Möchten Sie über diese Zeitschrift informiert bleiben? Klicken Sie bitte auf die Buttons, um unsere Alerts zu abonnieren.
Möchten Sie über diese Zeitschrift informiert bleiben? Klicken Sie bitte auf die Buttons, um unsere Alerts zu abonnieren.
How does public investment support change the capital structure and productivity of small enterprises? An empirical study of the food industry
in International Food and Agribusiness Management ReviewSearch for other papers by Jindřich Špička in
Current site
Google Scholar
The impact evaluations of public investments are essential for policymakers to evaluate the effectiveness of public resource allocation. European public investment subsidies target small companies to enhance their competitiveness and viability in the market. This article uses the average treatment effect and the difference-in-difference approach to evaluate the impacts of investment support from the Rural Development Programme and the Operational Programme Enterprise and Innovation on structural and economic indicators of small enterprises. This representative case study of 550 supported small companies from the Czech food and beverage industry during 2007-2015 clearly shows that investment subsidies increase the fixed assets, the credit-to-debt ratio and the labour productivity of supported companies versus nonparticipants. However, the discussion with recent studies indicates that this is not always positive for participants since high growth versus nonparticipants could result in crowding-out effects and increasing long-term and short-term debt that negatively impact technical efficiency.
-
Abadie, A. 2005. Semiparametric difference-in-differences estimators. The Review of Economic Studies 72(1): 1-19.
'Semiparametric difference-in-differences estimators ' () 72 The Review of Economic Studies : 1 -19.
-
Abadie, A and G.W. Imbens. 2006. Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effects. Econometrica 74(1): 235-267.
'Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effects ' () 74 Econometrica : 235 -267.
-
Abadie, A and G.W. Imbens. 2011. Bias-corrected matching estimators for average treatment effects. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 29(1): 1-11.
'Bias-corrected matching estimators for average treatment effects ' () 29 Journal of Business & Economic Statistics : 1 -11.
-
Angrist, J.D., G.W. Imbens and D.B. Rubin. 1996. Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. Journal of the American Statistical Association 91(434): 444.
'Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables ' () 91 Journal of the American Statistical Association : 444 .
-
Arshed, N., S. Carter and C. Mason. 2014. The ineffectiveness of entrepreneurship policy: is policy formulation to blame? Small Business Economics 43(3): 639-659.
'The ineffectiveness of entrepreneurship policy: is policy formulation to blame? ' () 43 Small Business Economics : 639 -659.
-
Bannò, M., L. Piscitello and C.A. Varum. 2014. The impact of public support on SMEs’ outward FDI: evidence from Italy. Journal of Small Business Management 52(1): 22-38.
'The impact of public support on SMEs’ outward FDI: evidence from Italy ' () 52 Journal of Small Business Management : 22 -38.
-
Bartova, L. and J. Hornakova. 2016. Farm investment support in the Slovak republic. In: Agrarian Perspectives XXV. – Global and European challenges for food production, agribusiness and the rural economy: proceedings of the 25th international scientific conference on agrarian perspectives, edited by L. Smutka, P. Benda, H. Cermakova, L. Domeova, M. Fejfarova, P. Halova, Z. Havlicek. Czech University of Life Sciences, Faculty of Economics and Management, Prague, Czech Republic, pp. 34-40.
'Farm investment support in the Slovak republic ', () 34 -40.
-
Bernini, C. and G. Pellegrini. 2011. How are growth and productivity in private firms affected by public subsidy? Evidence from a regional policy. Regional Science and Urban Economics 41(3): 253-265.
'How are growth and productivity in private firms affected by public subsidy? Evidence from a regional policy ' () 41 Regional Science and Urban Economics : 253 -265.
-
Bertrand, M., E. Duflo and S. Mullainathan. 2004. How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? The Quarterly Journal of Economics 119(1): 249-275.
'How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? ' () 119 The Quarterly Journal of Economics : 249 -275.
-
Bia, M. and A. Mattei. 2012. Assessing the effect of the amount of financial aids to Piedmont firms using the generalised propensity score. Statistical Methods and Applications 21(4): 485-516.
'Assessing the effect of the amount of financial aids to Piedmont firms using the generalised propensity score ' () 21 Statistical Methods and Applications : 485 -516.
-
Blasio, G. de, D. Fantino and G. Pellegrini. 2015. Evaluating the impact of innovation incentives: evidence from an unexpected shortage of funds. Industrial and Corporate Change 24(6): 1285-1314.
'Evaluating the impact of innovation incentives: evidence from an unexpected shortage of funds ' () 24 Industrial and Corporate Change : 1285 -1314.
-
Bronzini, R. and E. Iachini. 2014. Are incentives for R&D effective? Evidence from a regression discontinuity approach. Economic Policy 6(4): 100-134.
'Are incentives for R&D effective? Evidence from a regression discontinuity approach ' () 6 Economic Policy : 100 -134.
-
Bronzini, R. and G. de Blasio. 2006. Evaluating the impact of investment incentives: the case of Italy’s Law 488/1992. Journal of Urban Economics 60(2): 327-349.
'Evaluating the impact of investment incentives: the case of Italy’s Law 488/1992 ' () 60 Journal of Urban Economics : 327 -349.
-
Bronzini, R. and P. Piselli. 2016. The impact of R&D subsidies on firm innovation. Research Policy 45(2): 442-457.
'The impact of R&D subsidies on firm innovation ' () 45 Research Policy : 442 -457.
-
Caliendo, M. and S. Kopeinig. 2008. Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys 22(1): 31-72.
'Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching ' () 22 Journal of Economic Surveys : 31 -72.
-
Čechura, L. and H. Hockmann. 2017. Heterogeneity in production structures and efficiency: an analysis of the Czech food processing industry. Pacific Economic Review 22(4): 702-719.
'Heterogeneity in production structures and efficiency: an analysis of the Czech food processing industry ' () 22 Pacific Economic Review : 702 -719.
-
Cerqua, A. and G. Pellegrini. 2014. Do subsidies to private capital boost firms’ growth? A multiple regression discontinuity design approach. Journal of Public Economics 109: 114-126.
'Do subsidies to private capital boost firms’ growth? A multiple regression discontinuity design approach ' () 109 Journal of Public Economics : 114 -126.
-
Choudhry, M.T. and B. van Ark. 2010. Trade-off between productivity and employment in transition countries: an international comparison. In: Economic growth and structural features of transition. Studies in economic transition, edited by E. Marelli and M. Signorelli. Palgrave Macmillan, London, UK, pp. 104-127.
'Trade-off between productivity and employment in transition countries: an international comparison ', in Economic growth and structural features of transition. Studies in economic transition , () 104 -127.
-
Ciaian, P., d’Artis Kancs and J. Michalek. 2015. Investment crowding-out: firm-level evidence from Germany. SSRN Journal. Available at: http://tinyurl.com/y8vojrbj.
-
Decramer, S. and S. Vanormelingen. 2016. The effectiveness of investment subsidies: evidence from a regression discontinuity design. Small Business Economics 47(4): 1007-1032.
'The effectiveness of investment subsidies: evidence from a regression discontinuity design ' () 47 Small Business Economics : 1007 -1032.
-
Duflo, E., R. Glennerster and Michael Kremer. 2008. Chapter 61 using randomization in development economics research: a toolkit. In: Handbook of development economics. Volume 4, edited by T.P. Schultz and John Strauss. North Holland, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, pp. 3895-3962.
'Chapter 61 using randomization in development economics research: a toolkit ', in Handbook of development economics , () 3895 -3962.
-
EKOTOXA and IREAS. 2016. The Final report of Ex-post evaluation of the Rural Development Program of the Czech Republic for the period 2007-2013. Ministry of Agriculture, Prague, Czech Republic.
-
European Commission. 2003. Commission Recommendation of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (text with EEA relevance) (notified under document number C (2003) 1422). Available at: http://tinyurl.com/y9e2sl45.
-
European Commission. 2014. Directorate-general for agriculture and rural development. Investment support under rural development policy: contract 30-CE-0609852/00-41. Publications Office of the European Union. Final Report, Luxembourg, Luxembourg.
-
European Commission. 2016. Directorate-general for agriculture and rural development. Guidelines: assessment of rdp results: how to prepare for reporting on evaluation in 2017: annex 11 – Fiches for answering common evaluation questions for rural development programmes 2014-2020. EC, Brussels, Belgium.
-
Eurostat. 2017. Community innovation survey 2014. Available at: http://tinyurl.com/yc2ktgco.
-
Froelich, M. and M. Huber. 2017. Direct and indirect treatment effects-causal chains and mediation analysis with instrumental variables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B 79(5): 1667-1671.
'Direct and indirect treatment effects-causal chains and mediation analysis with instrumental variables ' () 79 Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B : 1667 -1671.
-
Guo, S. and M.W. Fraser. 2015. Propensity score analysis: statistical methods and applications. Second edition. Advanced quantitative techniques in the social sciences 11. SAGE. Los Angeles, CA, USA.
'Propensity score analysis: statistical methods and applications. Second edition ', in Advanced quantitative techniques in the social sciences 11 , ().
-
Harrison, R., J. Jaumandreu, J. Mairesse and B. Peters. 2014. Does innovation stimulate employment? A firm-level analysis using comparable micro-data from four European countries. International Journal of Industrial Organization 35: 29-43.
