IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v52y2025i5p720-736..html

How much alike are SBIR-like programmes?

Author

Listed:
  • Marcelo Pinho
  • Ana Paula M Avellar
  • Marisa R A Botelho
  • Debora Taño
  • Ana Lúcia V Torkomian

Abstract

Promoting innovation in small- and medium-sized enterprises through direct grants for research and development is the main objective of Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR), a programme that has inspired many countries and has grown in importance as part of their current innovation policies. In this article, we conducted a literature review to identify programmes similar to SBIR in other countries and compare them, considering key aspects of their operation, institutional setup, scope, and outcome assessments. Analysing the similarities and differences between the different programmes in eight countries addresses a gap in the literature, which has focused on the isolated analysis of programmes. In this methodological approach, we show how SBIR-like programmes, despite sharing the same main objective, undergo changes resulting from differences in the institutional and political framework, suggesting a process of translation rather than simple diffusion. Furthermore, the study illustrates how SBIR and SBIR-like programmes modify to adapt to changes in innovation policies over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcelo Pinho & Ana Paula M Avellar & Marisa R A Botelho & Debora Taño & Ana Lúcia V Torkomian, 2025. "How much alike are SBIR-like programmes?," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 52(5), pages 720-736.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:52:y:2025:i:5:p:720-736.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scaf013
    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

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:scippl:v:52:y:2025:i:5:p:720-736.. 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/spp .

    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.