IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/zewdip/16083.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Geographical clustering and the effectiveness of public innovation programs

Author

Listed:
  • Crass, Dirk
  • Rammer, Christian
  • Aschhoff, Birgit

Abstract

The paper analyzes how geographical clustering of beneficiaries might affect the effectiveness of public innovation support programs. The geographical proximity of firms operating in the same industry or field of technology is expected to facilitate innovation through knowledge spillovers and other localization advantages. Public innovation support programs may leverage these advantages by focusing on firms that operate in a cluster. We investigate this link using data from a large German program that co-funds R&D projects of SMEs in key technology areas called 'Innovative SMEs'. We employ three alternative cluster measures which capture industry, technology and knowledge dimensions of clusters. Regardless of the measure, firms located in a geographical cluster are more likely to participate in the program. Firms being part of a knowledge-based cluster significantly increases their chance of receiving public financial support. We find no effects, however, of geographical clustering on the program's effectiveness in terms of input or output additionality.

Suggested Citation

  • Crass, Dirk & Rammer, Christian & Aschhoff, Birgit, 2016. "Geographical clustering and the effectiveness of public innovation programs," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-083, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:16083
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/148366/1/87440648X.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Catherine Beaudry & Stefano Breschi, 2003. "Are firms in clusters really more innovative?," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 325-342.
    2. Klepper, Steven, 2010. "The origin and growth of industry clusters: The making of Silicon Valley and Detroit," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 15-32, January.
    3. Crepon, B. & Duguet, E. & Mairesse, J., 1998. "Research Investment, Innovation and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level," Papiers d'Economie Mathématique et Applications 98.15, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    4. Feldman, Maryann P. & Audretsch, David B., 1999. "Innovation in cities:: Science-based diversity, specialization and localized competition," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 409-429, February.
    5. Saxenian, AnnaLee, 1991. "The origins and dynamics of production networks in Silicon Valley," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 423-437, October.
    6. Aschhoff Birgit, 2010. "Who Gets the Money?: The Dynamics of R&D Project Subsidies in Germany," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 230(5), pages 522-546, October.
    7. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    8. 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.
    9. Gerlach, Heiko & Rønde, Thomas & Stahl, Konrad, 2009. "Labor pooling in R&D intensive industries," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 99-111, January.
    10. 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.
    11. Dirk Czarnitzki & Hanna Hottenrott, 2009. "Are Local Milieus The Key To Innovation Performance?," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 81-112, February.
    12. 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.
    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. Folta, Timothy B. & Cooper, Arnold C. & Baik, Yoon-suk, 2006. "Geographic cluster size and firm performance," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 217-242, March.
    15. 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 369-390, December.
    16. McCann, Brian T. & Folta, Timothy B., 2011. "Performance differentials within geographic clusters," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 104-123, January.
    17. Audretsch, David B & Feldman, Maryann P, 1996. "R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 630-640, June.
    18. 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.
    19. Krugman, Paul, 1991. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(3), pages 483-499, June.
    20. Jaffe, Adam B, 1989. "Real Effects of Academic Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 957-970, December.
    21. Glaeser, Edward L & Hedi D. Kallal & Jose A. Scheinkman & Andrei Shleifer, 1992. "Growth in Cities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(6), pages 1126-1152, December.
      • Edward L. Glaeser & Hedi D. Kallal & Jose A. Scheinkman & Andrei Shleifer, 1991. "Growth in Cities," NBER Working Papers 3787, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
      • Glaeser, Edward Ludwig & Kallal, Hedi D. & Scheinkman, Jose A. & Shleifer, Andrei, 1992. "Growth in Cities," Scholarly Articles 3451309, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    22. Samuel Kortum & Josh Lerner, 2000. "Assessing the Contribution of Venture Capital to Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(4), pages 674-692, Winter.
    23. Aerts, Kris & Schmidt, Tobias, 2008. "Two for the price of one?: Additionality effects of R&D subsidies: A comparison between Flanders and Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 806-822, June.
    24. Helsley, Robert W. & Strange, William C., 2002. "Innovation and Input Sharing," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 25-45, January.
    25. Sakakibara, Mariko, 2001. "The Diversity of R&D Consortia and Firm Behavior: Evidence from Japanese Data," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(2), pages 181-196, June.
    26. Katrin Hussinger, 2008. "R&D and subsidies at the firm level: an application of parametric and semiparametric two-step selection models," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(6), pages 729-747.
    27. Baptista, Rui & Swann, Peter, 1998. "Do firms in clusters innovate more?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 525-540, September.
    28. Brian Ashcroft & Stephen Roper & Stewart Dunlop & James H. Love, 2000. "Industry and location effects on UK plants' innovation propensity," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 34(4), pages 489-502.
    29. Bruno Crepon & Emmanuel Duguet & Jacques Mairesse, 1998. "Research, Innovation And Productivity: An Econometric Analysis At The Firm Level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 115-158.
    30. Hottenrott, Hanna & Lopes-Bento, Cindy, 2014. "(International) R&D collaboration and SMEs: The effectiveness of targeted public R&D support schemes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 1055-1066.
    31. Asheim, Bjorn T. & Coenen, Lars, 2005. "Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: Comparing Nordic clusters," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1173-1190, October.
    32. Cooke, Philip, 2001. "Regional Innovation Systems, Clusters, and the Knowledge Economy," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(4), pages 945-974, December.
    33. Bersch, Johannes & Gottschalk, Sandra & Müller, Bettina & Niefert, Michaela, 2014. "The Mannheim Enterprise Panel (MUP) and firm statistics for Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-104, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    34. 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.
    35. Gerben Panne, 2004. "Agglomeration externalities: Marshall versus Jacobs," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 593-604, December.
    36. Rammer, Christian & Crass, Dirk & Doherr, Thorsten & Hud, Martin & Hünermund, Paul & Iferd, Younes & Köhler, Christian & Peters, Bettina & Schubert, Torben, 2016. "Innovationsverhalten der deutschen Wirtschaft: Indikatorenbericht zur Innovationserhebung 2015," The Annual German Innovation Survey, Key Figures Reports 128149, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    37. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco, 2001. "The Geography of Innovation and Economic Clustering: Some Introductory Notes," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(4), pages 817-833, December.
    38. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    39. 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.
    40. 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.
    41. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    42. Tuomas Takalo & Tanja Tanayama & Otto Toivanen, 2013. "Estimating the Benefits of Targeted R&D Subsidies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(1), pages 255-272, March.
    43. Daniel Shefer & Amnon Frenkel, 1998. "original: Local milieu and innovations: Some empirical results," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 32(1), pages 185-200.
    44. Audretsch, David B & Stephan, Paula E, 1996. "Company-Scientist Locational Links: The Case of Biotechnology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 641-652, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation; Government Policy; Regional Government Analysis;

    JEL classification:

    • C35 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions
    • H50 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - General
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • R59 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Other

    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:zbw:zewdip:16083. 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: (ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/zemande.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.