UK and EU subsidies and private R&D investment: Is there input additionality?

Ugur, Mehmet and Trushin, Eshref and Solomon, Edna (2015): UK and EU subsidies and private R&D investment: Is there input additionality?

Abstract

This paper investigates the effects of UK and EU subsidies on privately-funded R&D intensity of a sample of 39,730 UK firms. The sample consists of R&D-active firms surveyed in at least one year from 1998-2012. The results are obtained from 4 different estimators, with different degrees of control for selection and time-constant fixed effects: (i) pooled OLS without selection correction; (ii) fixed-effect (within-group) estimation without selection correction; (iii) pooled OLS with selection correction; and (iv) fixed-effect estimation with selection correction. We report that UK subsidies are not associated with additionality in privately -funded R&D intensity in the full sample, and the additionality effect in manufacturing is too small to be conomically significant. In contrast, EU subsidy is associated with an additionality effect of 2% in both samples. Ordered-Heckman estimations of leverage indicate that an increase in UK subsidy intensity (subsidy/total R&D) is not likely to make a difference to private R&D effort in any of the subsidy intensity classes demarcated by 4 quartiles of the intensity distribution. However, an increase in EU subsidy intensity is associated with leverage in subsidy intensity class 3, which corresponds to subsidy intensity values within the 3rd quartile of the distribution.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Innovation, R&D, subsidies, additionality
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C4 - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics > C41 - Duration Analysis ; Optimal Timing Strategies; D - Microeconomics > D2 - Production and Organizations > D22 - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis; L - Industrial Organization > L1 - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O2 - Development Planning and Policy > O21 - Planning Models ; Planning Policy; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights

References

Aerts K. and T. Schmidt (2008), Two for the price of one? Additionality effects of R&D subsidies: A comparison between Flanders and Germany, Research Policy 37, 806-822.

Aerts, K. and D. Czarnitzki (2006), The Impact of Public R&D–Funding in Flanders, IWT Study No. 54, Brussels.

Aghion, P., N. Bloom, R. Blundell, R. Griffith, and P. Howitt. (2005). Competition and Innovation: An Inverted-U Relationship. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120(5), 701-728.

Almus, M. and D. Czarnitzki (2003), The effects of public R&D subsidies on firms' innovation activities: the case of Eastern Germany, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 21(2), 226-236.

Angrist, J.D. (1998), Estimating the labor market impact of voluntary military service using social security data, Econometrica 66, 249-288.

Arrow, K.J. (1962), Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention, in R.R. Nelson (ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, National Bureau of Economic Research, Conference Series, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 609-625.

Arrow, K.J. (1996), The Economics of Information: An Exposition, Empirica 23(2), 119-128.

Arrow, K.J. (1999), Information and the organization of industry, in: G. Chichilnisky (ed.), Markets, Information, and Uncertainty. Essays in Economic Theory in Honor of Kenneth J. Arrow, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 19-25.

Arrow, K.J. and R.C. Lind (1970), Uncertainty and the Evaluation of Public Investment Decisions, American Economic Review, 60, 364-378.

Balasubramanian, N., & Lee, J. (2008). Firm age and innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change, 17(5), 1019-1047.

Becker, B. and Hall, S.G. (2013) Do R&D strategies in high-tech sectors differ from those in low-tech sectors? An alternative approach to testing the pooling assumption. Economic Change and Restructuring 46: 183–202.

BIS (Department for Business Innovation and Skills) (2011), Innovation and Research Strategy for Growth, December 2011. Available at: www.bis.gov.uk/assets/BISCore/innovation/docs/I/11-1387-innovation-and-research-strategy-for-growth.pdf .

BIS (Department for Business Innovation and Skills) (2014), Estimating the effect of UK direct public support for innovation, BIS Analysis Paper no. 4. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/369650/bis-14-1168-estimating-the-effect-of-uk-direct-public-support-for-innovation-bis-analysis-paper-number-04.pdf Blank, D.M., Stigler, G.J., 1957. The Demand and Supply of Scientific Personnel. National Bureau of Economic Research, New York.

Brown, J. R., Fazzari, S. M., & Petersen, B. C. (2009). Financing innovation and growth: Cash flow, external equity, and the 1990s R&D boom. The Journal of Finance, 64(1), 151-185.

Busom, I. (2000), An empirical evaluation of the effects of R&D subsidies, Economics of Innovation and New Technology 9(2), 111-148.

Buxton, A. J. (1975). The process of technical change in UK manufacturing. Applied Economics, 7(1), 53-71.

Cerulli, G. (2010), Modelling and measuring the effect of public subsidies on business R&D: a critical review of the economic literature, Economic Record 86, 421-449.

Chiburis, R., & Lokshin, M. (2007). Maximum likelihood and two-step estimation of an ordered-probit selection model. Stata Journal, 7(2), 167-182.

