IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/csc/cerisp/200704.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Il finanziamento pubblico alla ricerca spiazza l’investimento privato in ricerca? Analisi ed implicazioni per la crescita economica dei paesi

Author

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between public and private funding for research. Data from Eurostat are used. The methodology applies descriptive statistics, correlation, regression and cluster analyses. The main results are: public funding for research crowds out business funding one; moreover private rather than public funding for research is the cause of economic growth of countries. The best economic performance has been achieved by the USA, followed by Europe and Japan. Italy instead has higher public funds of research than private one and the result is low rate of economic growth over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Mario Coccia, 2007. "Il finanziamento pubblico alla ricerca spiazza l’investimento privato in ricerca? Analisi ed implicazioni per la crescita economica dei paesi," CERIS Working Paper 200704, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    • Handle: RePEc:csc:cerisp:200704
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.byterfly.eu/islandora/object/librib:351801
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joshua Lerner, 2002. "Boom and bust in the venture capital industry and the impact on innovation," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, vol. 87(Q4), pages 25-39.
    2. 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.
    3. Klevorick, Alvin K. & Levin, Richard C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1995. "On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 185-205, March.
    4. Josh Lerner, 2002. "When Bureaucrats Meet Entrepreneurs: The Design of Effective "Public Venture Capital" Programmes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(477), pages 73-84, February.
    5. Mark Doms & Eric J. Bartelsman, 2000. "Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 569-594, September.
    6. Cockburn, Iain M & Henderson, Rebecca M, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
    7. Barry Bozeman & Daniel Sarewitz, 2005. "Public values and public failure in US science policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 119-136, April.
    8. Henry Etzkowitz, 2006. "The new visible hand: An assisted linear model of science and innovation policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(5), pages 310-320, June.
    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. Angelo Bonomi, 2017. "A technological model of the R&D process and its implications with scientific research and socio-economic activities," IRCrES Working Paper 201702, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY.

    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. Mario Coccia, 2007. "Quanto e come investire in ricerca per massimizzare la crescita economica? Analisi e implicazioni di politica economica per l’Italia e l’Europa," CERIS Working Paper 200705, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    2. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    4. Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2006. "Innovation, Competition and Welfare-Enhancing Monopoly," NBER Working Papers 12094, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    6. Leten, Bart & Landoni, Paolo & Van Looy, Bart, 2014. "Science or graduates: How do firms benefit from the proximity of universities?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1398-1412.
    7. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    8. Alperovych, Yan & Hübner, Georges & Lobet, Fabrice, 2015. "How does governmental versus private venture capital backing affect a firm's efficiency? Evidence from Belgium," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 508-525.
    9. 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.
    10. Rachel Levy & Pascale Roux & Sandrine Wolff, 2009. "An analysis of science–industry collaborative patterns in a large European University," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 1-23, February.
    11. Tuomas Takalo, 2012. "Rationales and Instruments for Public Innovation Policies," Journal of Reviews on Global Economics, Lifescience Global, vol. 1, pages 157-167.
    12. Valérie Revest & Alessandro Sapio, 2012. "Financing technology-based small firms in Europe: what do we know?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 179-205, July.
    13. Kanniainen, Vesa & Keuschnigg, Christian, 2004. "Start-up investment with scarce venture capital support," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(8), pages 1935-1959, August.
    14. Cappelli, Riccardo & Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius, 2014. "Sources of spillovers for imitation and innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 115-120.
    15. Nicola Lacetera, 2003. "Incentives and spillovers in R&D activities: an agency-theoretic analysis of industry-university relations," Microeconomics 0312004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Gamal Atallah, 2004. "The Allocation Of Resources To Cooperative And Noncooperative R&D," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(4), pages 435-447, December.
    17. Wu, Aihua, 2017. "The signal effect of Government R&D Subsidies in China: Does ownership matter?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 339-345.
    18. Christopher F Baum & Hans Lööf & Pardis Nabavi, 2019. "Innovation strategies, external knowledge and productivity growth," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 348-367, March.
    19. Taalbi, Josef, 2017. "What drives innovation? Evidence from economic history," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1437-1453.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Research Funding; Economic Growth; Comparative Study; Research Policy; Crowding-out;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C00 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - General
    • E00 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General - - - General
    • E60 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook - - - General
    • H50 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - General
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • O40 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - General
    • O57 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Comparative Studies of Countries

    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:csc:cerisp:200704. 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: Anna Perin or Giancarlo Birello (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cerisit.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.