'Does innovation stimulate employment? A firm-level analysis using comparable micro-data from four European countries ' () 35 International Journal of Industrial Organization : 29 -43.
-
Heckman, J., H. Ichimura, J. Smith and P. Todd. 1998. Characterizing selection bias using experimental data. Econometrica 66(5): 1017.
'Characterizing selection bias using experimental data ' () 66 Econometrica : 1017 .
-
Hud, M. and K. Hussinger. 2015. The impact of R&D subsidies during the crisis. Research Policy 44(10): 1844-1855.
'The impact of R&D subsidies during the crisis ' () 44 Research Policy : 1844 -1855.
-
Khandker, S.R., G.B. Koolwal and H.A. Samad. 2010. Handbook on impact evaluation: Quantitative methods and practices. World Bank, Washington, D.C., USA.
'Handbook on impact evaluation: Quantitative methods and practices', ().
-
Kirchweger, S. and J. Kantelhardt. 2015. The dynamic effects of government-supported farm-investment activities on structural change in Austrian agriculture. Land Use Policy 48:73-93.
'The dynamic effects of government-supported farm-investment activities on structural change in Austrian agriculture ' () 48 Land Use Policy : 73 -93.
-
Kirchweger, S., J. Kantelhardt and F. Leisch. 2015. Impacts of the government-supported investments on the economic farm performance in Austria. Agricultural Economics – Czech 61(8): 343-355.
'Impacts of the government-supported investments on the economic farm performance in Austria ' () 61 Agricultural Economics – Czech : 343 -355.
-
Lachenmaier, S. and H. Rottmann. 2011. Effects of innovation on employment: a dynamic panel analysis. International Journal of Industrial Organization 29(2): 210-220.
'Effects of innovation on employment: a dynamic panel analysis ' () 29 International Journal of Industrial Organization : 210 -220.
-
Lee, D.S. and T. Lemieux. 2010. Regression Discontinuity Designs in Economics. Journal of Economic Literature 48(2): 281-355.
'Regression Discontinuity Designs in Economics ' () 48 Journal of Economic Literature : 281 -355.
-
Lerner, J. 2010. The future of public efforts to boost entrepreneurship and venture capital. Small Business Economics 35(3): 255-264.
'The future of public efforts to boost entrepreneurship and venture capital ' () 35 Small Business Economics : 255 -264.
-
Mason, C. and R. Brown. 2013. Creating good public policy to support high-growth firms. Small Business Economics 40(2): 211-225.
'Creating good public policy to support high-growth firms ' () 40 Small Business Economics : 211 -225.
-
Medonos, T., T. Ratinger, M. Hruska and J. Spicka. 2012. The assessment of the effects of investment support measures of the rural development programmes: the case of the Czech Republic. Agris on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics 4(4): 35-48.
'The assessment of the effects of investment support measures of the rural development programmes: the case of the Czech Republic ' () 4 Agris on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics : 35 -48.
-
Michalek, J. 2012. Counterfactual impact evaluation of EU rural development programmes: propensity score matching methodology applied to selected EU Member States. EUR (Luxembourg. Online) 25421. Volume 1: A micro-level approach. FAO Publications Office Luxembourg, Luxembourg and Rome, Italy.
'Counterfactual impact evaluation of EU rural development programmes: propensity score matching methodology applied to selected EU Member States.', ().
-
MoA. 2008. Rural development programme of the Czech Republic for 2007-2013. Ministry of Agriculture, Prague. Available at: http://eagri.cz/public/web/file/10574/RDP_November_2008.pdf.
-
MoIT. 2007. Operational programme enterprise and innovation. Ministry of Industry and Trade, Prague, Czech Republic.
-
Naglova, Z., J. Spicka and M. Gurtler. 2016. Evaluation of effects of investment support in the Czech dairy industry. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis 64(4): 1345-1351.
'Evaluation of effects of investment support in the Czech dairy industry ' () 64 Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis : 1345 -1351.
-
Petrick, M. and P. Zier. 2011. Regional employment impacts of Common Agricultural Policy measures in Eastern Germany: a difference-in-differences approach. Agricultural Economics 42(2): 183-193.
'Regional employment impacts of Common Agricultural Policy measures in Eastern Germany: a difference-in-differences approach ' () 42 Agricultural Economics : 183 -193.
-
Pohlová, K., J. Mezera and J. Špička. 2016. Czech foreign trade with meat and meat products (in Czech with English abstract). Acta Oeconomica Pragensia 2016(2): 63-80.
'Czech foreign trade with meat and meat products (in Czech with English abstract) ' () 2016 Acta Oeconomica Pragensia : 63 -80.
