Public Innovation Support Research Articles

Geographical Clustering and the Effectiveness of Public Innovation Programs

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.

IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC INNOVATION SUPPORT IN EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA

The object of this paper is related to the public innovation support in Euro-pean Economic Area and its effectiveness assessment. Main aim of the re-search presented in this paper is to propose new model for public innovation support effectiveness assessment, which could be relevant to the contempo-rary needs and would be based on new explored practice of public innova-tion support developments. The methods of comparative, regression, model-ling analysis, multi-criteria evaluation, analogy search, logical abstraction and impact evaluation have been applied for the research presented in this paper. Proposed original system of quantitative and qualitative indicators that characterize any public innovation support system (public innovation support index) enables creation and implementation of measures devoted to the public innovation support impact improvement at EU and national level.

The State of Science and Innovation in Russia in 2014

In 2014, key events in the field of science were unfolding around the continuing reform of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS) and the associated assessment and restructuring of academic institutions, together with the first competitive tenders run by the Russian Science Foundation (RSF) and the creation of a new list of priorities for scientific and technological development in Russia. Thus, last year could be considered transitional, when the new departments responsible for science development were being structured and their activities were adapting to the new system of management. Innovation went into a decline, the rate of which had increased by the end of the year. No new instruments of innovation policy were introduced and the state of innovation was being significantly affected by the general conditions of economic activity, the business climate and some regulatory measures that were not even directly related to public support for innovation.

Policies to Promote Green Economy Innovation in East Asia and North America

Although there is progress in developing green sectors in North America and East Asia, the key challenge facing the expansion of economy-wide green innovation and structural change in these regions is the absence of relevant policy follow-up to the green stimulus enacted during the Great Recession. The boost to green sectors provided by such measures is waning quickly, given that much of the green stimulus focused on energy efficiency. The biggest obstacles to sustaining green growth in North America and East Asiaare major market disincentives, especially the under-pricing of fossil fuels and market failures that inhibit green innovation. A three-part strategy to overcome these obstacles would involve: first, removing fossil fuel subsidies; second, employing market-based instruments to further reduce the social costs of fossil fuel use; and third, allocating any resulting revenue to public support for green innovation and investments. Such a strategy would ensure that green growth is not about promoting niche green sectors but instigating economy-wide innovation and structural transformation in North America and East Asia.

Wirkungen föderaler Strukturen auf die staatliche Innovationsförderung

Viele Mitgliedstaaten der Europaischen Union vergeben staatliche Innovationshilfen, um die Innovationstatigkeit von Unternehmen anzuregen. Abhangig davon, ob die Forderung auf der Ebene der Lander, des Bundes oder der Europaischen Union angesiedelt ist, werden unterschiedliche Effekte erzielt. Da jedoch wenige Analysen zur Zielerreichung der unterschiedlichen Programmebenen vorliegen, wird hier untersucht, welche Effekte sich durch foderale Strukturen auf die Vielfalt der geforderten Unternehmen und auf die Effektivitat der Forderung ergeben.

Federalism and Innovation Support for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises

Private innovative activities receive public innovation support from different political levels. Few studies have empirically evaluated the influence of political systems on the reception of public innovation support and no other studies have evaluated innovation support across Europe with CIS data.This paper analyses the differences between federal, semi-federal and centralist political systems with CIS data from sixteen European countries. The results show that regional programmes in federal and semi-federal countries reach firms with barriers to innovate, such as small and medium-sized enterprises, while other programmes only claim to reach them. Federal and semi-federal countries therefore support a broader variety of firms compared with centralist countries. European support reaches SMEs better in centralist countries compared with federal and semi-federal countries. Regular and higher expenditure on innovative activities shows a positive influence on the reception of support in all countries, while indicators such as market focus vary between countries and political levels. Regional programmes focus more strongly on companies with a regional market focus, which can be seen as another barrier to innovation. As a policy implication, the paper implies that barriers to innovation can be reduced by a decentralized innovation framework with stronger regional programmes.

Effectiveness of Public Innovation Support in Europe. Does Public Support Foster Turnover, Employment and Labour Productivity?