Cohen, W. M., Levin, R. C., & Mowery, D. C. (1987). Firm Size and R&D Intensity: A Re-examination. Journal of Industrial Economics, 35(4), 543-65.

Czarnitzki, D. (2006), Research and development in small and medium-sized enterprises: the role of financial constraints and public funding, Scottish Journal of Political Economy 53(3), 335-257.

Czarnitzki, D. and A.A. Toole (2007), Business R&D and the interplay of R&D subsidies and product market uncertainty, Review of Industrial Organization 31(3), 169-181.

Czarnitzki, D. and A.A. Toole (2011), Patent Protection, Market Uncertainty, and R&D Investment, Review of Economics and Statistics 93(1), 147-159.

Czarnitzki, D. and C. Lopes-Bento (2011a), Evaluation of Public R&D Policies: A Cross- Country Comparison, World Review of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, forthcoming.

Czarnitzki, D. and C. Lopes-Bento (2011b), Innovation Subsidies: Does the Funding Source Matter for Innovation Intensity and Performance? Empirical Evidence from Germany, ZEW Discussion Paper No. 11-053, Mannheim.

Czarnitzki, D. and C. Lopes-Bento (2012). Value for money? New microeconometric evidence on public R&D grants in Flanders, ZEW Discussion Papers, No. 12-034, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:180-madoc-323085

Czarnitzki, D. and G. Licht (2006), Additionality of Public R&D Grants in a Transition Economy: The Case of Eastern Germany, Economics of Transition 14(1), 101-131.

Czarnitzki, D. and H. Hottenrott (2011), Financial Constraints: Routine versus Cutting Edge R&D Investment, Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 20(1), 121-157.

Czarnitzki, D. and K. Hussinger (2004), The Link between R&D Subsidies, R&D Spending and Technological Performance, ZEW Discussion Paper No. 04-56, Mannheim. Czarnitzki, D., H. Hottenrott and S. Thorwarth (2011), Industrial Research versus Development Investment: The Implications of Financial Constraints, Cambridge Journal of Economics 35(3), 527-544.

David, P.A., B.H. Hall and A.A. Toole (2000), Is public R&D a complement or substitute forprivate R&D? A review of the econometric evidence, Research Policy 29(4-5), 497-529.

Dehejia, R.H. and S. Wahba (1999), Causal effects in nonexperimental studies: reevaluating the evaluation of training programs, Journal of the American Statistical Association 94, 1053-1062.

Dixit, A.K. and R.S. Pindyck, Investment under Uncertainty, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.

Duguet, E. (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, Revue d’Economie Politique 114(2), 263-292.

Garcia, A. and P. Mohnen (2010), Impact of government support on R&D and innovation, UNU-MERIT Working Paper Series 034, United Nations University, Maastricht Economic and social Research and training centre on Innovation and Technology, Maastricht.

García‐Quevedo, J. (2004). Do public subsidies complement business R&D? A meta‐analysis of the econometric evidence. Kyklos, 57(1), 87-102.

Gerfin M. and M. Lechner (2002), A Microeconometric Evaluation of Active Labour Market Policy in Switzerland, Economic Journal 112, 845 -893.

González, X., Jaumandreu, J. and Pazó, C. (2005), Barriers to innovation and subsidy effectiveness, RAND Journal of Economics 36(4), 930-949.

Griliches Z. (1990), Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey, Journal of Economic Literature XXVIII, 1661–1707.

Griliches, Z. and J. Mairesse (1984), Productivity and R&D at the firm level, in: R&D, Patents and Productivity, Griliches Z (ed.). University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL; 339–374

Hall, B.H. (1990), The impact of corporate restructuring on industrial research and development, Brooking Papers on Economic Activity (1), 85–136.

Hall, B.H. (2002), The financing of Research and Development, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18, 35-51.

Hall, B.H. and A. Maffioli (2008), Evaluating the impact of technology development funds in emerging economies: evidence from Latin America, European Journal of Development Research 20(2), 172-198.

Hall, B.H. and J. Lerner (2010), The financing of R&D and innovation, in: B.H. Hall and N. Rosenberg (eds.), Handbook of the economics of innovation, Vol. 1, Amsterdam: Elsevier, 609- 639.

Hall, B.H. and J. Van Reenen (2000), How effective are fiscal incentives for R&D? Research Policy 29, 449-469.

Hall, B.K. J. Mairesse, L. Branstetter and B. Crepon (1998). Does cash flow cause investment and R&D: An exploration using panel data for French, Japanese and United States scientific firms. In D. Audretsch and A. Thurik (eds), Innovation, Industry Evolution and Employment. Cambridge University Press.

Haskel, J., & Wallis, G. (2013). Public support for innovation, intangible investment and productivity growth in the UK market sector. Economics letters, 119(2), 195-198.

Heckman, J. J., H. Ichimura and P. Todd (1997), Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: evidence from evaluating a job training program, Review of Economic Studies 64(4), 605-654.

Heckman, J. J., R. J. Lalonde and J. A. Smith (1999), The economics and econometrics of active labour market programs, in: A. Aschenfelter and D. Card (eds.), Handbook of Labour Economics, Amsterdam, 3, 1866-2097.

Heckman, J.J. (1978), ‘Dummy Endogenous Variables in a Simultaneous Equation System’, Econometrica, 46, 931–59.

Heckman, J.J., H. Ichimura and P. Todd (1998a), Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator, Review of Economic Studies 65(2), 261-294.

Heckman, J.J., H. Ichimura, J.A. Smith and P. Todd (1998b), Characterizing selection bias using experimental data, Econometrics 66, 1017-1098.

Holland, P.W. (1986), Statistics and Causal Inference, Journal of the American Statistical. Association 81, 945–960.

Huergo, E., & Jaumandreu, J. (2004). How does probability of innovation change with firm age? Small Business Economics, 22(3-4), 193-207.

Hughes, A., and A. Mina (2012), The UK R&D Landscape. Enhancing Value Task Force Report. http://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/centre-for-business-research/downloads/special-reports/specialreport-ukr_dlandscape.pdf

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.

Imbens, G.W. (2000), The role of the propensity score in estimating dose-response functions, Biometrika 87, 706–710.

Imbens, G.W. and J.M. Wooldridge (2009), Recent developments in the econometrics of program evaluation, Journal of Economic Literature 47, 5-86.

Jaffe, A.B. (1986), Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: evidence from firm’s patent, profits, and market value, American Economic Review 76 (5), 984–1001.

Lach, S. (2002), Do R&D subsidies stimulate or displace private R&D? Evidence from Israel, Journal of Industrial Economics 50(4), 369-390.

Lamberton, D. M. (1996), ‘Introduction: ‘Threatened Wreckage’ or New Paradigm?’, in Donald M. Lamberton (Ed.), The Economics of Communication and Information, Cheltham UK and Brookfield US: Edward Elgar, pp. xiii-xxviii.

Larosse, J. (2001), Conceptual and Empirical Challenges of Evaluating the Effectiveness of Innovation Policies with ‘Behavioural Additionality’, Case of IWT R&D Subsidies, IWTFlanders, Belgium.

Lechner, M. (1999), Earnings and employment effects of continuous off-the-job training in East Germany after reunification, Journal of Business and Economics Statistics 17, 74-90.

Lechner, M. (2000), An evaluation of public sector sponsored continuous vocational training in East Germany, Journal of Human Resources 35, 347-375.

Lechner, M. (2001), Identification and Estimation of Causal Effects of Multiple Treatments under the Conditional Independence Assumption, in M. Lechner and F. Pfeiffer (eds.), Econometric Evaluation of Labour Market Policies, Physica, Heidelberg, 43-58.

Maddala, G.S. (1983), Limited Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Nelson, R.R. (1959), The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research, Journal of Political Economy 49, 297-306.

OECD (1993), The Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys of Research and Experimental Development - Frascati Manual, Paris.

OECD/Eurostat (2005), Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data – the Oslo Manual, 3rd edition, Paris.

ONS (2012), Coverage of the Business Enterprise Research & Development survey, Office of National Statistics, http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-quality/specific/business-and-energy/research---development-surveys/information-note--coverage-of-the-business-enterprise-r-d-survey.pdf

Polder M. and Veldhuizen E. (2012) Innovation and competition in the Netherlands: testing the inverted U for industries and firms, Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 12(1), pp. 67-91.

Rosenbaum, P.R. and D.B. Rubin (1983), The central role of the propensity score observational studies for causal effects, Biometrica 70, 41-55.

Rubin, D.B. (1977), Assignment to treatment group on the basis of covariate, Journal of Educational Statistics 2, 1-26.

Rubin, D.B. (2008), For objective causal inference, design trumps analysis,The Annals of Applied Statistics 2(3), 808-840.

Schumpeter, J. (1942), Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Harper and Row, New York. Smith, J.A. and P.E. Todd (2005), Does matching overcome LaLonde’s critique of nonexperimental estimators?, Journal of Econometrics 125, 305-353.

Shefer, D., & Frenkel, A. (2005). R&D, firm size and innovation: an empirical analysis. Technovation, 25(1), 25-32.

Takalo, T., T. Tanayama and O. Toivanen (2013), Estimating the benefits of targeted R&D subsidies, Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(1), 255–272.

Tsai, K. H., & Wang, J. C. (2005). Does R&D performance decline with firm size?—A re-examination in terms of elasticity. Research Policy, 34(6), 966-976.

Wallsten S.J. (2000), The effects of government-industry R&D programs on private R&D: the case Small Business Innovation Research Program, RAND Journal of Economics 31(1), 82-100.

Zúñiga‐Vicente, José Ángel, et al. "Assessing the effect of public subsidies on firm R&D investment: a survey." Journal of Economic Surveys 28.1 (2014): 36-67.