The success of business-sector research and development (R&D) activities and innovation performance is dependent on general development conditions (path dependency), but also on the efficiency of public R&D policy measures, which supports business-sector R&D activities directed towards innovation. In the current article we present a holistic approach based on macro-quantitative analysis for characterizing the role of the public sector in shaping business-sector R&D activities and innovation performance. The influence of R&D policy on business-sector R&D activities in EU member states (and countries closely associated with them) will be empirically analyzed with the combined methods of principal component analysis and multiple regression analysis. The goal of the article is to explore new possibilities of the macro-quantitative approach for policy-influence analysis and to assess on the basis of constructed models the situation in the Baltic States, which have, after the transformation from command to market economy, chosen different approaches to R&D policy. The article reports on the following research tasks: (1) an analysis of the role (needs and opportunities) of R&D policy for shaping business-sector R&D activities and innovation performance; (2) a presentation of the new opportunities to develop the macro-quantitative modelling of R&D policy influence through the combination of principal component analysis (PCA) and multiple regression analysis methods; and (3) an assessment of the results of R&D policy influence on business-sector R&D activities and innovation performance in the Baltic States, based on constructed statistical models. Data from 2004, 2006, 2008, and 2010 has been used. Large discrepancies can be found in both theoretical and empirical approaches to the formation of business-sector R&D activities and innovation performance. In the current study, available theoretical studies are systematized, the solution for some statistical modelling problems in available empirical studies is demonstrated, and finally, the assessment of the influence of R&D policy on the business sector in small Baltic States is provided in comparison to the sample of investigated countries.
AcostaJ., ModregoA. (2001) “Public financing of cooperative R&D projects in Spain: The concerted projects under the national R&D plan”, Research Policy, 30(4):625–641.
2.
AertsK., SchmidtT. (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.
3.
Albors-GarrigosJ., BarreraR. R. (2011) “Impact of Public Funding on a Firm's Innovation Performance, Analysis of Internal and External Moderating Factors”, International Journal of Innovation Management, 15(6):1297–1322.
4.
Alvarez-PelaezM. J., GrothC. (2005) “Too Little or Too Much R&D?”, European Economic Review, 49(2):437–456.
5.
ArundelA., HollandersH. (2005) “Policy, Indicators and Targets: Measuring the Impacts of Innovation Policies.” European Trend Chart on Innovation, MERIT, December 19th.
6.
AudretschD. B. (2003) “Globalization, Innovation and the Strategic Management of Places”, in BröckerJ., DohseD., SoltwedelR. (eds) Innovation Clusters and Interregional Competition, pp. 11–27, Berlin: Springer.
7.
AudretschD. B. (2004) “Sustaining Innovation and Growth: Public Policy Support fot Entrepreneurship”, Industry and Innovation, 11(3):167–191.
8.
BaileyD., LenihanH. (2015) “A Critical Reflection on Irish Industrial Policy: A Strategic Choice Approach”, International Journal of the Economics of Business, 22(1):47–78.
9.
BelderbosR., CarreeM., LokshinB. (2004) “Cooperative R&D and firm performance”, Research Policy, 33(10):1477–1492.
10.
BérubéC., MohnenP. (2009) “Are firms that receive R&D subsidies more innovative?”, Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, 42(1):206–225.
11.
BlanesJ., BusomI. (2004) “Who participates in R&D subsidy programs? The case of Spanish manufacturing firms”, Research Policy, 33(10):1459–1476.
12.
BledaM., Del RioP. (2013) “The market failure and the systemic failure rationales in technological innovation systems”, Research Policy, 42(2):1039–1052.
13.
BusomI. (2000) “An empirical evaluation of the effects of R&D subsidies”, Economic Innovation and New Technology, 9(2):111–148.
14.
CerulliG. (2010) “Modelling and measuring the effect of public subsidies on business R&D: A critical review of the econometric literature”, The Economic Record, 86(274):421–449.
CohenW. M., LevinR. C., MoweryD. C. (1987) “Firm size and R&D intensity: A re-examination”, Journal of Industrial Economics, 35(4):543–563.
17.
CoshA., FuX., HughesA. (2012) “Organisation structure and innovation performance in different environments”, Small Business Economics, 39(2): 301–317.
18.
CzarnitzkiD., DelanoteJ. (2015) “R&D policies for young SMEs: input and output effects”, Small Business Economics, 45(3):465–485.
19.
CzarnitzkiD., EbersbergerB., FierA. (2007) “The relationship between R&D collaboration, subsidies and R&D performance: Empirical evidence from Finland and Germany”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(7):1347–1366.
20.
CzarnitzkiD., HanelP., RosaJ. M. (2011) “Evaluating the impact of R&D tax credits on innovation: A microeconometric study on Canadian firms”, Research Policy, 40(2):217–229.
21.
CzarnitzkiD., LichtG. (2006) “Additionality of Public R&D Grants in a Transition Economy: The Case of Eastern Germany”, Economics of Transition, 14(1):101–131.
22.
CunninghamP., RobsonD., NevesE. (2008) “Mapping of Innovation Support Measures”, Pro Inno Europe, Inno Learning Platform.
23.
DolfsmaW. (2011) “Government Failure – Four Types”, Journal of Economic Issues, 45(3):593–604.
24.
EdquistC. (2011) “Design of innovation policy through diagnostic analysis: identification of systemic problems (or failures)”, Industrial and Corporate Change, 20(6):1725–1753.
25.
EdquistC. (2002) “Innovation Policy – A Systemic Approach”, in: ArchibugiD., LundvallB.-Å. (eds) The Globalizing Learning Economy, pp. 219–238, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26.
EdquistC. (2006) “System of Innovation. Perspectives and Challenges”, in: FagerbergJ., MoweryD. C., NelsonR. R. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, pp. 181–208, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27.
EdquistH. (2011) “Can Investment in Intangibles Explain the Swedish Productivity Boom in the 1990s?”, The Review of Income and Wealth, 57(4): 658–682.
28.
Eurostat. (2016a) Research and Development Expenditure, by sectors of performance. Accessed January 28, 2016 (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat).
29.
Eurostat. (2016b) Total General Government Expenditure. Accessed January 28, 2016 (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat).
30.
FalkM. (2004) “What Drives Business R&D Intensity Across OECD Countries?”, WIFO Working Papers, 236, 28 pp.
31.
ForsmanH. (2009) “Improving Innovation Capabilities of Small Enterprises: Cluster Strategy as a Tool”, International Journal of Innovation Management, 13(2):221–243.
32.
FrishammarJ., HörteS. Å. (2005) “Managing external information in manufacturing firms: The impact on innovation performance”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(3):251–266.
33.
GalendeJ., de la FuenteJ.M. (2003) “Internal factors determining a firm's innovative behavior”, Research Policy, 32(5):715–736.
34.
GarciaA., MohnenP. (2010) “Impact of government support on R&D and innovation”, UNU merit Working Paper, 34, Maastricht.
35.
GeorghiouL., ClarysseB., SteursG., LarosseJ., BilsenV. (2004) “Making the Difference. The evaluation of ‘Behavioural additionality’ of R&D subsidies”, IWT studies, 48, Brussels.
36.
GhoshM. (2007) “R&D Policies and Endogenous Growth: A Dynamic General Equilibrium Analysis of the Case for Canada”, Review of Development Economics, 11(1):187–203.
37.
GlaisterK. W., BuckleyP. J. (1996) “Strategic motives for international alliance formation”, Journal of Management Studies, 33(3):301–332.
38.
GrilichesZ. (1992) “The Search for R&D Spillovers”, Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 94(0): S29–S47.
39.
GruppH. (1998) Foundations of the Economics of Innovation: Theory, Measurement and Practice. Northampton: Edward Elgar.
40.
GuellecD., van PottelsbergheB. (2003) “The Impact of Public R&D Expenditure on Business R&D”, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 12(3):225–243.
41.
HaapanenM., LenihanH., MarianiM. (2014) “Government Policy Failure in Public Support for Research and Development”, Policy Studies, 35(6):557–575.
42.
HallB. (2002) “The financing of research and development”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18(1):35–51.
43.
HallB., van ReenenJ. (2000) “How effective are fiscal incentives for R&D? A review of the evidence”, Research Policy, 29(4):449–469.
44.
Hervas-OliverJ. L., Albors-GarrigosJ. (2009) “The role of the firm's internal and relational capabilities in clusters: when distance and embeddedness are not enough”, Journal Economic Geography, 9(2):263–285.
