IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/elg/eechap/15558_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Public gains from entrepreneurial research: Inferences about the economic value of public support of the Small Business Innovation Research program

In: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms

Author

Listed:
  • Stuart D. Allen
  • Stephen K. Layson
  • Albert N. Link

Abstract

Public support for innovation, chiefly through government programs such as the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program, has had a significant impact on fostering economic growth in the US. This collection synthesizes a decade of scholarship from Albert N. Link on the subject, specifically on small, technology-based entrepreneurial firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Stuart D. Allen & Stephen K. Layson & Albert N. Link, 2013. "Public gains from entrepreneurial research: Inferences about the economic value of public support of the Small Business Innovation Research program," Chapters, in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 6, pages 105-112, Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Handle: RePEc:elg:eechap:15558_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.elgaronline.com/view/9781783470174.00016.xml
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    2. Edwin Mansfield & John Rapoport & Anthony Romeo & Samuel Wagner & George Beardsley, 1977. "Social and Private Rates of Return from Industrial Innovations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 91(2), pages 221-240.
    3. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2013. "Employment growth from public support of innovation in small firms," Chapters, in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 3, pages 41-64, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Albert N. Link & Christopher J. Ruhm, 2013. "Bringing science to market:commercializing from NIH SBIR awards," Chapters, in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 1, pages 3-24, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, December.
    6. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2005. "Evaluating Public Sector R&D Programs: The Advanced Technology Program's Investment in Wavelength References for Optical Fiber Communications," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 241-251, January.
    7. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2013. "Governments as entrepreneur: Evaluating the commercialization success of SBIR projects," Chapters, in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 2, pages 25-38, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Zvi Griliches, 1958. "Research Costs and Social Returns: Hybrid Corn and Related Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 66, pages 419-419.
    9. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott (ed.), 2011. "The Economics of Evaluation in Public Programs," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14418.
    10. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2013. "Private Investor Participation and Commercialization Rates for Government-sponsored Research and Development: Would a Prediction Market Improve the Performance of the SBIR Programme?," Chapters, in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 11, pages 157-174, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Scherer, F M, 1979. "The Welfare Economics of Product Variety: An Application to the Ready-to-Eat Cereals Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 113-134, December.
    12. Link, Albert N. & Scott, John T., 2011. "Public Goods, Public Gains: Calculating the Social Benefits of Public R&D," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199729685.
    13. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2013. "The theory and practice of public-sector R&D economic impact analysis," Chapters, in: Albert N. Link & Nicholas S. Vonortas (ed.), Handbook on the Theory and Practice of Program Evaluation, chapter 2, pages 15-55, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Michael P. Gallaher & Albert N. Link & Alan C. O’Connor, 2012. "Public Investments in Energy Technology," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14348.
    15. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2005. "Evaluating Public Sector R&D Programs: The Advanced Technology Program’s Investment in Wavelength References for Optical Fiber," Springer Books, in: Albert N. Link & F. M. Scherer (ed.), Essays in Honor of Edwin Mansfield, pages 87-97, Springer.
    16. H. Spencer Banzhaf, 2009. "Objective or Multi-Objective? Two Historically Competing Visions for Benefit-Cost Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(1), pages 3-23.
    17. Georghiou, Luke & Roessner, David, 2000. "Evaluating technology programs: tools and methods," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 657-678, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Michael J. Hall, 2015. "Public investments in sustainable technology: an evaluation of North Carolina's Green Business Fund," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(5), pages 436-456, July.
    2. Albert N Link & John T Scott, 2018. "Toward an assessment of the US Small Business Innovation Research Program at the National Institutes of Health," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(1), pages 83-91.
    3. Martin S. Andersen & Jeremy W. Bray & Albert N. Link, 2017. "On the failure of scientific research: an analysis of SBIR projects funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 431-442, July.
    4. Link, Albert, 2022. "An Assessment and Evaluation of the U.S. Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Program," UNCG Economics Working Papers 22-8, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.
    5. Albert N. Link, 2023. "The U.S. Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Program: An Assessment and an Evaluation of the Program," Annals of Science and Technology Policy, now publishers, vol. 7(2), pages 81-151, March.
    6. Onken, James & Aragon, Richard & Calcagno, Anna Maria, 2019. "Geographically-related outcomes of U.S. funding for small business research and development: Results of the research grant programs of a component of the National Institutes of Health," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    7. Link, Albert & Scott, John, 2017. "Toward an Assessment of the U.S. Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program at the National Institutes of Health," UNCG Economics Working Papers 17-6, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.

