The Effects of Fiscal Incentives for R & D In Spain

References (59)

1. See Heckman, Ichimura and Todd (1997, 1998), Heckman, Ichimura, Smith and Todd (1998), Smith (2000), Becker and Ichino (2002) and Smith and Todd (2004) for a discussion of different types of matching estimators. 11 Nearest neighbour matching has been used in Czarnitzki (2001), Fier (2002), Czarnitzki and Fier (2002), Almus and Czarnitzki (2003), Czarnitzki and Hussinger (2004), Kaiser (2004), Czarnitzki, Ebersberger and Fier (2004), Lööf and Hesmati (2005), Czarnitzki and Licht (2005), Czarnitzki and Ebersberger (2006), González and Pazó (2006), Herrera and Heijs (2006) and Aerts and Czarnitzki (2006).
2. Kernel-based matching has been used by Czarnitzki and Fier (2003), Duguet (2004), Kaiser (2004), Ebersberger and Lehtoranta (2005), Busom and Fernández-Ribas (2005) and Busom (2006). References
3. Abadie, A., Drukker, D., Leber Herr, J. and Imbens G.W. (2004). Implementing matching estimators for average treatment effects in Stata. The Stata Journal, 4(3), 290-311.
4. Abadie, A., Imbens, G.W. (2005). On the failure of the bootstrap for matching estimators. http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~aabadie/bootstrap.pdf
5. Abadie, A., Imbens, G.W. (2006). Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effects. Econometrica, 74 (1), 235-267.
6. Aerts, K., Czarnitzki, D. (2005). Using innovation survey data to evaluate R&D policy: the case of Flanders. ZEW Discussion Paper, n. 04-55.
7. Almus, S., Czarnitzki, D. (2003). The effects of public R&D subsidies on firm's innovation activities: the case of Eastern Germany. Journal of Economic Statistics, 21(1), 226-236.
8. Arrow, K. (1962). Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Inventions. In R. Nelson (Ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity. Princeton University Press.
9. Asmussen, R., Berriot, C. (1993). Le credit d-impot recherche, cout et effet incitatif. Ministere de l'Economie et des Finances, París.
10. Becker, S., Ichino, A. (2002). Estimation for average treatment effects based on propensity scores. The Stata Journal, 2(4), 358-377.
11. Berger, P. (1993). Explicit and implicit tax effects of the R&D tax credit. Journal of Accounting Research, 31(2).
12. Blanes, J.V. , Busom, I. (2004). Who participates in R&D subsidy programs? The case of Spanish manufacturing firms. Research Policy, 33, 1459-1476.
13. Bloom, N., Griffith, R., Van Reenen, J. (2002). Do R&D credits work? Evidence from an international panel of countries 1979-1997. Journal of Public Economics, 85, 1-31.
14. Busom, I. (2000). An empirical evaluation of the effects of R&D subsidies. Economics of innovation and New Technologies, 9, 111-148.
15. European Commission (2003). Raising EU R&D Intensity. Improving the Effectiveness of Public Support Mechanism for Private Sector Research and Development: Fiscal Measures. EUR 20714, DG for Research Knowledge Based Society and Economy Strategy and Policy, Investment in Research, Luxemburgo.
16. Corchuelo, M.B. (2006). Incentivos fiscales en I+D y decisiones de innovación. Revista de Economía Aplicada, XIV (40), 5-34.
17. Corchuelo, M.B., Martínez-Ros, E. (2008). Aplicación de los incentivos fiscales a la inversión en I+D en las empresas españolas, Hacienda Pública Española/Revista de Economía Aplicada, 187-(4/2008), 9-39.
18. Czarnitzki, D., Fier A. (2002). Do innovation subsidies crowded out private investment: evidence from the German service sector. Applied Economics Quarterly, 48(1), 1-25.
19. Czarnitzki, D., Hanel, P., Rosa, J.M. (2004). Evaluating the impact of R&D tax credit on innovation: A microeconometric study on Canadian firms. ZEW Discussion Paper Nº. 04- 77.
20. David, P.A., Hall, B.H., Toole A.A. (2000). Is public R&D a complement or substitute for private R&D? A review of the econometric evidence. Research Policy, 29, 497-529.
21. Dehejia, R., Wahba, S. (1999). Casual effects in nonexperimental studies: reevaluating the evaluation of training programmes. Journal of the American Statistical Association.
22. Dehejia, R., Wahba, S. (2002). Propensity Score-Matching methods for nonexperimental casual studies. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84(1), 151-161.
23. Department of Finance Canada and Revenue Canada (1998). Evaluation report: The Federal system of income tax incentives for scientific research and experimental development.
24. Ottawa.
25. Duch, N., Montolia, D., Mediavilla, M. (2007). Evaluation of public subsidies oriented to firm's performance: a quasi-experimental approach. Instituto D'Economia de Barcelona, Working Paper 2007/3.
26. Duguet, E. (2004). 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. Review d'Economie Politique, 114 (2), 263-292.
27. Ebersberger, B., Lehtoranta (2005). Pattern of innovative activities among Finnish firms. VTT Publications, 558.
28. Falk, M. (2004). European Productivity, Innovation and Public Sector R&D: Evidence from OECD country and industry-level data, background report for the European Competitiveness Report 2004.