45.
HuangC, ArundelA., HollandersH. (2008) “Non-R&D innovation of manufacturing firms: Theory and evidence from the third European community innovation survey”, Inno barometer, European Commission, Luxembourg.
46.
HussingerK. (2008) “R&D and Subsidies at the Firm Level, An Application of Parametric and semiparametric two-step selection models”, Journal of Applied Economics, 23(6):729–747.
47.
HyytinenA., ToivanenO. (2005) “Do financial constraints hold back innovation and growth? Evidence on the role of public policy”, Research Policy, 34(9):1385–1403.
48.
CommissionEuropean. (2014) State of the Innovation Union. Taking stock 2010–2014. Luxembourg, European Commission.
LedermanD., MaloneyW. F. (2003) “R&D and Development”, Policy Research Working Paper, 3024, The World Bank.
51.
LiuX., WhiteS. (2001) “Comparing innovation systems: a framework and application to China's transitional context”, Research Policy, 30(7):1091–1114.
52.
ManjónJ. V. G. (2008) “Establishing a set of indicators for measuring the impact of R&D policies”, BEFORE: Benchmarking and Foresight for Regions of Europe.
53.
ManjónJ. V. G. (2010) “A Proposal of Indicators and Policy Framework for Innovation Benchmark in Europe”, Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 5(2):13–23.
54.
OECD. (1997) Oslo Manual. The Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities. Proposed Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Data. 2nd ed. Paris: OECD Publications.
55.
OECD. (1998) Technology, Productivity and Job Creation: Best Policy Practices. The OECD Jobs Strategy. Paris: OECD Publications.
56.
OECD. (2001) Science, Technology and Industry Outlook. Drivers of Growth: Information Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Paris: OECD Publications.
57.
OECD. (2003) OECD science, technology and industry scoreboard. Paris: OECD Publications.
58.
OECD. (2006) Government R&D Funding and company behaviour: Measuring behavioural additionality. Paris: OECD Publications.
59.
OECD. (2007) Innovation and Growth: Rationale for an Innovation Strategy. Paris: OECD Publications.
60.
PenederM. (2008) “The problem of private under-investment in innovation: a policy mind map”, Technovation, 28(8):518–530.
61.
РейльянЯ. (1981) Интерпретация результатов современного факторного анализа в экономических исследованиях // Ученые записки Тартуск. гос. ун-та. Вып. 593. C. 64-77.
RomerP. M. (1996) “Why, indeed, in America? Theory, history, and the origins of modern economic growth”, American Economic Review, 86(2):202–206.
64.
RoperS., LoveJ. H. (2002) “Innovation and export performance: Evidence from the UK and German manufacturing plants”, Research Policy, 31(7): 1087–1102.
65.
SánchezA. M., BermejoL. R. (2007) “Public Sector performance and efficiency in Europe: The role of public R&D”, Institute of Social and Economic Analysis 5 Working paper 01/2007.
66.
SantamaríaL., Barge-GilA., ModregoA. (2010) “Public selection and financing of R&D cooperative projects: Credit versus subsidy funding”, Research Policy, 39(4):549–563.
67.
InnovationSmart. (2006) A Practical Guide to Evaluating innovation programmes. A Study for DG Enterprise and Industry.
68.
SørensenA. (1999) “R&D, learning and phases of economic growth”, Journal of Economic Growth, 4(4):429–445.
69.
SymeonidisG. (1996) “Innovation, Firm Size and Market Structure: Schum-peterian Hypotheses and Some New Themes”, OECD Economics Department Working Paper, 161.
70.
WallstenS. (2000) “The effects of government-industry R&D programme on prívate R&D: The case of the small business innovation research program”, RAND Journal of Economics, 13(1):82–100.
71.
VarsakelisN. C. (2001) “The impact of patent protection, economy openness and national culture on R&D investment: a cross-country empirical investigation”, Research Policy, 30(7):1059–1068.
72.
VeugelersR. (1997). “Internal R&D expenditures and external technology sourcing”, Research Policy, 26(3):303–315.
73.
VeugelersR., CassimanB. (1999) “Make and buy in innovation strategies: Evidence from Belgian manufacturing firms”, Research Policy, 28(1):63–80.
