IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Subsidy and networking: The effects of direct and indirect support programs of the cluster policy

  • Nishimura, Junichi
  • Okamuro, Hiroyuki

Industrial clusters have attracted considerable attention worldwide for their expected contribution to regional innovation. Recently, policymakers in various countries have developed specific cluster policies. However, there exist few empirical studies on cluster policies. Focusing on the Industrial Cluster Project (ICP) in Japan initiated by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry in 2001, we address two research questions on the support programs of the cluster policies: if the project participants who exploit various support programs are more successful in network formation within the cluster than others, and which kind of support program contributes to firm performance. We pay special attention to the differences between direct R&D support and indirect networking/coordination support. The estimation results, which are based on recent original survey data, suggest that cluster participants who exploit support programs (especially indirect support measures) expand the industry-university-government network after participating in the ICP. Moreover, we find that not every support program contributes to firm performance; firms should therefore select the program that is most aligned with their aims. Indirect support programs have an extensive and strong impact on output whereas direct R&D support has only a weak effect.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/rs/bitstream/10086/25343/1/ifn_wp022.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Center for Interfirm Network, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University in its series Working Paper Series with number 22.

as
in new window

Length: 34 p.
Date of creation: Dec 2012
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:hit:cinwps:22
Contact details of provider: Postal: +81-42-580-8327
Phone: +81-42-580-9138
Fax: +81-42-580-8333
Web page: http://www.ier.hit-u.ac.jp/ifn/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Acs, Zoltan J. & Anselin, Luc & Varga, Attila, 2002. "Patents and innovation counts as measures of regional production of new knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1069-1085, September.
  2. Stuart S. Rosenthal & William C. Strange, 2003. "Geography, Industrial Organization, and Agglomeration," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 377-393, May.
  3. Hussinger, Katrin, 2003. "R&D and Subsidies at the Firm Level: An Application of Parametric and Semi-Parametric Two-Step Selection Models," ZEW Discussion Papers 03-63, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  4. Junichi Nishimura & Hiroyuki Okamuro, 2011. "R&D productivity and the organization of cluster policy: an empirical evaluation of the Industrial Cluster Project in Japan," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 117-144, April.
  5. Reinhard Hujer & Dubravko Radic, 2005. "Evaluating The Impacts Of Subsidies On Innovation Activities In Germany," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 52(4), pages 565-586, 09.
  6. Yang, Chih-Hai & Motohashi, Kazuyuki & Chen, Jong-Rong, 2009. "Are new technology-based firms located on science parks really more innovative?: Evidence from Taiwan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 77-85, February.
  7. Falck, Oliver & Heblich, Stephan & Kipar, Stefan, 2010. "Industrial innovation: Direct evidence from a cluster-oriented policy," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 574-582, November.
  8. Dirk Czarnitzki & Bernd Ebersberger & Andreas Fier, 2007. "The relationship between R&D collaboration, subsidies and R&D performance: Empirical evidence from Finland and Germany," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(7), pages 1347-1366.
  9. Hujer, Reinhard & Radić, Dubravko, 2005. "Evaluating the Impacts of Subsidies on Innovation Activities in Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-43, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  10. Frank McDonald & Dimitrios Tsagdis & Qihai Huang, 2006. "The development of industrial clusters and public policy," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 525-542, November.
  11. Mariagrazia Squicciarini, 2008. "Science Parks’ tenants versus out-of-Park firms: who innovates more? A duration model," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 45-71, February.
  12. Michele Cincera, 2007. "Geographic and Technological R&D spillovers within the Triad: Micro evidence from US patents," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/147173, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  13. 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.
  14. Fritsch, Michael & Franke, Grit, 2004. "Innovation, regional knowledge spillovers and R&D cooperation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 245-255, March.
  15. Rumen Dobrinsky, 2009. "The Paradigm of Knowledge-Oriented Industrial Policy," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 273-305, December.
  16. Spence, Michael, 1984. "Cost Reduction, Competition, and Industry Performance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(1), pages 101-21, January.
  17. Paul A. David, Bronwyn H. Hall and Andrew A. Toole., 1999. "Is Public R&D a Complement or Substitute for Private R&D? A Review of the Econometric Evidence," Economics Working Papers E99-269, University of California at Berkeley.
  18. 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.
  19. Josh Lerner, 2002. "When Bureaucrats Meet Entrepreneurs: The Design of Effective "Public Venture Capital" Programmes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(477), pages F73-F84, February.
  20. Dahl, Michael S. & Pedersen, Christian O.R., 2004. "Knowledge flows through informal contacts in industrial clusters: myth or reality?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1673-1686, December.
  21. Ronde, Patrick & Hussler, Caroline, 2005. "Innovation in regions: What does really matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1150-1172, October.
  22. Desrochers, Pierre, 2001. " Geographical Proximity and the Transmission of Tacit Knowledge," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 25-46, March.
  23. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Hussinger, Katrin, 2004. "The Link Between R&D Subsidies, R&D Spending and Technological Performance," ZEW Discussion Papers 04-56, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  24. Jeffrey L. Furman & Margaret K. Kyle & Iain M. Cockburn & Rebecca Henderson, 2006. "Public & Private Spillovers, Location and the Productivity of Pharmaceutical Research," NBER Working Papers 12509, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  25. Sebastien Lechevalier & Yukio Ikeda & Junichi Nishimura, 2010. "The effect of participation in government consortia on the R&D productivity of firms: a case study of robot technology in Japan," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(8), pages 669-692.
  26. Anselin, Luc & Varga, Attila & Acs, Zoltan, 1997. "Local Geographic Spillovers between University Research and High Technology Innovations," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 422-448, November.
  27. NISHIMURA Junichi & Tingting Wang & NAGAOKA Sadao, 2009. "Managerial and Policy Agenda for Improving Japanese R&D: Inventors' views (Japanese)," Discussion Papers (Japanese) 09031, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
  28. Teece, David J., 1986. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 285-305, December.
  29. Lerner, Josh, 1999. "The Government as Venture Capitalist: The Long-Run Impact of the SBIR Program," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 72(3), pages 285-318, July.
  30. Michael E. Porter, 2000. "Location, Competition, and Economic Development: Local Clusters in a Global Economy," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 14(1), pages 15-34, February.
  31. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Ebersberger, Bernd, 2010. "Do direct R&D subsidies lead to the monopolization of R&D in the economy?," ZEW Discussion Papers 10-078, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  32. Jeffrey L. Furman & Margaret K. Kyle & Iain Cockburn & Rebecca M. Henderson, 2010. "Public and Private Spillovers: Location and the Productivity of Pharmaceutical Research," NBER Chapters, in: Contributions in Memory of Zvi Griliches, pages 165-188 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  33. Audretsch, David B. & Lehmann, Erik E. & Warning, Susanne, 2005. "University spillovers and new firm location," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1113-1122, September.
  34. Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker & Andrew Wang, 2004. "Joint Ventures, Universities, and Success in the Advanced Technology Program," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 22(2), pages 145-161, 04.
  35. Lee G. Branstetter & Mariko Sakakibara, 2002. "When Do Research Consortia Work Well and Why? Evidence from Japanese Panel Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 143-159, March.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hit:cinwps:22. 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: (Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library)

The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library to update the entry or send us the correct address

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.