In the European Union (EU), twenty Member States offer public innovation support for private research and development (R&D) activities through either subsidies or a combination of tax cuts and subsidies. Existing studies show ambiguous results regarding the effectiveness of public innovation support in different countries. Accordingly, following a description of the current public innovation framework in Europe, this paper analyses data from the European Community Innovation Survey concerning the effectiveness of public support. The measures chosen relate to changes in turnover as well as the number of employees and labour productivity (measured as turnover per employee) between 2006 and 2008. The paper finds a positive influence of public innovation support on labour productivity in an innovating company, a negative influence on turnover changes and a negative yet not significant influence on the development of employment. The influences of these factors are very weak, whereas other coefficients such as the money spent on innovative activities clearly show positive effects for all three indicators.

Public Support for Innovation in Russian Firms: Looking for Improvements in Corporate Performance Quality

This research focuses on the efficiency of Russia’s policy to foster innovation. We conduct an empirical analysis of how policy instruments impact firms’ behavior. The analytical data are obtained from a survey of more than 650 Russian industrial firms in 2012. The analysis shows that state support for innovation clearly targets successful companies and does not target laggard or insider (i.e., partially state-owned) firms. Comparing innovation effects on firms with and without state support, we found no strong improvement in corporate performance as a result of state-supported innovation. A significant positive correlation with state support existed for only one characteristic of firm performance: export volume. Considering specific effects of tax incentives and public subsidies on companies’ innovation behavior, we found out that direct public funding was more likely to mitigate risk and facilitate the launch of new innovative projects. Simultaneously, both tools lead to public funds crowding out private funds.

Stimulating Innovation through Public Procurement: Barriers to Awareness Level of Public Procurement of Innovation

<p class="ber"><span lang="EN-GB">Public sector procurement is very significant driver of innovation and currently re-emerging as the most sought after instrument of demand-side innovation policies. P</span><span lang="EN-GB">rogressively, it has been viewed as having imperative potential to drive innovation; </span><span lang="EN-GB">there has been an issue of awareness deficit of public procurement as an innovation policy tool among key stakeholders- policy makers, procurement practitioners and academics particularly in Ghana and Africa. It’s in this direction that this study sought to explore the barriers to awareness level of public procurement as an innovation policy tool among the key stakeholders in Ghana. The study adopted both exploratory and cross-sectional survey designs in investigating the barriers.<span> Purposive sampling was used in selecting the sample to help <span>fulfil </span>the predetermined purpose of the study. </span>The study revealed among others the following: low level of education as a major challenge to innovation in Ghana and developing nations, limited budgets for education in training of high-skill specialist for promotion of innovation, lack of coordination across agencies on innovation policies (incoherent public policies), poor governance and business conditions affecting awareness level, lack of public sector support of innovation, no policy direction as to the use of public procurement to stimulate innovation in Ghana. The study also showed a lack of link between science and innovation in Ghana impeding the awareness level among the key stakeholders. <span>The study recommends performance appraisal and institutional performance reviews for management of education to improve the level of education in Ghana and </span>the curriculum for VTE level should be practical-oriented. They should also increase the funding of education in general and VTE in particular. Agencies responsible for STI should be strengthened to coordinate all policies intended to influence innovation in Ghana and put together a coherent policy competent enough to capturing innovation where public procurement policy, R&D policies and innovation policies will be connected together.</span></p>

Public Innovation Support Index for Impact Assessment in the European Economic Area

Objective: The object of this research is public innovation support in European Economic Area and its effectiveness assessment. The main aim is to propose a new model for public innovation support effectiveness assessment, adjusted to contemporary needs and based on practice of public innovation support development. Research Design & Methods: The methods of comparative, cluster, regression, modelling analysis, multi-criteria evaluation, analogy search, logical abstraction and impact evaluation have been applied for the research presented in this paper. Findings: The paper conceptualizes a new model for the assessment of public innovation support. It is based on theoretical argumentation and practical verification. Its structure is based on new solutions and quantitative assessment methods. Implications & Recommendations: The analysis of the proposed model applicability revealed important patterns for the public innovation support impact assessment. Findings suggest that the increase of public innovation support index is a necessary but insufficient condition for the growth of the countries innovation index. The impact of public innovation support occurs only in the long run, as the delay of the effect exists. Contribution & Value Added: The proposed system of quantitative and qualitative indicators that characterize any public innovation support system (public innovation support index) enables the creation and implementation of measures devoted to the public innovation support impact improvement at EU and national level. The practical application of the suggested model is significant for the effectiveness improvement of public innovation support at EU institutions.