-
Ratinger, T., T. Medonos and M. Hruska. 2013. An assessment of the differentiated effects of the investment support to agricultural modernisation: the case of the Czech Republic. Agris on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics 5(4): 153-164.
'An assessment of the differentiated effects of the investment support to agricultural modernisation: the case of the Czech Republic ' () 5 Agris on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics : 153 -164.
-
Ravallion, M. 2005. Evaluating Anti-Poverty Programs: The World Bank. Available at: https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/wbkwbrwps/3625.htm.
-
Rezbova, H. and O. Skubna. 2013. Analysis of the impact of subsidies on economic performance of agricultural enterprises in the Czech Republic. In: Agrarian Perspectives XXII. –Development trends in agribusiness: proceedings of the 22nd International Scientific Conference on Agrarian Perspectives, edited by Lubos Smutka and Lukas Zagata. Czech University of Life Sciences, Faculty of Economics and Management, Prague, Czech Republic, pp. 78-85.
'Analysis of the impact of subsidies on economic performance of agricultural enterprises in the Czech Republic ', () 78 -85.
-
Rosenbaum, P.R. and D.B. Rubin. 1983. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70(1): 41.
'The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects ' () 70 Biometrika : 41 .
-
Rudinskaya, T. 2017. Heterogeneity and efficiency of food processing companies in the Czech Republic. Agricultural Economics – Czech 63(9): 411-420.
'Heterogeneity and efficiency of food processing companies in the Czech Republic ' () 63 Agricultural Economics – Czech : 411 -420.
-
Shane, S. 2009. Why encouraging more people to become entrepreneurs is bad public policy. Small Bus Econ 33(2): 141-149.
'Why encouraging more people to become entrepreneurs is bad public policy ' () 33 Small Bus Econ : 141 -149.
-
Smutka, L., M. Svatoš, K. Tomšík and O.I. Sergienko. 2016. Foreign trade in agricultural products in the Czech Republic. Agricultural Economics – Czech 62(1): 9-25.
'Foreign trade in agricultural products in the Czech Republic ' () 62 Agricultural Economics – Czech : 9 -25.
-
Spicka, J. 2018. Dynamic Effects of Public Investment Support in the Food and Beverage Industries. Agris on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics 10(1): 91-110.
'Dynamic Effects of Public Investment Support in the Food and Beverage Industries ' () 10 Agris on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics : 91 -110.
-
Spicka, J., Z. Naglova and M. Gurtler. 2017. Effects of the investment support in the Czech meat processing industry. Agricultural Economics – Czech 63(8): 356-369.
'Effects of the investment support in the Czech meat processing industry ' () 63 Agricultural Economics – Czech : 356 -369.
-
Weltin, M., I. Zasada, Ch. Franke, A. Piorr, M. Raggi and D. Viaggi. 2017. Analysing behavioural differences of farm households: An example of income diversification strategies based on European farm survey data. Land Use Policy 62: 172-184.
'Analysing behavioural differences of farm households: An example of income diversification strategies based on European farm survey data ' () 62 Land Use Policy : 172 -184.
-
White, H. 2009. Theory-based impact evaluation: principles and practice. Journal of Development Effectiveness 1(3): 271-84.
'Theory-based impact evaluation: principles and practice ' () 1 Journal of Development Effectiveness : 271 -84.
| Insgesamt | Letzte 365 Tage | In den letzten 30 Tagen | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aufrufe von Kurzbeschreibungen | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gesamttextansichten | 383 | 130 | 10 |
| PDF-Downloads | 247 | 101 | 2 |
How does public investment support change the capital structure and productivity of small enterprises? An empirical study of the food industry
in International Food and Agribusiness Management ReviewSearch for other papers by Jindřich Špička in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
The impact evaluations of public investments are essential for policymakers to evaluate the effectiveness of public resource allocation. European public investment subsidies target small companies to enhance their competitiveness and viability in the market. This article uses the average treatment effect and the difference-in-difference approach to evaluate the impacts of investment support from the Rural Development Programme and the Operational Programme Enterprise and Innovation on structural and economic indicators of small enterprises. This representative case study of 550 supported small companies from the Czech food and beverage industry during 2007-2015 clearly shows that investment subsidies increase the fixed assets, the credit-to-debt ratio and the labour productivity of supported companies versus nonparticipants. However, the discussion with recent studies indicates that this is not always positive for participants since high growth versus nonparticipants could result in crowding-out effects and increasing long-term and short-term debt that negatively impact technical efficiency.
| Insgesamt | Letzte 365 Tage | In den letzten 30 Tagen | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aufrufe von Kurzbeschreibungen | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gesamttextansichten | 383 | 130 | 10 |
| PDF-Downloads | 247 | 101 | 2 |
