An analysis of the efficiency of public spending and national policies in the area of R&D

Improving the quality of public finances is a major challenge for European policy makers. The economic crisis has increased budgetary pressures and accentuated the tension between the need to sustain public spending aimed at raising the EU growth potential and the increased scarcity of public resources. Rising the efficiency and effectiveness of public spending in growth-enhancing areas such as education, R&D and innovation has become, therefore, even more important. This paper reviews the innovation performance of the different EU Member States and provides estimates of the relative efficiency of their R&D spending. In doing so, it aims at moving the policy discussion from mere volume-based policy targets towards a better assessment of the quality and effects of public R&D spending. The main contribution of this paper is therefore the identification of both (1) a suitable methodology for the evaluation of efficiency levels across Member States and (2) structural and policy determinants which may contribute to raise efficiency levels of R&D spending across countries and over time. Results indicate that there exist large cross-country differences in terms of measured efficiency, which is an indication that in many Member States there remains a significant potential for further improvement. Currently, there appears to be a divide in efficiency levels between old and new Member States. However, there is some evidence that the new Member States are catching up. The estimated efficiency scores indicate that all EU Member States have improved their efficiency levels over time. There is evidence that the efficiency of R&D spending is higher in countries with a strong knowledge base which, in turn, implies that increases in R&D spending do not necessarily lead to reductions in efficiency levels. Other factors that positively affect efficiency levels include the high-tech specialisation of the economy, the level of investment in education, the employment share in science and technology, and the degree of protection of intellectual property rights. Finally, a R&D tax treatment more oriented towards fiscal incentives rather than direct subsidies appears to have a positive effect on the efficiency level of R&D spending across EU Member States. This work is based on both a quantitative measurement of efficiency levels and a qualitative analysis of the policy instruments used in the Member States to promote R&D efficiency and effectiveness. Efficiency scores are calculated by means of the Stochastic Frontier Analysis for a set of input and output indicators in order to overcome the limitations associated with each individual indicator. A complementary survey of national governments highlights some further policy instruments that could contribute to increase the efficiency of R&D and innovation policies, in particular at the national level. The results of the survey argue in favour of adopting a systemic approach to R&D, education and innovation policies, including three main elements: (i) adapting educational programmes and the research infrastructure to the needs of science and industry; (ii) making a sustained commitment to knowledge investment by adopting medium-term funding programmes; and (iii) evaluating existing R&D programmes in order to determine which policy tools are the most effective and in which areas R&D investments offer the highest returns. More recently, Member States have introduced R&D spending measures specifically targeted to deal with the consequences of the economic crisis. A closer look at these measures reveals that Member States consider direct grants and offers of tax relief as appropriate instruments to counteract the effects of the crisis. It should be clear that such policy measures should be tailored to the specific needs and strengths of every Member State.Public Finance, Efficiency, R&D spending, patents, innovation policy.

Innovation Indicators: for a critical reflection on their use in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs)

It has been widely recognized that innovation is an important driver of economic growth. Many Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) have adopted innovation indicators to monitor innovation performance and to evaluate the impact of innovation policies. This paper argues that innovation indicators should be customized to the different socio-economic structures of LMICs. For this, the definition of innovation needs to be relevant to the multitude of innovation actors and processes in LMICs. LMICs also need to build competences not only in the construction of innovation indicators within their statistical systems, but also in the use of these indicators by among others policy makers. Especially as the fourth edition of the Oslo Manual (OM 2018) has broadened the scope of “innovation”, opening up policy space for LMICs to accommodate the diversity in their national systems of innovation and to develop accompanying innovation indicators.JEL Classification Codes: O38, O32, O29, P47http://www.grips.ac.jp/list/jp/facultyinfo/iizuka-michiko

The technological specialization of Europe in the 1990s

This paper contributes to the ongoing debate on the international position of Europe by (i) presenting new evidence on technological specialization and competitiveness and (ii) exploring methodological issues underlying the empirical analysis. The results show that the technological profile of the member countries of the European Union offers a wide scope for technology transfer and inter-industry trade both within the European Union and between the member countries of the European Union on the one hand and Japan, the United States and Eastern Europe on the other. However, risks loom large in the possible eastward enlargement of the European Union and in the formation of a monetary union, because of the former's and the latter's potential impact on the European Union's technological profile and the international competitiveness of European firms.