From exclusion to inclusion in public innovation support?


 
 
 This article examines whether hitherto marginalized actors, industries and innovations – such as women, services industries and service innovations – could be acknowledged by the use of a bottom-up approach in innovation research in a way that helps make public innovation support more inclusive. It is scrutinized whether the relation between context, organization and outcomes in publically financed innovation networks such as clusters and innovation systems serves to highlight how more inclusive innovation support could be designed. Four regional innovation networks promoting women’s entrepreneurship and innovation in Sweden are analyzed by a bottom-up approach, since while emphasizing decentralization and inclusion in theory, most innovation theories and policies are in practice characterized by a top-down approach, ascribing superiority to certain actors, industries and innovations while marginalizing others in a distinct – often gendered – pattern. The bottom-up approach makes it possible to expose that being a marginalized actor in public innovation support is related to the organization of entrepreneurial types of innovation systems, based on contacts established ad hoc and resources gathered from scratch, making a wider range of actors, industries and innovations relevant than in institutional types of innovation systems favored in prevalent public innovation support. By acknowledging both types of innovation systems, more inclusive innovation policies could be designed and more nuanced innovation theories could be developed.
 
 

Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms

Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms Albert N. Link Edward Elgar Publishers, 2013 191 pages, $ 110.00 (Hard cover)Albert N Link is a professor of Economics at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. His book Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms is a well-chosen collection of some of his previous research in the area of public support of innovation, mainly through government programs, in small, technology-based entrepreneurial firms.A major contribution of this book is the access the author had to data collected by the National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academies of the United States on projects funded through the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program.The book is organized into four sections. Section one focuses on commercializing new technology. This section is composed of two papers:1) Bringing science to market: Commercializing from NIH SBIR awards, and2) Government as entrepreneur: Evaluating the commercialization success of SBIR projects.The papers conclude that even with the assistance of the U.S. Small Business Innovation Development Act, a firm does not have a greater chance to commercialize from a Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) award.Section two focuses on Employment growth from public support of innovations. This section is composed of two papers:1) Employment growth from public support of innovations in small firms, and2) Employment growth from the Small Business Innovation Research program.Employment growth is analyzed in both short-term and long-term employment. Through an analysis of the NRC data, the papers conclude that while there is no significant increase in short-term employment that can be associated with the SBIR founded research, there is an increase in long-term employment that can be associated with the SBIR program.Section three focuses on the spillover benefits from public support of innovation and it is composed of five papers:1) Public/private technology partnerships: Evaluating SBIR-supported research,2) Public gains from entrepreneurial research: Inferences about the economic value of public support of the small business innovation program,3) Public knowledge, private knowledge: The intellectual capital of entrepreneurs,4) The exploitation of publicly funded technology, and5) Regional appropriation of university-based knowledge and technology for economic development. …

The Contribution of Research and Innovation to Productivity and Economic Growth

This paper examines the impact of investment in research and innovation on Australian market sector productivity. While previous studies have largely focused on a narrow class of private sector intangible assets as a source of productivity gains, this paper shows that there is a broad range of other business sector intangible assets that can significantly affect productivity. Moreover, the paper pays special attention to the role played by public support for research and innovation in the economy. The empirical results suggest that there are significant spillovers to productivity from public sector R&D spending on research agencies and higher education. No evidence is found for productivity spillovers from indirect public support for the business enterprise sector, civil sector or defence R&D. These findings could have implications for government innovation policy as they provide insights into possible productivity gains from government funding reallocations.

Public support for innovation, intangible investment and productivity growth in the UK market sector

Does publicly-financed R&D spill over to private sector productivity growth? We document a robust correlation between UK public-sector financed R&D disbursed via research councils and market sector total factor productivity growth.

Additionality and sustained additionality of public support for innovation

In many countries significant amounts of public funding are devoted to supporting firms’ R&D and innovation projects. However, policy evaluations often focus on short-term outputs rather than longe...

