Behavioural Additionality Evaluation of industrial R&D programmes, the case of the TIP programme

Open access

Abstract

Behavioural additionality is defined as permanent (long-term) changes in all spheres of behaviour and general capabilities of supported companies as a consequence of public support received. It closely relates to the output additionality because it creates prerequisites for improvement of firms economic performance. This paper aims to show the concrete application of this concept in the evaluation of programmes in the Czech Republic on the example of the TIP programme. It also tries to outline certain aspects that cannot be captured on the one hand when looking only at input and output additionalities, but on the other hand they enable better understanding of these additionality types. The methodology used for assessing behavioural additionality is based on a qualitative approach, a mix of a questionnaire survey and structured interviews. The evaluation confirmed the applicability of the behavioural additionality concept for programmes evaluation in the Czech Republic and showed that both the short-term and long-term effects of the R&D support in the areas of cooperation, R&D activities and firms strategies have already occurred.

[1] AFCHA, S., GARCÍA-QUEVEDO, J. (2016): The impact of R&D subsidies on R&D employment composition. Industrial and Corporate Change 25(6), s. 955–975.

[2] BUISSERET, T. J., CAMERON, H. M., GEORGHIOU, L. (1995): What Difference Does It Make - Additionality in the Public Support of R&D in Large Firms. International Journal of Technology Management 6 (10), s. 587–600.

[3] CLARYSSE, B., BILSEN, V., STEURS, G. (2006): Behavioural additionality of the R&D subsidies programme of IWT-Flanders (Belgium). In: OECD, Government R&D Funding and Company Behaviour: Measuring Behavioural Additionality. Paris: OECD.

[4] ČADIL, V., KOSTIĆ, M. (2018): Koncept behaviorální adicionality a jeho využití v hodnocení programů výzkumu, vývoje a inovací. Evaluační teorie a praxe 1(6), s. 25–51.

[5] ČADIL, V., MAREK, D. (2018): Is there a pathway towards more complex, long-term collaborative projects? The case of the Competence Centres Programme in Czechia. In: Eu-SPRI Annual Conference Vienna 2017 “The Future of STI – the Future of STI Policy”. Vienna: Eu-SPRI Forum & AIT Austrian Institute of Technology Center for Innovation Systems & Policy.

[6] DAVENPORT, S., GRIMES, C., DAVIES, J. (1998): Research collaboration and behavioural additionality: A New Zealand case study. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 10(1), s. 55–68.

[7] DVOULETÝ, O. (2017): Effects of Soft Loans and Credit Guarantees on Performance of Supported Firms: Evidence from the Czech Public Programme START. Sustainability 9 (12), 2293.

[8] FIER, A., ASCHHOFF, B. a LÖHLEIN, H. (2006): Behavioural additionality of public R&D funding in Germany. In: OECD, ed. Government R&D funding and company behaviour: measuring behavioural additionality. In: OECD, Government R&D Funding and Company Behaviour: Measuring Behavioural Additionality. Paris: OECD, 2006.

[9] GEORGHIOU, L. (2007): What Lies Beneath: Avoiding the Risk of Under-evaluation. Science and Public Policy 10 (34), s. 743–752.

[10] GEORGHIOU, L., CLARYSSE, B., STEURS, G., BILSEN, V., LAROSE, J. (2004): Making the Difference, The Evaluation of Behavioural Additionality of R&D Subsidies [IWT Studies 48/2004]. Bielefeld: Bielefeld University.

[11] GÖK, A. (2010): An Evolutionary Approach to Innovation Policy Evaluation: Behavioural Additionality and Organisational Routines. Manchester: PREST, The University of Manchester.

[12] GÖK, A., EDLER, J. (2012): The use of behavioural additionality evaluation in innovation policy making. Research Evaluation 1(21), s. 1–13.

[13] KNOCKAERT, M., SPITHOVEN, A., CLARYSSE, B. (2013): The impact of technology intermediaries on firm cognitive capacity additionality. Technological Forecasting & Social Change. 81, 376–387.

[14] KOSTIĆ, M. (2018): Účastnická návaznost mezi programy podpory podnikového výzkumu a follow-up adicionalita účasti v programech IMPULS, TANDEM a TIP. ERGO 1(13), s. 23–32.

[15] KUČERA, Z., ČADIL, V., MAREK, D., PAZOUR, M., MEISLOVÁ, K., KOSTIĆ, M., VONDRÁK, T. (2016): Ověření potřebnosti programu Národních center kompetence. Praha: TC AV ČR.

[16] OECD (2006): Government R&D Funding and Company Behaviour monitoring Behavioural Additionality. Paris: OECD.

[17] PALGUTA, J., SRHOLEC, M. (2016): Stimulují přímé dotace soukromé výdaje firem na VaV? Metoda regresní diskontinuity [Studie 17/2016]. Praha: Národohospodářský ústav AV ČR, v. v. i.

[18] POTLUKA, O., BRUHA, J., VOZAR, O., SPACEK, M., LOUN, J. (2013): The Impacts of Subsidies on Czech Firms. Statistika: Statistics and Economy Journal 93(4), s. 56–62.

[19] RATINGER, T., ČADIL, V., AMAOKO AGYEMANG, S. (2018): Evaluation of socio-economic impacts of the business R&D support in small economies. The case of the Czech Republic. Příspěvek přednesený na konferenci Impact of R&I Policy at the Crossroads of Policy Design, Implementation and Evaluation. Vídeň 5.–6. listopadu 2018.

[20] RATINGER, T. (2015): Investice do VaV, přelévání technologie a produktivita v zemědělství, případ České republiky. Agricultural Economics 7 (61), s. 297–313.

[21] ROPER, S., XIA, H. (2014): Innovation, innovation strategy and survival [ERC Research Paper 17/2014]. Coventry: University of Warwick.

[22] ROPER, S., HEWITT-DUNDAS, N. (2014):The legacy of public subsidies for innovation: input, output and behavioural additionality effects. ERC Research Paper No. – No 21, Enterprise Research Centre and Warwick Business School, Coventry: University of Warwick.

[23] SIDORKIN, O., SRHOLEC, M. (2017): Do Direct Subsidies Stimulate New R&D Outputs in Firms? The Comparison of the IMPULS, TIP and ALFA Programmes [Studie 8/2017]. Praha: Národohospodářský ústav AV ČR, v. v. i.

ERGO

The Journal of Technology Centre ASCR

Journal Information

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 28 28 14
PDF Downloads 23 23 9