| dc.description.abstract | The government rationalizes that government-sponsored R&D (GSP) support will result in competitive benefits for the firm, which will spill over into the economy and ultimately increase industry competitiveness. Therefore, traditional evaluation methods for governmental R&D subsidies use appropriate economic indicators to assess performance. However, traditional studies of the impact of public R&D grants on recipient firms have often failed to distinguish between a single sponsored project and the longer-term business innovation effort of which it is part. It is also difficult to define which effects to measure, and to attribute these to a specific government intervention. The concept of additionality – measuring the difference in firm innovation activities resulting from a government intervention – was developed to overcome such difficulties. By reviewing the evidence of academic evaluation studies, 86 ATP evaluation reports from 1993 to 2007 in US and a series of national studies carried out in 2004 and 2005 under the auspices of the OECD’s Working Party on Innovation and Technology Policy (ITP), we addressed a government-sponsored R&D evaluation model based on the additionality.
Based on 127 government-sponsored R&D programmes over 9 years in Taiwan, input additionality, behavioural additionality, and output additionality were examined. The empirical investigation demonstrates that behavioural additionality of recipient firms could be classified into project enlargement, strategy formulation, cost-effectiveness, and commercialization behaviour. Firms in different industry sectors and innovation categories emphasize different additionality respectively. Through cluster analysis three kinds of performance patterns in recipient firms are concluded: ideal, compliant and marginal. The firms with an ideal pattern have high additionality on input, behavioural and output and dimensions what government officers and firm managers greatly care about. The performance patterns are also different in different industry sectors. Besides, the results also showed that the government must carefully develop evaluation criteria for sponsored programmes in order to direct the behaviour of recipient firms. | en_US |