Book Review: Employment Growth From Public Support of Innovation in Small Firms

Book Review: Employment Growth From Public Support of Innovation in Small Firms

Employment growth from public support of innovation in small firms

Herein, we investigate the impacts of the US publicly funded Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program's funding on the overall employment growth of SBIR award-recipient firms. This paper is motivated by the US Congress’ continued emphasis on employment growth during its deliberations on the reauthorization of the SBIR program. We set forth a model of employment growth; the model offers a framework through which we can compare a firm's actual level of employment after receipt of an SBIR award and completion of the research project to the level of employment predicted by the firm's characteristics prior to the award. Using data collected by the National Research Council within the National Academies, we estimate our model, and we conclude that, on average, the overall employment effects associated with the SBIR program are large absolutely and relative to dollars of funding, but these effects are, in general, not statistically significant.

Innovation Policy in Hard Times: Lessons from the Nordic Countries

The current economic crisis has so far mostly triggered short-term responses like corporate bailouts and rescue packages for ailing industries. This indicates that the crisis has been constructed as an event, a “great recession”, primarily caused by governance failures in the financial sector. However, it may also be interpreted as a more fundamental crisis of the economic growth model as such, calling for a broad-ranged overhaul of policies for economic growth and employment, entailing a more pivotal role for innovation policy. This paper analyses the preconditions for such radical policy changes. The economic crisis of the Finnish and Swedish economies in the early 1990s was countered by a three-layered transformation of public policies, comprising macroeconomic stringency, renovations of social and employment policies, and massive investments in public innovation support. The institutional preconditions for such layered policy responses are discussed and some implications for contemporary crisis policy are presented.

Open innovation and SMEs

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore, through the use of a multidisciplinary lens, the policy context and the scope for improvements in university‐based public programmes focused on improving innovation in small and medium enterprises (SMEs).Design/methodology/approachThe authors use the street‐level bureaucracy (SLB), combined with the systems of innovation approach (SIA) and diagnostic analysis (DA) to understand the context components that impact on public programme services. The study is part of a research programme oriented to the diffusion of information systems in SMEs and which used original interview‐based programme support case studies, interviews with regional policy managers, and documentation relating to the policy system and different public programmes. Although the empirical work was UK and European Union centric the results of the research have wide applicability.FindingsThe paper establishes the importance of programme contexts for diagnosing and providing a basis for public programme improvements. It further demonstrates the robustness of the context analysis framework to provide insights into proposed policy changes. The responsibility of improving programme contexts relies on actors that operate outside programme organisations, for instance EU funding bodies, government departments in charge of SME policies, public‐private partnerships, and private evaluators. Given this complexity it is suggested that SME associations have a potentially important role in increasing participation by SMEs in the public programme for innovation and knowledge support policy. Despite possible policy changes the requirement for public programme support for innovation and hence the role of universities as programme providers is confirmed and expanded.Research limitations/implicationsThe results demonstrate the value of a multidisciplinary framework to analyse programme interventions at both macro and micro levels and provide a basis for programme policy and policy implementation improvements.Originality/valueThis research is a novel attempt to use the SLB, SIA and DA to public programme university‐based interventions in SMEs and SME policies in general. It complements extant research on open innovation and knowledge exchange by extending the concept of public programme contexts. Beneficiaries of the findings include policy makers, programme organisations, universities, SME associations, and researchers.

The knowledge value chain as an SME innovation policy instrument framework: an analytical exploration of SMEs public innovation support in OECD countries

Innovation policy instruments in OECD countries are developed from different streams of policies related to the suppliers and the users of knowledge. They are also integrated into different levels of implementation (supranational, national, regional and local). Such complexity leads policy actors and stakeholders to experience a lack of coordination in their innovation efforts. This paper, based on a broad cross-country analysis of 844 innovation policy instruments implemented in 27 OECD countries, aims to contribute to the advancement of knowledge on this issue by: 1 validating a conceptual framework as a tool of policy instrument coordination 2 conducting an innovation policy instrument framework based both on the conceptual framework and a on diversity of instruments. The innovation policy instrument framework has been devised to be used as a roadmap to link innovation policy instruments and innovation functions.