of Public R&D Subsidies on Firms' Innovation Activities: The Case of Eastern Germany

By Matthias Almus, Dirk Czarnitzki. 2003

239 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5663dec6c5bdae5da46400f4cdc91cedcb059410

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Barriers to Innovation and Subsidy Effectiveness (2001, background): “E-mail: cpazo@uvigo.es”
Business R&D and the Interplay of R&D Subsidies and Product Market Uncertainty (2007, background): “This finding is in line with results found earlier for German data by Almus and Czarnitzki (2003) and Hussinger (2007).”
R&D support programs in developing countries: The Turkish experience (2008, methodology): “These studies, respectively, find that R&D investment increases by 100 percent (in East Germany), 150 percent (in Belgium), and 30 percent (in Germany) as the result of receiving public subsidies.”
Evaluating the impact of public subsidies on a firm's performance: A quasi-experimental approach (2007, unknown): “…result confirms previous empirical findings for both Spain (Heijs, 1999 and 2001; Busom, 2000), as well as other countries (Arvantis et al. , 2002; Almus and Czarnitzki, 2003; Czarnitzki and Fier 2002), which indicate that certain sectors, most prominently high tech, participate more actively in…”
A Primer for Applying Propensity-Score Matching (2010, methodology): “For example, Heckman, Ichimura and Todd (1998), Lechner (1999), Dehejia and Wahba (2002), and Smith & Todd (2005) use PSM techniques to estimate the impact of labor market and training programs on income; Jalan and Ravallion (2003) evaluate antipoverty workfare programs; Galiani, Gertler and Schargr”
R&D Subsidies and Company Performance: Evidence from Geographic Variation in Government Funding Based on the ERDF Population-Density Rule (2014, background): “3 For studies in which identification is based on the assumption of random assignment after conditioning on observable characteristics, see Howe and McFetridge (1976), Irwin and Klenow (1996), Lerner (1999), and Almus and Czarnitzki (2003).”
The effects of public support schemes on small and medium enterprises (2015, methodology): “…score alone or jointly with other covariates) has been used extensively in estimation of the effects of R&D subsidies and was employed in studies by Almus and Czarnitzki (2003), Duguet (2004), Aerts and Czarnitzki (2006, 2004), Reinkowski et al. (2010), Herrera et al. (2010), Czarnitzki et al.…”
The Impact of R&D Subsidies on Firm Innovation (2016, background): “2 See for example: Lerner (1999), Busom (2000), Wallesten (2000), Lach (2002), Almus and Czarnitzki (2003), Gonzalez et al. (2005), Gorg and Strobl (2007), Merito (2007), Hussinger (2008), Clausen (2009), Takalo et al. (2010), de Blasio et al. (2011), Bronzini and Iachini (2014).”
Are Incentives for R&D Effective? Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Approach † (2011, background): “Also Almus and Czarnitzki (2003) use matching strategy to study R&D subsidies in Eastern Germany, but unlike the previous paper they find an overall positive and significant effect on investment. Gonzalez et al. (2005) explore the case of Spain estimating simultaneously the probability to obtain a s”
Two for the price of one? On additionality effects of R&D subsidies: A comparison between Flanders and Germany (2006, background): “…correcting for a potential selection bias tend to reject full crowding out effects, the results are not unambiguous: Aerts and Czarnitzki (2004), Almus and Czarnitzki (2003), Busom (2000), Czarnitzki (2001), Czarnitzki and Fier (2002), Duguet (2004), Fier (2002), González and Pázo (2006),…”
Additionality or crowding-out? An overall evaluation of public R&D subsidy on private R&D expenditure (2016, background): “…study is no exception and follows this strand of literature, assessing the French R&D grant support system performing an “after the fact” analysis as in Almus and Czarnitzki (2003), Blanes and Busom (2004), Czarnitzki and Licht (2006), and González and Pazó (2008), Hussinger (2008), among others.”
Evaluating the Impact of R&D Tax Credits on Innovation: A Microeconometric Study on Canadian Firms (2011, unknown): “(1999), Heckman et al. (1998a, 1998b), and Lechner (1999, 2000). Almus and Czarnitzki (2003) as”
The "Matthew Effect" in R&D Public Subsidies: the Italian Evidence (2013, unknown): “Such matching methodology has been widely used in recent years as estimation technique and is also applied in this study (Heckman et al., 1999, Blundell and Costa Dias, 2000; Almus and Czarnitzki, 2003; Hussinger, 2008).”
Public R&D Policies and Private R&D Investment: A Survey of the Empirical Evidence (2015, result): “These conclusions are also compatible with evidence found by Almus and Czarnitzki (2003) for a transition economy, for which capital market imperfections may a priori also be expected to be relatively more pronounced.”
What drives business Research and Development (R&D) intensity across Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries? (2006, methodology): “Microeconometric methods such as matching methods applied to firm level data allow us to control for the selection arising from the fact that participation R&D programmes are not random (see Almus and Czarnitzki, 2003 ).”