IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pum/wpaper/2013-05.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Regional Effects of a Cluster-oriented policy measure. The Case of the InnoRegio program in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Brenner

    (Philipps-Universität Marburg)

  • Carsten Emmrich
  • Charlotte Schlump

    (Philipps-Universität Marburg)

Abstract

This paper examines regional effects of the InnoRegio program, which was conducted by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research. The InnoRegio program has been a new tool of innovation policy with the aim to improve innovativeness in East Germany on the basis of prosperous regional networks. Besides the direct support of networks and innovation activities, the program was meant to trigger the regional development in East Germany. While existing studies examine whether the development of networks or cluster was successful, this paper focuses on the investigation of regional economic development. Using regional data, especially on employment and patents, we examine whether the involved industries have developed better in supported regions than in other (East) German regions. Developments are investigated for a time span including years before, during and after the policy measure. We find some positive effects in the regional development that can be assigned to the InnoRegio program.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Brenner & Carsten Emmrich & Charlotte Schlump, 2013. "Regional Effects of a Cluster-oriented policy measure. The Case of the InnoRegio program in Germany," Working Papers on Innovation and Space 2013-05, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
  • Handle: RePEc:pum:wpaper:2013-05
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: ftp://137.248.191.199/RePEc/pum/wpaper/wp0513.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin Mole & Mark Hart & Stephen Roper & David Saal, 2008. "Differential Gains from Business Link Support and Advice: A Treatment Effects Approach," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 26(2), pages 315-334, April.
    2. Eickelpasch, Alexander & Fritsch, Michael, 2005. "Contests for cooperation--A new approach in German innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1269-1282, October.
    3. Fromhold-Eisebith Martina & Eisebith Günter, 2008. "Clusterförderung auf dem Prüfstand," Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie, De Gruyter, vol. 52(1), pages 79-94, October.
    4. Harrison, Rupert & Jaumandreu, Jordi & Mairesse, Jacques & Peters, Bettina, 2014. "Does innovation stimulate employment? A firm-level analysis using comparable micro-data from four European countries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 29-43.
    5. Marco Bellandi & Annalisa Caloffi, 2009. "An Analysis of Regional Policies Promoting Networks for Innovation," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 67-82, July.
    6. Fier, Andreas & Heger, Diana & Hussinger, Katrin, 2005. "Die Wirkungsanalyse staatlicher Förderprogramme durch den Einsatz von Matching- und Selektionsmodellen am Beispiel der Fertigungstechnik," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-09, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    7. Slavtchev, Viktor & Fritsch, Michael, 2005. "The Role of Regional Knowledge Sources for Innovation: An Empirical Assessment," Freiberg Working Papers 2005,15, TU Bergakademie Freiberg, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    8. Per Lundequist & Dominic Power, 2002. "Putting Porter into Practice? Practices of Regional Cluster Building: Evidence from Sweden," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 685-704, September.
    9. Nishimura, Junichi & Okamuro, Hiroyuki, 2011. "Subsidy and networking: The effects of direct and indirect support programs of the cluster policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 714-727, June.
    10. Ron Martin & Peter Sunley, 2003. "Deconstructing clusters: chaotic concept or policy panacea?," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 5-35, January.
    11. 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.
    12. Eickelpasch, Alexander & Kauffeld, Martina & Pfeiffer, Ingo, 2002. "The InnoRegio-program: a new way to promote regional innovation networks - empirical results of the complementary research -," ERSA conference papers ersa02p262, European Regional Science Association.
    13. Fromhold-Eisebith, Martina & Eisebith, Gunter, 2005. "How to institutionalize innovative clusters? Comparing explicit top-down and implicit bottom-up approaches," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1250-1268, October.
    14. Erik Arnold, 2004. "Evaluating research and innovation policy: a systems world needs systems evaluations," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 3-17, April.
    15. Christian Longhi, 1999. "Networks, Collective Learning and Technology Development in Innovative High Technology Regions: The Case of Sophia-Antipolis," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 333-342.
    16. Mark Lorenzen, 2001. "Localized Learning and Policy: Academic Advice on Enhancing Regional Competitiveness through Learning," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 163-185, March.
    17. Brown, Marilyn A. & Curlee, T. Randall & Elliott, Steven R., 1995. "Evaluating technology innovation programs: the use of comparison groups to identify impacts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 669-684, September.
    18. Aschhoff, Birgit & Astor, Michael & Crass, Dirk & Eckert, Thomas & Heinrich, Stephan & Licht, Georg & Rammer, Christian & Riesenberg, Daniel & Rüffer, Niclas & Strohmeyer, Robert & Tonoyan, Vartuhi & , 2012. "Systemevaluierung "KMU-innovativ"," ZEW Dokumentationen 12-04, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    19. Horst Rottmann & Monika Ruschinski, 1997. "Sind Innovationen beschäftigungswirksam?," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 50(17-18), pages 21-26, October.
    20. Alexander Eickelpasch & Ingo Pfeiffer, 2004. "InnoRegio: Unternehmen beurteilen die Wirkung des Förderprogramms insgesamt positiv," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 71(23), pages 331-337.
    21. Susan E Cozzens & Kamau Bobb & Isabel Bortagaray, 2002. "Evaluating the distributional consequences of science and technology policies and programs," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 101-107, August.
    22. Thomas Brenner & André Mühlig, 2007. "Factors and Mechanisms Causing the Emergence of Local Industrial Clusters - A Meta-Study of 159 Cases," Papers on Economics and Evolution 2007-23, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
    23. Bianchi, Patrizio & Bellini, Nicola, 1991. "Public policies for local networks of innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 487-497, October.
    24. Dohse, Dirk, 2000. "Technology policy and the regions -- the case of the BioRegio contest," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1111-1133, December.
    25. 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. Markov, L. & Petukhova, M. & Ivanova, K., 2015. "The Cluster Policy Organizational Structures," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 27(3), pages 140-162.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    cluster policy; InnoRegio program; cluster; networks; region; employment; innovation; policy evaluation;

    JEL classification:

    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • O25 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Industrial Policy
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes
    • R28 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Household Analysis - - - Government Policy

    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:pum:wpaper:2013-05. 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: (Christoph Mengs). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/vamarde.html .

    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 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.

    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.