Effectiveness and efficiency of SME innovation policy
- 2.2k Downloads
This paper assesses UK innovation policy impact on a large, population weighted, sample of both service and manufacturing SMEs. By focussing on self-reported innovation the study achieves a wider coverage of the effects of SME innovation policy than possible with more traditional indicators. Propensity score matching indicates that SMEs receiving UK state support for innovation were more likely to innovate than unsupported comparable enterprises. Innovating enterprises are shown to have grown significantly faster over the years 2002–2004 when other growth influences are appropriately controlled. Combining these two results and comparing the outlays on SME innovation policy with the estimated effects suggests that policy was efficient as well as effective. There is evidence that SME tax credits were expensive compared with earlier support instruments. But the overall high returns estimated suggest that, even in times of public spending cuts, persisting with SME innovation policy would be prudent.
KeywordsInnovation State aid SME Policy evaluation
JEL ClassificationsL25 L26 R38
Thanks to Peng Zhou and Tom Nicholls for excellent research assistance and to anonymous referees for their comments on an earlier draft.
This work contains statistical data from ONS which is Crown copyright and reproduced with the permission of the controller of HMSO and Queen’s Printer for Scotland. The use of the ONS statistical data in this work does not imply the endorsement of the ONS in relation to the interpretation or analysis of the statistical data. This work uses research datasets which may not exactly reproduce National Statistics aggregates.
- Abramovsky, L., Harrison, R., & Simpson, H. (2004). Increasing innovative activity in the UK? Where now for government support for innovation and technology transfer? IFS Briefing Note no. 53.Google Scholar
- Acs, Z., & Audretsch, D. (1988). Innovation in large and small firms: An empirical analysis. American Economic Review, 78, 678–690.Google Scholar
- BERR. (2008). SME statistics for the UK and regions 2007, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110920151722/http://stats.bis.gov.uk/ed/sme/index.htm.
- BIS. (2010). Internationalisation of innovative and high growth SMEs. BIS Economics Paper No. 5 March, Department for Business Innovation and Skills.Google Scholar
- Commission of the European Communities (2006). Framework for state aid for research and development and innovation (2006/C 323/01) Google Scholar
- Davidson, R., & Mackinnon, J.G. (1993). Estimation and Inference in Econometrics. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
- Department for Innovation Universities and Skills. (2008). Persistence and change in UK innovation 2002–2006. http://www.dius.gov.uk.
- DTI. (2006). Innovation in the UK: Indicators and insights. DTI occasional paper no. 6 July.Google Scholar
- DTI Innovation Report. (2003). Competing in the global economy: the innovation challenge. December, http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file12093.pdf. Accessed 11 March 2012.
- Griliches, Z. (1990). Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 28, 1661–1707.Google Scholar
- H M Treasury. (2003). The Green Book: Appraisal and evaluation in Central Government. London TSO. http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/green_book_complete.pdf. Accessed 11 March 2012.
- H M Treasury, DTI, & DfES. (2004). Science and innovation investment framework 2004–2014. July. http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file40398.doc
- Hall, B. (2009). The financing of innovative firms. EIB Papers, 14(2), 8–29.Google Scholar
- Harris R. (2008). An empirical study of the respective contributions of exporting and foreign direct investment to UK R&D, UK Trade and Industry, November. http://www.tradeinvest.gov.uk/download/file/115272.html
- Ientile, D., & Mairesse, J. (2009). A policy to boost R&D: Does the R&D tax credit work? EIB Papers, 14(1), 145–168.Google Scholar
- Jaumotte, F., & Pain, N. (2005a). Innovation in the business sector, OECD Economics Department Working Papers no. 459.Google Scholar
- Jaumotte, F., & Pain, N. (2005b). From innovation development to implementation: Evidence from the community innovation survey, OECD Economics Department Working Papers no. 458.Google Scholar
- Leuven, E., & Sianesi, B. (2003). PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing. http://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s432001.html. Accessed 11 March 2012.
- Lev, B. (2001). Intangibles: Management, measurement, and reporting. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
- OECD. (2003). Tax incentives for research and development: Trends and issues. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
- Peters, B. (2004). Employment effects of different innovation activities: Microeconometric evidence. ZEW—Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper No. 04-073.Google Scholar
- Smith, K. (2005). Measuring Innovation. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Sutton, J. (1997). Gibrat’s legacy. Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 40–59.Google Scholar
- van Leeuwen, G., & Klomp, L. (2006). On the contribution of innovation to multi-factor productivity growth. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 15(4–5), 367–390.Google Scholar