Assessing the potential for knowledge-based development in transition countries. Bruegel Working Paper 2010/01, May 2010

This Working Paper by Bruegel Senior Fellow Reinhilde Veugelers examines the potential for a knowledge-based growth path in transition countries of central and eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia. The paper looks closely at how total-factor productivity, a residual growth factor commonly interpreted as reflecting technological progress, drives growth rates in these economies which exhibit a much lower GDP per capita compared to the EU15 or the United States. By analysing the prerequisites for knowledge-based growth, the author explains why transition countries are at a systemic disadvantage relative to the EU15, US and Japan and have limited potential for knowledge-based growth

Environmental policy without costs? A review of the Porter hypothesis

This paper reviews the theoretical and empirical literature connected to the so called Porter Hypothesis. That is, to review the literature connected to the discussion about the relation between environmental policy and competitiveness. According to the conventional wisdom environmental policy, aiming for improving the environment through for example emission reductions, do imply costs since scarce resources must be diverted from somewhere else. However, this conventional wisdom has been challenged and questioned recently through what has been denoted the “Porter hypothesis”. Those in the forefront of the Porter hypothesis challenge the conventional wisdom basically on the ground that resources are used inefficiently in the absence of the right kind of environmental regulations, and that the conventional neo-classical view is too static to take inefficiencies into account. The conclusions that can be made from this review is (1) that the theoretical literature can identify the circumstances and mechanisms that must exist for a Porter effect to occur, (2) that these circumstances are rather non-general, hence rejecting the Porter hypothesis in general, (3) that the empirical literature give no general support for the Porter hypothesis. Furthermore, a closer look at the “Swedish case” reveals no support for the Porter hypothesis in spite of the fact that Swedish environmental policy the last 15-20 years seems to be in line the prerequisites stated by the Porter hypothesis concerning environmental policy.Environmental policy; Costs; Porter hypothesis

Environmental policy without costs? A review of the Porter hypothesis

This paper reviews the theoretical and empirical literature connected to the so called Porter Hypothesis. That is, to review the literature connected to the discussion about the relation between environmental policy and competitiveness. According to the conventional wisdom environmental policy, aiming for improving the environment through for example emission reductions, do imply costs since scarce resources must be diverted from somewhere else. However, this conventional wisdom has been challenged and questioned recently through what has been denoted the “Porter hypothesis”. Those in the forefront of the Porter hypothesis challenge the conventional wisdom basically on the ground that resources are used inefficiently in the absence of the right kind of environmental regulations, and that the conventional neo-classical view is too static to take inefficiencies into account. The conclusions that can be made from this review is (1) that the theoretical literature can identify the circumstances and mechanisms that must exist for a Porter effect to occur, (2) that these circumstances are rather non-general, hence rejecting the Porter hypothesis in general, (3) that the empirical literature give no general support for the Porter hypothesis. Furthermore, a closer look at the “Swedish case” reveals no support for the Porter hypothesis in spite of the fact that Swedish environmental policy the last 15-20 years seems to be in line the prerequisites stated by the Porter hypothesis concerning environmental policy.Environmental policy; the Porter hypothesis; productivity; profitability

INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN THE FOOD SECTOR AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, HEALTH, AND SAFETY: A SURVEY OF POLICY ISSUES

International Relations/Trade,

A framework for assessing innovation collaboration partners and its application to BRICs

We develop a framework for assessing innovation collaboration partners. Based on the studies explaining the internationalisation of inventive activity, we identify four elements relevant as drivers of innovation collaboration. These elements include inventive capacity, technological specialization patterns, openness to international innovation collaboration and economic potential of technology. In order to make the framework operational, we propose a set of patent-based indicators that capture the relevant elements. This way the proposed framework serves as a tool to both assess the potential of inventive collaboration and to anticipate benefits of such collaboration. In a second step, we apply the framework to analyse the attractiveness of BRIC countries as potential partners for innovation collaboration. Our analysis shows that BRICs do not only differ in terms of inventive performance, but also in terms of the openness to international collaboration or the economic potential of technology developed by these countries.JRC.J.3-Information Societ

Assessing the potential for knowledge-based development in transition countries

This Working Paper by Bruegel Senior Fellow Reinhilde Veugelers examines the potential for a knowledge-based growth path in transition countries of central and eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia. The paper looks closely at how total-factor productivity, a residual growth factor commonly interpreted as reflecting technological progress, drives growth rates in these economies which exhibit a much lower GDP per capita compared to the EU15 or the United States.  By analysing the prerequisites for knowledge-based growth, the author explains why transition countries are at a systemic disadvantage relative to the EU15, US and Japan and have limited potential for knowledge-based growth.