Abrindo a caixa preta da recorrência na política de inovação

fontes do efeito Mateus no caso argentino

Autores

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20396/rbi.v20i00.8661719

Palavras-chave:

Alocação de política de inovação, Recorrência, Efeito Matthew, Capacidades de inovação

Resumo

Este artigo estuda o papel que as três fontes teóricas de recorrência - ou o efeito Mateo - desempenham nos processos de primeiro acesso e acesso recorrente a fundos públicos para a inovação. Essas três fontes são a "reputação", "capacidade de inovação" e "capacidade de formulação" da empresa. A análise empírica se baseia no Fundo Tecnológico Argentino (em espanhol, FONTAR) entre 2007-2018. Os resultados mostram que as habilidades de formulação das empresas aumentam a probabilidade de que os fundos sejam concedidos inicialmente, e as habilidades de formulação adicionais, juntamente com as capacidades de inovação, aumentam a probabilidade de recorrência, enquanto a reputação faz o oposto.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Biografia do Autor

Diana Suárez, Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento

Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Florencia Fiorentin, Centro Interdisciplinario de Estudios de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación

Centro Interdisciplinario de Estudios de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Mariano Pereira, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas

Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Referências

AGUER, A.; KOENIG, V.M.; CARUGATI, M.I. Análisis de Las Nuevas Empresas Adjudicatarias Del FONTAR Durante El Periodo 2008-2012. Argentina: MINCyT, 2015.

ANTONELLI, C.; CRESPI, F. The “Matthew Effect” in R&D Public Subsidies: The Italian Evidence. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, v. 80, n. 8, p. 1523-1534, Oct. 2013. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.03.008.

ASCHHOFF, B. Who Gets the Money? The Dynamics of R&D Project Subsidies in Germany, 2008. (Zew Discussion Paper, n. 08-018).

BARLETTA, F.; PEREIRA, M.; YOGUEL, G. Schumpeterian, Keynesian, and Endowment Efficiency: Some Evidence on the Export Behavior of Argentinian Manufacturing Firms. Industrial and Corporate Change, v. 23, n. 3, p. 797-826, June 2014. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtt027.

BARLETTA, F.; PEREIRA, M.; SUÁREZ, D.; YOGUEL, G. Construcción de capacidades en las firmas argentinas. Más allá de los laboratorios de I+D. Pymes, Innovación y Desarrollo, v. 4, n. 3, p. 39-56, 2017. https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/pid/article/view/16880/0.

BERRUTTI, F.; BIANCHI, C. Effects of Public Funding on Firm Innovation: Transforming or Reinforcing a Weak Innovation Pattern? Economics of Innovation and New Technology, v.29, n. 5, p. 522-539, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2019.1636452.

BLANES, J.V.; BUSOM, I. Who Participates in R&D Subsidy Programs?: The Case of Spanish Manufacturing Firms. Research Policy, v. 33, n. 10, p. 1459-1476, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.07.006.

BUSOM, I.; CORCHUELO, B.; MARTÍNEZ-ROS, E. Participation Inertia in R&D Tax

Incentive and Subsidy Programs. Small Business Economics, v. 48, n. 1, p. 153-177, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9770-5.

CASTILLO, V.; MAFFIOLI, A.; ROJO, S.; STUCCHI, R. Knowledge Spillovers of Innovation Policy through Labor Mobility: An Impact Evaluation of the FONTAR Program in Argentina. Inter-American Development Bank, 2014. (IDB Working Paper Series, IDB-WP-488).

CHAMBERLIN, E.H. An Experimental Imperfect Market. Journal of Political Economy, v.

, n. 2, 1948. https://doi.org/10.1086/256654.

CHAMINADE, C.; EDQUIST, C. Rationales for Public Policy Intervention in the Innovation Process: Systems of Innovation Approach. In: SMITS, R.E.; Stefan KUHLMANN, S.; SHAPIRA, P. The Theory and Practice of Innovation Policy: An International Research Handbook, 2010. p. 95-114. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781849804424.00012.

CLARYSSE, B.; WRIGHT, M.; MUSTAR, P. Behavioural additionality of R&D subsidies: A learning perspective. Research Policy, North-Holland, v. 38, n. 10, p. 1517-1533, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.09.003.

COHEN, W.M.; LEVINTHAL, D. Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 35, n. 1, p. 128-152, 1990.

COHEN, W.M.; KLEPPER, S. Firm Size and the Nature of Innovation within Industries: The Case of Process and Product R&D. The Review of Economics and Statistics. JSTOR, v. 78, n. 2, p. 232-243, May 1996.

CRÉPON, B.; DUGUET, E.; MAIRESSE, J. Research, Innovation and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level, 1998. (NBER Working Papers Series, n. 6696).

