety, and regional innovation," Working Papers on Innovation and Space 2015-01, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
    8. Lars Mewes & Tom Broekel, 2020. "Subsidized to change? The impact of R&D policy on regional technological diversification," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 65(1), pages 221-252, August.
    9. Tom Broekel & Matthias Brachert & Matthias Duschl & Thomas Brenner, 2017. "Joint R&D Subsidies, Related Variety, and Regional Innovation," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 40(3), pages 297-326, May.
    10. Hesse, Kolja, 2020. "Unlocking the radical potential of German innovators How can R&D policy foster radical innovation?," Papers in Innovation Studies 2020/5, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    11. Massimo Ricottilli, 2006. "Constraints and Freedom of Action: a fitness trade-off," Working Papers 580, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    12. Dirk Czarnitzki & Cindy Lopes-Bento, 2014. "Innovation Subsidies: Does the Funding Source Matter for Innovation Intensity and Performance? Empirical Evidence from Germany," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(5), pages 380-409, July.
    13. Yuhan Zhao & Xuguang Song, 2018. "How Should the Chinese Government Invest R&D Funds: Enterprises or Institutions?," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 52(4), pages 1089-1112, December.
    14. Nishimura, Junichi & Okamuro, Hiroyuki, 2011. "Subsidy and networking: The effects of direct and indirect support programs of the cluster policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 714-727, June.
    15. Anna‐Maria Kindt & Matthias Geissler & Kilian Bühling, 2022. "Be my (little) partner?!—Universities' role in regional innovation systems when large firms are rare," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(5), pages 1274-1295, November.
    16. Dirk Engel & Timo Mitze & Roberto Patuelli & Janina Reinkowski, 2013. "Does Cluster Policy Trigger R&D Activity? Evidence from German Biotech Contests," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(11), pages 1735-1759, November.
    17. Szücs, Florian, 2020. "Do research subsidies crowd out private R&D of large firms? Evidence from European Framework Programmes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(3).
    18. Beck, Mathias & Lopes-Bento, Cindy & Schenker-Wicki, Andrea, 2016. "Radical or incremental: Where does R&D policy hit?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 869-883.
    19. Dirk Czarnitzki & Paul Hünermund & Nima Moshgbar, 2018. "Public procurement as policy instrument for innovation," Working Papers of Department of Management, Strategy and Innovation, Leuven 606259, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Management, Strategy and Innovation, Leuven.
    20. Hottenrott, Hanna & Lopes-Bento, Cindy, 2014. "(International) R&D collaboration and SMEs: The effectiveness of targeted public R&D support schemes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 1055-1066.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    project funding; innovation; technology space; agent-based simulation;
    All these keywords.

    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:zbw:hohdps:102015. 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/fwhohde.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.