Empirical Analysis of Evidence-Based Policymaking in R&amp;D Programmes

Hyensup Shim,Kiyoon Shin

doi:10.3390/su14010311

Abstract

This study explores evidence-based policymaking (EBP) in public research and development (R&D) programmes. Governments develop and implement R&D programmes to promote innovation, the key driver of sustainable economic growth. For effective management, public policies should be planned, executed, and terminated based on their impact evaluation and feedback. Although many studies have investigated the impact of R&D support, few have analysed whether it evolves on the basis of evidence. Using a dataset of Korean programmes, this study adopted the propensity score matching with a difference-in-differences method. We distinguished four determinants of performance evidence: R&D intensity, assets, sales, and profits growth. The following are the main results: (1) while R&D intensity, sales, and profits growth reveal the efficiency of the EBP mechanism, the performance of assets do not differ across the abolished and continued programmes; (2) the EBP process classified by subsidy amount reveals no statistically significant differences in terms of R&D intensity and profits. This suggests that policymakers need to consider the amount of subsidy granted under the budget limitation. This study contributes to the empirical research on EBP using heterogeneous evidence indicators and describes how policymakers exploit policy evaluation to implement and monitor policies for sustainable development.

Highlights

Many governments have launched research and development (R&D) programmes to promote private innovation, the key driver of sustainable economic growth [1,2]
We aimed to determine whether the R&D programmes supporting Korean small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) evolve based on performance evidence obtained by comparing the characteristics of sustained and abolished programmes using empirical analysis, that is, by using the propensity score matching with the difference-in-differences (PSM–DID) method
We found that different effects occur according to the performance indicators, suggesting that because the R&D programmes for various purposes are mixed, heterogeneous effects occur according to performance indicators [46]

Summary

Introduction

Many governments have launched research and development (R&D) programmes to promote private innovation, the key driver of sustainable economic growth [1,2]. The major legitimacy of policy intervention is stimulating economic growth by fixing market failures [3,4,5]. R&D activities, and this knowledge spillover keeps private R&D investment below the socially optimal level. Information asymmetry among stakeholders restricts external financing for R&D investment causing small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), especially those vulnerable to financial constraints, to struggle to finance their R&D and innovation activities [1]. This type of market failure, characterised by underinvestment in R&D activities, has compelled public intervention

Objectives

Results

Conclusion