IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Role of Science and Technology Policy in Small Economies


  • Heikkilä, Tuomo
  • Kiander, Jaakko
  • Hjerppe, Reino
  • Berghäll, Elina
  • Kilponen, Juha
  • Lavrac, Vladimir
  • Stanovnik, Peter


KNOGG, an EU financed thematic network, studies the role ST&I policies play in driving economic growth in six small European economies. It aims to develop guidelines at the EU level for improving knowledge-based growth in small European economies. This report sets the stage of the project, and provides a selective survey of the current literature on economic growth from the point of view of small open economies. Based on the New Growth Theory and Schumpeterian view of innovation, this report develops a conceptual framework for the project. The constraints imposed by country size and available resources as well as their implications for knowledge-based growth strategies are highlighted. Although ST&I policies in small countries may be more knowledgediffusion oriented, sole reliance on imitation strategies and foreign spillovers may lead to under-investment in domestic R&D and to difficulties to absorb new technologies. In this respect the KNOGG countries' past and current experiences in ST&I policies are rather mixed and diversified.

Suggested Citation

  • Heikkilä, Tuomo & Kiander, Jaakko & Hjerppe, Reino & Berghäll, Elina & Kilponen, Juha & Lavrac, Vladimir & Stanovnik, Peter, 2002. "The Role of Science and Technology Policy in Small Economies," Research Reports 91, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:fer:resrep:91

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. LaLonde, Robert J, 1986. "Evaluating the Econometric Evaluations of Training Programs with Experimental Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 604-620, September.
    2. Michael Lechner, 2002. "Program Heterogeneity And Propensity Score Matching: An Application To The Evaluation Of Active Labor Market Policies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(2), pages 205-220, May.
    3. McCloskey, Donald N, 1983. "The Rhetoric of Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 481-517, June.
    4. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    5. Heckman, James, 2001. "Accounting for Heterogeneity, Diversity and General Equilibrium in Evaluating Social Programmes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(475), pages 654-699, November.
    6. Lechner, Michael, 1999. "Identification and Estimation of Causal Effects of Multiple Treatments Under the Conditional Independence Assumption," IZA Discussion Papers 91, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    7. Schmidt, Christoph M., 1999. "Knowing What Works: The Case for Rigorous Program Evaluation," IZA Discussion Papers 77, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    8. Jochen Kluve & Hartmut Lehmann & Christoph M. Schmidt, 2000. "Disentangling Treatment Effects of Polish Active Labour Market Policies: Evidence from Matched Samples," CERT Discussion Papers 0007, Centre for Economic Reform and Transformation, Heriot Watt University.
    9. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 2002. "Propensity Score-Matching Methods For Nonexperimental Causal Studies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(1), pages 151-161, February.
    10. Jeffrey Smith, 2000. "A Critical Survey of Empirical Methods for Evaluating Active Labor Market Policies," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 136(III), pages 247-268, September.
    11. Devarajan, Shantayanan & Squire, Lyn & Suthiwart-Narueput, Sethaput, 1997. "Beyond Rate of Return: Reorienting Project Appraisal," World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, vol. 12(1), pages 35-46, February.
    12. Venetoklis, Takis, 2001. "Business Subsidies and Bureaucratic Behaviour," Research Reports 79, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    13. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey A. Smith, 1998. "Evaluating the Welfare State," NBER Working Papers 6542, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Richard Blundell & Monica Costa Dias, 2000. "Evaluation methods for non-experimental data," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 21(4), pages 427-468, January.
    15. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    16. Venetoklis, Takis & Kangasharju, Aki, 2002. "Business Subsidies and Employment of Firms: Overall Evaluation and Regional Extension," Discussion Papers 268, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    17. James J. Heckman, 2000. "Causal Parameters and Policy Analysis in Economics: A Twentieth Century Retrospective," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 115(1), pages 45-97.
    18. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra Todd, 1998. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 65(2), pages 261-294.
    19. Mark Schreiner, 2001. "Evaluation and Microenterprise Programs," Development and Comp Systems 0108002, EconWPA, revised 27 Dec 2001.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Berghäll, Elina, 2008. "Revealing Agglomeration Economies with Stochastic Frontier Modelling in the Finnish ICT Industry," Discussion Papers 435, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Kiander, Jaakko & Berghäll, Elina, 2003. "The Finnish Model of STI Policy: Experiences and Guidelines. KNOGG Thematic Network WP4 Country Report - Finland," Discussion Papers 313, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    3. repec:spr:scient:v:99:y:2014:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-013-1224-0 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Berghäll, Elina, 2006. "RD and Productivity Growth in Finnish ICT Manufacturing," Discussion Papers 388, VATT Institute for Economic Research.


    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:fer:resrep:91. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Anita Niskanen). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.