Ricerca e innovazione in campania: una valutazione controfattuale della politica di coesione

Author/s Ivano D'Antonio, Alessandro De Iudicibus, Giuseppe Piroli, Francesco Savoia
Publishing Year 2015 Issue 2014/113 Language Italian
Pages 27 P. 61-87 File size 147 KB
DOI 10.3280/STE2014-113003
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Do public funds stimulate firms’ productivity? Is public R&D spending complementary to private R&D spending or a substitute for it? These questions still generate conflicting opinions and heterogeneity in empirical results across countries. Generally, in the empirical literature the effects are measured in terms of input additionality. In this paper, we investigate the causal relationship between public funds and effects in terms of both financial and performance indicators, so extending the existing literature. Combining open data on national and EU Cohesion policy (OpenCoesione) and financial data (Aida-Bureau Van Dick), we provide evidence on the impact in a region of southern Italy classified as less developed by the EU. To verify the effects we implement a two-step process: a bias-corrected matching procedure to create our counterfactual, followed by a Sample Average Treatment on Treated (SATT) to estimate the effects. The results reveal a positive and non-transitory significant impact of European Structural Funds on input and output variables for subsidised firms.

Keywords: R&I, bias-adjusted matching, SATT, Evaluation, Open data

Jel codes: L2, L52, O3, C3

  1. Abadie A., Imbens G.W. (2011), Bias-Corrected Matching Estimators for Average Treatment Effects, Journal of Business & Economic Statistics January, Vol. 29, No. 1.
  2. Aerts K., Czarnitzki D. (2009). The returns to public research funding. In: Delanghe H., Soete L., Muldur U. (Eds.), The European Research Area: Foundations, Progress and Perspectives, Cheltenham Glos (UK): Edward Elgar Publishing.
  3. Almus M., Czarnitzki D. (2003), The effects of public R&D subsidies on firm’s innovation activities. The case of Eastern Germany. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 21(2): 226-236.
  4. Arrow K. (1962), Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for inventions.
  5. In: Nelson R. (Ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, Princeton, Princeton University Press.
  6. Bèrubè C., Mohnen P. (2009), Are firms that receive R&D subsidies more innovative? Canadian Journal of Economics, 42(1): 206-225.
  7. Biagi F., Loi M. (2012), Do Innovation Incentives work? Evidence from the Italian Manufacturing Sector, European Commission, Joint Research Centre, IPTS.
  8. Bondonio D. (2000), Metodi per la valutazione degli aiuti alle imprese con specifico target territoriale, WP Dipartimento di Politiche Pubbliche e Scelte Collettive, n. 14, Università del Piemonte Orientale “A. Avogadro”.
  9. Bronzini R., Iachini E. (2011), Are incentives for R&D effective? Evidence from a regression discontinuity approach, Banca d’Italia, Tema 791.
  10. Czarnitzki D., Ebersberger B., Fier A. (2007), The Relationship Between R&D Collaboration, Subsidies and Patenting Activity: Empirical Evidence from Finland and Germany, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22 (7): 1347-1366.
  11. Czarnitzki D., Hottenrott H. (2010), Financing constraints for industrial innovation: what do we know? Review of Business and Economics, 55(3): 346-362.
  12. David P.A., Hall B.H., Toole A.A. (2000), Is Public R&D a Complement or Substitute for Private R&D? A Review of the Econometric Evidence, Research Policy, 29: 497-529.
  13. De Blasio G., Fantino D., Pellegrini G. (2014), Evaluating the impact of innovation incentives: evidence from an unexpected shortage of funds, Industrial and Corporate Change, pp. 1-30, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  14. Fantino D., Cannone G. (2013), Evaluating the efficacy of European regional funds for R&D, Banca d’Italia, Tema 902.
  15. Garcia-Quevedo J. (2004), Do Public Subsidies Complement Business R&D? A Meta-Analysis of the Econometric Evidence, Kiklos, Vol. LVII.
  16. Georghiou L., Clarysse B. (2006), Government R&D Funding and Company Behaviour: Measuring Behavioural Additionality, Introduction and synthesis, OECD, pp. 9-38.
  17. Gok A., Edler J. (2011), The Use of Behavioural Additionality in Innovation Policy-Making, Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, University of Manchester. Gonzalez X., Jaumandreu J., Pazo C. (2005), Barriers to innovation and subsidy effectiveness, RAND Journal of Economics, 36(4): 930-950.
  18. Gorg H., Strobl E. (2007), The effect of R&D subsidies on private R&D, Economica, 74(294): 215-234.
  19. Hall B.H. (2002), The financing of research and development, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18: 35-51.
  20. Hottenrott H., Lopes-Bento C. (2014), (International) R&D collaboration and SMEs: The effectiveness of targeted public R&D support schemes, Research Policy, 43: 1055-1066.
  21. Hujer R., Radic D. (2005), Evaluating the impacts of subsidies on innovation in Germany, Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 52(4): 565-586.
  22. Hussinger K. (2008), R&D and Subsidies at the Firm Level: An Application of Parametric and Semi-Parametric Two-Step Selection Models, Journal of Applied Econometrics 23, 729-747.
  23. Lach S. (2002), Do R&D subsidies stimulate or displace private R&D? Evidence from Israel, Journal of Industrial Economics, 50(4): 369-390.
  24. Lerner J. (1999), The government as venture capitalist: The long-run impact of the SBIR program, Journal of Business, vol. 72, 3: 285-318.
  25. Mariani M., Mealli F. (2012), The effects of R&D subsidies to small and mediumsized enterprises: Evidence from Italy, wp IRPET.
  26. Martin M., Scott J.T. (2000), The nature of innovation market failure and the design of public support for private innovation, Research Policy, 29(4-5): 437-447.
  27. Mealli F., Mariani M., Maitino M.L. (2011), Valutazione di impatto delle politiche regionali di sostegno alla R&S: il caso delle misure 1.1.1b/legge 598 e 1.8.1 in Toscana, IRPET.
  28. Merito M., Giannangeli S., Bonaccorsi A. (2010), Do incentives to industrial R&D enhance research productivity and firm growth? Evidence from the italian case, International Journal of Technology Management, vol. 49: 25-48.
  29. Mouquè D. (2012), What are counterfactual impact evaluations teaching us about enterprise and innovation support?, Regional Focus, DG Regional and Urban Policy, Brussels.
  30. Nelson R. (1959), The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research, The Journal of Political Economy, 67(3), 297-306.
  31. Potì B., Cerulli G. (2010), La valutazione ex-post di uno strumento di politica della ricerca industriale: modello analitico, processo di realizzazione, eterogeneità degli effetti, L’industria, anno XXXI, 2: 307-333.
  32. Robson M. (1993), federal funding and the level of private expenditure on basic research, Southern Economic Journal, 60 (1): 63-71.
  33. Wallsten S.J. (2000), The Effects of Government-Industry R&D Programs on Private RAND Journal of Economics, 31(1): 82-100.
  34. Zúñiga-Vicente J.A., Alonso-Borrego C., Forcadell F.J., Galán J.I. (2012), Assessing the effect of public subsidies on firm R&D investment: A survey. Journal of Economic Surveys, vol. 28, Issue 1: 36-67

Ivano D'Antonio, Alessandro De Iudicibus, Giuseppe Piroli, Francesco Savoia, Ricerca e innovazione in campania: una valutazione controfattuale della politica di coesione in "STUDI ECONOMICI " 113/2014, pp 61-87, DOI: 10.3280/STE2014-113003