CRESPI, F.; ANTONELLI, C. Matthew Effects and R&D Subsidies: Knowledge Cumulability in High-Tech and Low-Tech Industries. Giornale Degli Economisti e Annali Di Economia, v. 71, n.1, p. 5-31, 2012.

DAVID, P.A. Positive Feedbacks and Research Productivity in Science: Reopening Another Black Box. In: GRANDSTRAND, O. Economics of Technology. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1994. p. 54-89.

DIMOS, C.; PUGH, G. The Effectiveness of R&D Subsidies: A Meta-Regression Analysis of the Evaluation Literature. Research Policy, v. 45, n. 4, p. 797-815, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESPOL.2016.01.002.

DUGUET, E. Are R&D Subsidies a Substitute or a Complement to Privately Funded R&D?

Evidence from France Using Propensity Score Methods for Non-Experimental Data. Cahiers de La MSE – EUREQua, n. 75, 2003.

DUMONT, M. Assessing the Policy Mix of Public Support to Business R&D. Research Policy, v. 46, n. 10, p. 1851-1862, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.09.001.

DUTRENIT, G.; KATZ, J. Introduction: Innovation, growth and development in LatinAmerica: Stylized facts and a policy agenda. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, v. 7, n. 2-3, p. 105-130, 2005.

FIORENTIN, F.; PEREIRA, M.; SUAREZ, D. As Times Goes by. A Dynamic Impact Assessment of the Innovation Policy and the Matthew Effect on Argentinean Firms. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, v. 28, n. 7, p. 657-673, 2019a. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2018.1557404.

FIORENTIN, F.; PEREIRA, M.; SUAREZ, D. Teoría y Práctica de La Política de Innovación y El Desarrollo de Capacidades. Hechos Estilizados Del FONTAR. In: LUGONES, G.; BRITTO, F.A. Ciencia y Tecnología Para El Desarrollo. Bernal: UNQ, 2019b.

FISCHER, B.B.; MOLERO, J. Firm Segmentation as a Tool for R&D Policy Evaluation: Revisiting the Taxonomy of Firms Engaged in International R&D Networks. Journal of

Technology Management and Innovation, v. 8, n. 2, p. 119-131, 2013. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-27242013000200010.

GOEDHUYS, M. The Impact of Innovation Activities on Productivity and Firm Growth: Evidence from Brazil. United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and social Research and training centre on Innovation and Technology, 2007. (Working Paper Series).

GÖK, A.; EDLER, J. The Use of Behavioural Additionality Evaluation in Innovation Policy Making. Research Evaluation, v. 21, n. 4, p. 306-318, Oct. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvs015.

GONZÁLEZ, X.; JAUMANDREU, J.; PAZÓ, C. Barriers to Innovation and Subsidy Effectiveness. RAND Journal of Economics, v. 36, n. 4, p. 930-949, 2005.

HALL, B.H.; MAFFIOLI, A. Evaluating the Impact of Technology Development Funds in Emerging Economies: Evidence from Latin-America. Inter-American Development Bank Office of Evaluation and Oversight, Jan. 2008. (Working Paper: OVE/WP-01/08).

HUERGO, E.; MORENO, L. Does History Matter for the Relationship between R&D, Innovation, and Productivity? Industrial and Corporate Change, v. 20, n. 5, p. 1335-1368, 2011.

JACKSON, J.E. A User’s Guide to Principal Components. New York: Wiley, 2003.

LERENA, O.; MARTÍNEZ CORREA, J.; PEREIRA, M. El Impacto Del FONTAR En El Desempeño Innovador de Las Empresas Industriales Argentinas: ¿qué Evidencia Aporta La Endei? Ciudad Autonoma de Buenos Aires: CIECTI, 2017. (Documento de Trabajo, n. 11).

LERNER, J. When Bureaucrats Meet Entrepreneurs: The Design of Effectivepublic Venture Capital’programmes. The Economic Journal, v. 112, n. 477, p. F73-F84, Feb. 2002. (Wiley Online Library).

LOPEZ, A. Empresarios, Instituciones y Desarrollo Económico: El Caso Argentino. Buenos Aires: CEPAL, 2006.

METCALFE, J.S. Systems Failure and the Case for Innovation Policy. In: LLERENA,

P.; MATT, M. (ed.). Innovation Policy in a Knowledge-Based Economy. Springer, Berlin: Heidelberg, 2005. p. 47-74.

MINCYT - Ministerio Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Productiva. Análisis de Las Empresas Beneficiadas Con Apoyos Reiterados Del FONTAR. Buenos Aires: MINCYT, 2013.

MINCYT - Ministerio Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Productiva. Encuesta Nacional de Dinámica Del Empleo y La Innovación (ENDEI 2010-2012). Buenos Aires: MINCYT / Ministerio de Trabajo, Empleo y Seguridad Social, 2015.