29. Fariñas, J.C., Jaumandreu, J. (1999). Diez años de Encuesta sobre Estrategias Empresariales (ESEE). Economía Industrial, 329, 29-42.
30. Fier, A. (2002), Technology policy and business innovation activities in the case of Germany. In Gretzmacher, N., G. Hutschenreiter y W. Polt (eds.), Proceedings of the tip workshop: Changing Strategies for Business R&D and their implications for Science and Technology (pp.54-67).
31. González, X., Pazó, C. (2005). Do public subsidies stimulate private R&D spending?. Documentos de Traballo 0601, Universidad of Vigo.
32. Guellec, D., Van Pottlesberghe, B. (2003). The impact of public R&D expenditure on business R&D. Economics of Innovation and New Technologies, 12(3), 225-244.
33. Gupta, S.,, Hwang, Y., Schmidt, A. (2004). R&D spending fools? An analysis of the R&D credit's incentive effects after the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989. Working Paper.
34. Hall, B. (1993). R&D tax policy during the 1980s: success or failure. Tax Policy and the Economy, 7, 1-35.
35. Hall, B.H. (2002). The financing of research and development. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18(1), 35-51.
36. Hall, B.H., Van Reenen, J. (2000). How effective are fiscal incentives for R&D? A review of the evidence. Research Policy, 29, 449-469.
37. Hanel, P. (2003). Impact of Government support programs on innovation by Canadian manufacturing firms. Note de Recherche 2003-09, CIRST: Centre Interuniversitaire de recherche sur la science et la technologie (CIRST).
38. Harhoff, D. (1998). Are the financing constraints for R&D investment in German manufacturing firms?. Annales D'Économie et de Statistique, 49/50, 421-456.
39. Heckman, J., Ichimura, H., Todd, P. (1997). Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: evidence from evaluating a job training program. Review of Economic Studies, 64 (5), 605- 664.
40. Heckman, J., Ichimura, H., Todd, P. (1998). Characterizing selection bias using experimental data. Econometrica,66 (5), 1017-1098.
41. Heckman, J., LaLonde, R., Smith, J. (1999). The economics and econometrics of active labour market programme. In Ashenfelter, O. and Card, D. (eds.), The Handbook of Labor Economics, Vol. III.
42. Herrera, L. (2004).
43. Hotz, V.J., Imbens, G.W., Klerman, J.A. (2006). Evaluating the differential effects of alternative welfare-to-work training components: a re-analysis of the Californian GAIN program. NBER Working Paper nº. 11939.
44. Kaiser, U. (2004). Private R&D and public subsidies: microeconomic evidence from Denmark. Center for Economic and Business Research, DP 2004-19.
45. Klassen, K.J., Pittman, J.A., Reed, M.P. (2003). A cross-national comparison of R&D decisions: tax incentives and financial constraints. Contemporary Accounting Research, 21(3), 639-684.
46. Lattimore, R. (1997). Research and Development Fiscal Incentives in Australia: Impacts and Policy Lessons. Industry Commission.
47. Lechner, M. (2002). Some practical issues in the evaluation of heterogeneous labour market programmes by matching methods. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Serie A (Statistics in Society), 165, 59.
48. Lööf, H., Hesmati, A. (2005). Additionality or crowding out? On the effectiveness of R&D subsidies. The Royal Institute of Technology. Centre of Excellence for Studies in Science and Innovation.
49. Donald, C. (2004). R&D tax incentives: a comparison of the incentive effects of refundable and non-refundable tax credit. Summer Research Paper. University of Waterloo.
50. Mansfield, E. (1986). The R&D tax credit and other technology policy issues. American Economic Review, 76 (2), 190-194.
51. Marra, M.A. (2004). Incentivos fiscales, inversión en actividades de I+D y estructura de costes. Un análisis por tamaño para una muestra representativa de empresas manufactureras españolas 1991-1999. Hacienda Pública Española/ Revista de Economía Pública, 170- (3/2004), 9-35.
52. Mc Fetridge, D.G., Warda, J.P. (1983). Canadian R&D Tax Incentives: Their Adequacy and Impact. Canadian Tax Paper, 70. Toronto: Canadian Tax foundation.
53. Nelson, R. (1959). The simple economics of basic scientific research. Journal of Political Economy, 76, 297-306.
54. Parisi, M.L., Sembenelli, A. (2003), Is private R&D spending sensitive to its price? Empirical evidence on panel data for Italy. Empirica, 4.
55. Sianesi, B. (2001). Implementing propensity score matching estimators with Stata. http://fmwww.bc.edu/RePec/usug2001/psmatch.pdf
56. Van Pottlesberghe, B., Megally, E., Nysten, S. (2003). Evaluation of current fiscal incentives for business R&D in Belgium. Working Paper CEB 011. Solvay Business School, Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
57. Warda, J. (2001). Measuring the value of R&D tax treatment in OECD countries. In SIT Review, 27, 185-211.
58. Warda, J. (2002). A 2001-2002 update of R&D tax treatment in OECD countries. Paper prepared for the OECD Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry.
59. Wooldridge, J.M. (2001). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma.