How Public R&D Support Affects Research Activity of Enterprises: Evidence from the Czech Republic

  • Viktorie KlímováEmail author
  • Vladimír Žítek
  • Maria Králová


Public support for research and development (R&D) in business sector is usually justified by the argument about market failure. New knowledge produced by research and development has some features of public good, which causes underinvestment in private R&D activities. From the social development point of view, it is desirable to produce and diffuse new knowledge. The article seeks to answer the question what impact a change in the amount of public support for R&D has on research activities of private enterprises. This paper tries to bridge a gap in the literature dealing with impact of R&D policy in emerging innovation systems in Central Europe. Our research is carried out on the example of the Czech Republic and its regions. We evaluate direct and indirect R&D support in the period 2007–2015, and we pay attention to three variables representing R&D in businesses: business expenditures on R&D, number of R&D employees in businesses and number of R&D workplaces in businesses. We calculate year-on-year changes in all the observed variables, and the relation between the public support and research activities of enterprises is assessed through descriptive statistics, measures of association and regression models. Our analyses proved a positive impact of R&D support on companies’ own expenditures on R&D and the number of employees. The relation between R&D support and number of workplaces seems to be quite weak. The paper also discusses limitations of the research and implications for public policy.


Research and development Innovation Public support Expenditures on R&D Region Czech Republic 



  1. Aerts, K., & Schmidt, T. (2008). Two for the price of one? Additionality effects of R&D subsidies: a comparison between Flanders and Germany. Research Policy, 37(5), 806–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Afcha, S., & García-Quevedo, J. (2016). The impact of R&D subsidies on R&D employment composition. Industrial & Corporate Change, 25(6), 955–975.Google Scholar
  3. Agostini, M. R., Vieira, L. M., Da Rosa Portella Tondolo, R., & Gonçalves Tondolo, V. A. (2017). An overview on social innovation research: guiding future studies. Brazilian Business Review (Portuguese Edition), 14(4), 385–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ali-Yrkkö, J. (2005). Impact of public R&D financing on employment. ETLA Discussion Papers, No. 980.Google Scholar
  5. Arrow, K. J. (1962). Economic welfare and the allocations of resources of invention. In The rate and direction of inventive activity: economic and social factors (pp. 609–626). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Arvanitis, S., & Bolli, T. (2013). A comparison of national and international innovation cooperation in five European countries. Review of Industrial Organization, 43(3), 163–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Asheim, B. T., Smith, H. L., & Oughton, C. (2011). Regional innovation systems: theory, empirics and policy. Regional Studies, 45(7), 875–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Autio, E. (1998). Evaluation of RTD in regional systems of innovation. European Planning Studies, 6(2), 131–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barge-Gil, A., & López, A. (2014). R versus D: estimating the differentiated effect of research and development on innovation results. Industrial and Corporate Change, 24(1), 93–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Beck, M., Lopes-Bento, C., & Schenker-Wicki, A. (2016). Radical or incremental: where does R&D policy hit? Research Policy, 45(4), 869–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Berube, C., & Mohnen, P. (2009). Are firms that receive r&d subsidies more innovative? Canadian Journal of Economics, 42(1), 206–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bronzini, R., & Piselli, P. (2016). The impact of R&D subsidies on firm innovation. Research Policy, 45(2), 442–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brown, J. R., Martinsson, G., & Petersen, B. C. (2017). What promotes R&D? Comparative evidence from around the world. Research Policy, 46(2), 447–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Busom, I., Corchuelo, B., & Martinez-Ros, E. (2014). Tax incentives … or subsidies for business R&D? Small Business Economics, 43(3), 571–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Choi, J., & Lee, J. (2017). Repairing the R&D market failure: public R&D subsidy and the composition of private R&D. Research Policy, 46(8), 1465–1478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Crespi, G., Giuliodori, D., Giuliodori, R., & Rodriguez, A. (2016). The effectiveness of tax incentives for R&D+i in developing countries: the case of Argentina. Research Policy, 45(10), 2023–2035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. CSO. (2016). Výzkum a vývoj v krajích 2005–2015. Accessed 10 Sept 2017.
  19. CSO. (2017). Nepřímá veřejná podpora výzkumu a vývoje v České republice 2015. Accessed 10 Sept 2017.
  20. Czarnitzki, D., Hanel, P., & Rosa, J. M. (2011). Evaluating the impact of R&D tax credits on innovation: a microeconometric study on Canadian firms. Research Policy, 40(2), 217–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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(4), 497–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dodgson, M. (2017). Innovation in firms. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(1), 85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dortet-Bernadet, V., & Sicsic, M. (2017). The effect of R&D subsidies and tax incentives on employment an evaluation for small firms in France. Economie et Statistique / Economics and Statistics, 2017(493), 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Drucker, P. F. (2015). Innovation and entrepreneurship: practice and principles. London: Routledge Classics.Google Scholar
  25. Elschner, C., Ernst, C., Licht, G., & Spengel, C. (2011). What the design of an R&D tax incentive tells about its effectiveness: a simulation of R&D tax incentives in the European Union. Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 233–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. European Commission (2010). Europe 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Accessed 20 August 2016.
  27. European Commission (2018). European Innovation Scoreboard. Accessed 4 July 2018.
  28. Faggian, A., & McCann, P. (2009). Human capital, graduate migration and innovation in British regions. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 33(2), 317–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fischer, M. M., Scherngell, T., & Jansenberger, E. (2009). Geographic localisation of knowledge spillovers: evidence from high-tech patent citations in Europe. Annals of Regional Science, 43(4), 839–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gál, Z. (2014). Policy aspects of innovation governance. Central and regional governance of innovation in Hungary. Társadalomkutatás, 32(3), 295–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gershman, M., & Kitova, G. (2017). Assessing government support for research and innovation in Russian universities. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 8(3), 1067–1084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. González, X., & Pazó, C. (2008). Do public subsidies stimulate private R&D spending? Research Policy, 37(3), 371–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hlaváček, P., & Sivíček, T. (2017). Spatial differences in innovation potential of central European regions during posttransformation period. Journal of International Studies, 10(2), 61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hud, M., & Hussinger, K. (2015). The impact of R&D subsidies during the crisis. Research Policy, 44(10), 1844–1855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hudec, O., & Prochádzková, M. (2015). Visegrad countries and regions: innovation performance and efficiency. Quality Innovation Prosperity, 19(2), 55–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Huergo, E., & Moreno, L. (2017). Subsidies or loans? Evaluating the impact of R&D support programmes. Research Policy, 46(7), 1198–1214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Isaksen, A. (2001). Building regional innovation systems: is endogenous industrial development possible in the global economy? Canadian Journal of Regional Science, 24(1), 101–120.Google Scholar
  38. Janeček, M., Mráček, K., & Neumajer, V. (2012). Nepřímá podpora výzkumu, vývoje a inovací. Podklad pro přípravu nové NP VaVaI. Prague: Aktivity pro výzkumné organizace, o.p.s.Google Scholar
  39. Klette, T. J., Møen, J., & Griliches, Z. (2000). Do subsidies to commercial R&D reduce market failures? Microeconometric evaluation studies. Research Policy, 29(4), 471–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Klímová, V., & Žítek, V. (2012). Selected aspects of the innovation environment in the south Moravian and the Moravian-Silesian regions. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on European Integration (pp. 117–130). Ostrava: VŠB-TUO.Google Scholar
  41. Klímová, V., & Žítek, V. (2017). Intensity and structure of research and development in the Czech and Slovak regions. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems, 15(1), 36–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kraftová, I., & Miháliková, E. (2011). Rozsah a dopady podpory výzkumu a inovací v zemích bývalého Československa. Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice. Series D, XVI(22), 81–93.Google Scholar
  43. McCann, P., & Ortega-Argilés, R. (2013). Modern regional innovation policy. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 6(2), 187–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Montmartin, B. A., & Herrera, M. (2015). Internal and external effects of R&D subsidies and fiscal incentives: empirical evidence using spatial dynamic panel models. Research Policy, 44(5), 1065–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mynarzová, M., & Štverková, H. (2015). Public support as an important factor for competitiveness of SMEs in the European Union. In Conference on Current Problems of the Corporate Sector (pp. 452–461). Bratislava: University of Economics in Bratislava.Google Scholar
  46. OECD. (2005). Oslo manual. The measurement of scientific and technological activities, proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological innovation data (3rd ed.). Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  47. OECD. (2015). Frascati manual. Guidelines for collecting and reporting data on research and experimental development. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. OECD. (2016). Measuring tax support for R&D and innovation. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. Accessed 16 August 2017.
  49. Potts, J., & Kastelle, T. (2010). Public sector innovation research: what’s next? Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 12(2), 122–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Prokop, V., & Stejskal, J. (2017). Different approaches to managing innovation activities: an analysis of strong, moderate, and modest innovators. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 28(1), 47–55.Google Scholar
  51. Schiavone, F., & A Simoni, M. (2016). Prior experience and co-opetition in R&D programs. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 7(3), 819–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schumpeter, J. A. (1939). Business cycles: a theoretical, historical, and statistical analysis of the capitalist process. New York: McGraw-Hill book Company.Google Scholar
  53. Soukopová, J., Vaceková, G., & Klimovský, D. (2017). Local waste management in the Czech Republic: limits and merits of public-private partnership and contracting out. Utilities Policy, 2017(48), 201–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Thomson, R., & Jensen, P. (2013). The effects of government subsidies on business r&d employment: evidence from OECD countries. National Tax Journal, 66(2), 281–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Weber, K. M., & Rohracher, H. (2012). Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change. Research Policy, 41(6), 1037–1047.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ženka, J., Slach, O., Novotný, J., & Ivan, I. (2017). Spatial distribution of knowledge-intensive business services in a small post-communist economy. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 8(2), 385–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Regional Economics and Administration, Faculty of Economics and AdministrationMasaryk UniversityBrnoCzech Republic
  2. 2.Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, Faculty of Economics and AdministrationMasaryk UniversityBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations