IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v34y2025i4p775-804..html

Trade-offs and complementarities between regional, sectoral, and national support policies for firms’ innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Roper
  • Enrico Vanino
  • Nola Hewitt-Dundas

Abstract

Public support for R&D can play a crucial role in addressing systemic failures that hinder the functioning of innovation systems, whether national, sectoral, or region-specific. However, little is known about the trade-offs and complementarities between subnational and national innovation policies. Here, we consider trade-offs and complementarities between national R&D support measures managed by UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), regional support provided by the Northern Ireland government, and sectoral support provided by the UK’s Catapult network. Using a propensity score matching combined with a difference-in-difference event study analysis, we find evidence of dynamic complementarities between subnational and national innovation policies. Both regional and sectoral innovation support measures have positive effects on both employment and turnover growth. However, each subnational policy targets somewhat different groups of firms to national policy measures. Strong static and dynamic complementarities are also evident between sectoral and national support, as firms initially supported by the Catapults are significantly more likely to secure national R&D funding in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Roper & Enrico Vanino & Nola Hewitt-Dundas, 2025. "Trade-offs and complementarities between regional, sectoral, and national support policies for firms’ innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 34(4), pages 775-804.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:34:y:2025:i:4:p:775-804.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/icc/dtae046
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    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:oup:indcch:v:34:y:2025:i:4:p:775-804.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    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.