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.
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).
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2021 Revista Brasileira de Inovação