IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Access (not) granted: What kinds of firms participate in technology programs?

  • Tommy Clausen

    (Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo)

Registered author(s):

    In this paper we focus on the participation stage and analyze what kinds of firms that are granted access to the 5 most important technology programs in Norway. Based upon a combination of logistic regression and factor analysis we find that the public support system for R&D in Norway is built around export oriented, innovative and larger firms. Technology programs support these firms with “research” and “development” subsidies in order to support the development of national champions.

    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://www.tik.uio.no/InnoWP/Tommy%20IPP12%20WPready.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo in its series Working Papers on Innovation Studies with number 20070612.

    as
    in new window

    Length: 57 pages
    Date of creation: Aug 2007
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:tik:inowpp:20070612
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Postboks 1108 Blindern N-0317 Oslo

    Phone: 22 84 16 00
    Fax: : 22 84 16 01
    Web page: http://www.tik.uio.no/Innovation
    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. Aerts, Kris & Czarnitzki, Dirk, 2004. "Using Innovation Survey Data to Evaluate R&D Policy: The Case of Belgium," ZEW Discussion Papers 04-55, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    2. Bronwyn Hall, 2004. "The financing of research and development," Chapters, in: Financial Systems, Corporate Investment in Innovation, and Venture Capital, chapter 2 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Paul A. David & Bronwyn H. Hall & Andrew A. Toole, 2000. "Is Public R&D a Complement or Substitute for Private R&D? A Review of the Econometric Evidence," Development and Comp Systems 9912002, EconWPA.
    4. J. Vicente Blanes & Isabel Busom, 2004. "WHO PARTICIPATES IN R&D SUBSIDY PROGRAMS?. The case of Spanish Manufacturing Firms," Working Papers wpdea0407, Department of Applied Economics at Universitat Autonoma of Barcelona.
    5. David, Paul A. & Hall, Bronwyn H., 2000. "Heart of Darkness: Modeling Public-Private Funding Interactions Inside the R&D Black Box," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt5g29w0xq, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    6. 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.
    7. Levin, Richard C & Cohen, Wesley M & Mowery, David C, 1985. "R&D Appropriability, Opportunity, and Market Structure: New Evidence on Some Schumpeterian Hypotheses," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 20-24, May.
    8. Almus, Matthias & Czarnitzki, Dirk, 2001. "The effects of public R&D subsidies on firms' innovation activities: the case of Eastern Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 01-10, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    9. Lundvall, Bengt-Ake & Johnson, Bjorn & Andersen, Esben Sloth & Dalum, Bent, 2002. "National systems of production, innovation and competence building," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 213-231, February.
    10. Georghiou, Luke & Roessner, David, 2000. "Evaluating technology programs: tools and methods," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 657-678, April.
    11. 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.
    12. Isabel Busom, 2000. "An Empirical Evaluation of The Effects of R&D Subsidies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 111-148.
    13. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-96, September.
    14. 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.
    15. DUGUET Emmanuel, 2004. "Are R&D subsidies a substitute or a complement to privately funded R&D? Evidence from France using propensity score methods for non- experimental data," Public Economics 0411007, EconWPA.
    16. Lach, Saul, 2002. "Do R&D Subsidies Stimulate or Displace Private R&D? Evidence from Israel," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(4), pages 369-90, December.
    17. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Fier, Andreas, 2002. "Do Innovation Subsidies Crowd Out Private Investment? Evidence from the German Service Sector," ZEW Discussion Papers 02-04, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    18. Mytelka, Lynn K. & Smith, Keith, 2002. "Policy learning and innovation theory: an interactive and co-evolving process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1467-1479, December.
    19. Klette, Tor Jakob & Moen, Jarle & Griliches, Zvi, 2000. "Do subsidies to commercial R&D reduce market failures? Microeconometric evaluation studies1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 471-495, April.
    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:tik:inowpp:20070612. 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: (H&kon Normann)

    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.