MOORI KOENIG, M.V. de.; CARUGATI, M.I.; IBÁÑEZ, M.O.; WAINFELD, M. Capacidades diferenciales de las empresas beneficiarias del Fondo Tecnológico Argentino (FONTAR). Santiago: Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), 2017. p. 21-44. (Documentos de Proyectos, n. 44130). Disponível em: https://repositorio.cepal.org/bitstream/handle/11362/42490/1/S1700839_es.pdf.

MUNDLAK, Y. On the Pooling of Time Series and Cross Section Data. Econometrica v. 46, n. 1, p. 69-85, Jan. 1978.

NELSON, R. Why do firms differ, and how does it matter? Strategic Management Journal, v. 12, n. S2, p. 61-74, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250121006.

NELSON, R.; WINTER, S. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. The Economic Journal, v. 93, n. 371, p. 652-654, 1982. https://doi.org/10.2307/2232409.

PENROSE, E.T. The theory of the growth of the firm. Oxford: Basil Blackwell & Mott Ltd., 1959.

PEREIRA, M.; SUÁREZ, D. Matthew Effect, Capabilities and Innovation Policy: The Argentinean Case. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, v. 27, n. 1, p. 62-79, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2017.1294544.

PETELSKI, N.; MILESI, D.; VERRE, V. Public Support to Innovation: Impact on Technological Efforts in Argentine Manufacturing Firms. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, v. 29, n. 1, p. 66-88, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2019.1585672.

PORTA, F. Especialización productiva e inserción internacional. Evidencias y reflexiones sobre el caso argentino. In: LUGONES, G.; PORTA, F. Enfoques y Metodologías Alternativas Para La Medición de Las Capacidades Innovativas. Buenos Aires: Proyecto PICT 02-09536 (FONCYT-ANPCYT), 2006.

PORTA, F.; LUGONES, G. Investigación Científica e Innovación Tecnológica En Argentina. Impacto de Los Fondos de La Agencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y Tecnológica. Buenos Aires: Universidad Nacional de Quilmes, 2011.

RADICIC, D.; PUGH, G.; HOLLANDERS, H.; WINTJES,R.; CRESPI, F.; ANTONELLI, C. The Impact of Innovation Support Programmes on SME Innovation in Traditional Manufacturing Industries: An Evaluation for Seven EU Regions. UNU‐MERIT, 2014. (Working Paper Series #2014-033).

SILVA, A.M.; SILVA, S.T.; CARNEIRO, A. Determinants of grant decisions in R&D subsidy programmes: Evidence from firms and S&T organisations in Portugal. Science and Public Policy, v. 44, n. 5, p. 683-697, Oct. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scx002.

SRHOLEC, M.; VERSPAGEN, B. The Voyage of the Beagle into Innovation: Explorations on Heterogeneity, Selection, and Sectors. Industrial and Corporate Change, v. 21, n. 5, p. 1221-1253, 2012.

SUÁREZ, D.; YOGUEL, G.; ROBERT, V.; BARLETTA, F. The Argentinean System of Innovation: Micro Determinants and Meso-Macro Disarticulation. In: DUTRÉNIT, G.; SUTZ, J. National Innovation Systems, Social Inclusion and Development: The Latin American Experience.UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2014. p. 102-132. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781782548683.00009.

TANAYAMA, T. Eligibility, Awareness and the Application Decision: An Empirical Study of Firm Participation in an R&D Subsidy Program, 2007. (HECER Discussion Paper, n. 161).

THOMAS FALK, M.; SVENSSON, R. Evaluation Criteria versus Firm Characteristics as Determinants of Public R&D Funding. Science and Public Policy, v. 47, n. 4, p. 525-535, 2020.

VERSPAGEN, B. Innovation and Economic Growth. In: FAGERBERG, J.; MOWERY, D.C. The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford: OUP Oxford, 2005.

WOOLDRIDGE, J M. Simple Solutions to the Initial Conditions Problem in Dynamic, Nonlinear Panel Data Models with Unobserved Heterogeneity. Journal of Applied Econometrics v. 20, n. 1, p. 39-54, 2005.

ZÚÑIGA‐VICENTE, J.Á.; ALONSO‐BORREGO, C.; FORCADELL, F.J.; GALÁN, J.I. Assessing the Effect of Public Subsidies on Firm R&D Investment: A Survey. Journal of Economic Surveys, v. 28, n. 1, p. 36-67, 2014. (Wiley Online Library).

Publicado

2021-10-10

Como Citar

SUÁREZ, D.; FIORENTIN, F.; PEREIRA, M. Abrindo a caixa preta da recorrência na política de inovação: fontes do efeito Mateus no caso argentino. Revista Brasileira de Inovação, Campinas, SP, v. 20, n. 00, p. e021010, 2021. DOI: 10.20396/rbi.v20i00.8661719. Disponível em: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/rbi/article/view/8661719. Acesso em: 29 nov. 2022.