국가 R&D 정책에 따른 기업의 R&D 투자 활성화에 대한 실효성 분석 - 한국기술혁신조사(KIS) 제조업 기업을 대상으로 -
An analysis for real effect of national R&D policies to firms’ R&D stimulation: For manufacture firms in Korea innovation survey(KIS)
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
본 연구에서는 국가 R&D 정책의 실효성을 분석하였다. 국가 R&D 정책은 조세지원, 자금지원, 연구지원의 세 가지로 구분하였다. 정책의 실효성은 정책 수혜를 받은 기업의 R&D 투자 활성화 정도를 수치로 추정하였다. 추정을 위해, R&D 집중도와 성향점수 매칭을 이용한 처리효과 분석방법을 이용하였다. R&D 집중도는 기업의 매출액 대비 연구개발 투자액의 비율로, 기업 R&D 투자의 측도이다. 처리효과는 국가 R&D 정책 수혜를 받는 처리집단과 수혜를 받지 못하는 통제집단의 R&D 집중도 평균의 차이로, 성향점수 매칭을 통해 두 집단이 유사한 특성을 갖도록 사전적으로 조정하였다. 국가 R&D 정책은 중복 수혜가 가능하므로, 가능한 모든 정책 수혜의 경우를 7가지로 세분화하여, 각 경우의 처리효과를 추정하였다. 그 결과 자금지원과 연구지원을 함께 받는 경우, 세 가지 모든 정책의 수혜를 받는 경우에 양의 처리효과가 추정되었다.
Abstract
The goal of this paper is real effect analysis of national R&D policies. National R&D policies can be categorized into three, corporative tax reduction, bank loan subsidy for innovation firm and R&D subsidies(research fund of R&D projects and indirect subsidies including skilled workers, knowledge and infrastructure). Real effect of policies is an estimated number which indicates stimulation of firms’ R&D investment. For estimation, a concept of R&D intensity and an econometric method of treatment effect analysis using propensity score matching are used. The R&D intensity, a ratio of firms’ R&D investment expenditure to firms’ revenue, is measurement of firms’ R&D investment. The treatment effect is difference of R&D intensity between treated group subsidized from national R&D policies and controlled group not subsidized. Before estimating treatment effect, controlled group is adjusted to have similar characteristics which treated group has by propensity score matching. A firm can be subsidizied from one more policies simultaneously. Therefore, there are totally seven subsidies events and the treatment effect for each event can be estimated. Estimation results are as follow. For firms subsidized from corporative tax reduction and bank loan subsidy togother, and for firms subsidized from all three R&D policies, the estimated treatment effects are positive.
참고문헌 (14)
- 2013년도 연구개발활동조사보고서, "한국과학기술기획평가원", 미래창조과학부, ~ (2014)
- 이도형, "기술혁신형 기업 육성을 위한 기술혁신지원제도의 현황 및 정책적 이슈" (2012), 한국과학기술기획평가원
- OECD, "Oslo manual: Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation Data", OECD and Eurostar, ~ (2005)
- Almus, M., "The effects of public R&D subsidies on firms’ innovation activities: The case of eastern Germany", Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 21(2), pp.226~236 (2003)
- Busom, I., "An empirical evaluation of the effects of R&D subsidies", Economic Innovation and New Technology, 9, pp.111~148 (2000)
- Cameron, A, "Microeconometrics: Methods and applications" (2005), Cambridge University
- Are subsidies a substitute or a complement to privately funded R&D? Evidence from France using propensity score methods for non-experimental data, "Duguet, E.", University de Paris I, ~, pp.Working Paper no 2003(75) (2003)
- Gonzalez, X., "Do public subsidies stimulate private R&D spending?", Research Policy, 37, pp.371~389 (2008)
- Do R&D subsidies stimulate or displace private R&D? Evidence from Israel, "Lach, S.", NBER, ~, pp.NBER Working Paper No.7943 (2000)
- Lechner, M., "Training the east German labour force - Microeconometric evaluation of continuous training after unification" (1998), Physica
- Lee, M.J., "Micro-econometrics for policy, program, and treatment effects" (2005), Oxford University Press
- Leonard, William N., "Research and development in industrial growth", Journal of Political Economy, 79(2), pp.232~256 (1971)
- The impact of public funding on private R&D investment: New evidence from a firm level innovation study, "Loof, H.", INFRA, CESIS, ~ (2005)
- Rosenbaum, P., "The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects", Biometrica, 70, pp.41~55 (1983)