    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. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2019. "The economic benefits of technology transfer from U.S. federal laboratories," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(5), pages 1416-1426, October.
    2. Link, Albert & Scott, John, 2017. "Toward an Assessment of the U.S. Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program at the National Institutes of Health," UNCG Economics Working Papers 17-6, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.
    3. Barry Bozeman & Albert N. Link, 2015. "Toward an assessment of impacts from US technology and innovation policies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 369-376.
    4. David B. Audretsch & Dennis P. Leyden & Albert N. Link, 2013. "Regional Appropriation of University-Based Knowledge and Technology for Economic Development," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 27(1), pages 56-61, February.
    5. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2013. "Employment growth from public support of innovation in small firms," Chapters, in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 3, pages 41-64, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Albert N. Link & Christopher J. Ruhm & Donald S. Siegel, 2014. "Private Equity and the Innovation Strategies of Entrepreneurial Firms: Empirical Evidence from the Small Business Innovation Research Program," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(2), pages 103-113, March.
    7. Albert N. Link, 2021. "Investments in R&D and innovative behavior: an exploratory cross-country study," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 731-739, June.
    8. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2012. "On the social value of quality: An economic evaluation of the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(5), pages 680-689, July.
    9. Donald Siegel & Charles Wessner, 2012. "Universities and the success of entrepreneurial ventures: evidence from the small business innovation research program," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 404-415, August.
    10. John Scott, 2009. "Cost-benefit analysis for global public–private partnerships: an evaluation of the desirability of intergovernmental organizations entering into public–private partnerships," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(6), pages 525-559, December.
    11. Maribel Guerrero & Albert N. Link, 2022. "Public support of innovative activity in small and large firms in Mexico," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(1), pages 413-422, June.
    12. David B. Audretsch & Dennis P. Leyden & Albert N. Link, 2013. "Universities as research partners in publicly supported entrepreneurial firms," Chapters, in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 12, pages 175-192, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Christopher S. Hayter, 2015. "Social Networks and the Success of University Spin-offs," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 29(1), pages 3-13, February.
    14. Chiara F. DEL BO, 2014. "The rate of return to investment in R&D infrastructure: an overview," Departmental Working Papers 2014-11, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    15. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2013. "The exploitation of publicly funded technology," Chapters, in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 8, pages 127-135, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Christopher Hayter, 2015. "Public or private entrepreneurship? Revisiting motivations and definitions of success among academic entrepreneurs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1003-1015, December.
    17. Amol M. Joshi & Todd M. Inouye & Jeffrey A. Robinson, 2018. "How does agency workforce diversity influence Federal R&D funding of minority and women technology entrepreneurs? An analysis of the SBIR and STTR programs, 2001–2011," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 499-519, March.
    18. David B. Audretsch, 2018. "Industrial Organization and the Organization of Industries: Linking Industry Structure to Economic Performance," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 52(4), pages 603-620, June.
    19. Martin S. Andersen & Jeremy W. Bray & Albert N. Link, 2017. "On the failure of scientific research: an analysis of SBIR projects funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 431-442, July.
    20. Farhat Chowdhury & Albert N. Link & Martijn Hasselt, 2022. "Public support for research in artificial intelligence: a descriptive study of U.S. Department of Defense SBIR Projects," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 762-774, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Business and Management; Innovations and Technology;

    JEL classification:

    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate
    • O22 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Project Analysis
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:elg:eechap:15558_6. 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: Darrel McCalla (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.e-elgar.com .

    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.