臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：政府研發補助政策績效評估之實證研究
作者：薛招治 引用關係
作者(外文)：Chao-Chih Hsueh
校院名稱：國立中央大學
系所名稱：企業管理研究所
指導教授：洪德俊
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2008
主題關鍵詞：政府研發補助計畫；附加性；績效評估；Government-sponsored R&D programme；Additionality；Evaluation
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:68
各國政府均認為政府研發補助經費將導致補助公司提高競爭效益，並且公司效益將擴散至產業，最後導致產業競爭力的提高，各國政府提出不同的研發補助政策以提高國家的競爭力，但也同時面臨政策績效評估的壓力。傳統上各種評估方法提出不同的指標以衡量政府研發補助政策的績效，然而這些評估報告，並未有效地說明所衡量的績效是歸屬於單一政府研發補助專案所誘發出來的績效，或是公司長期努力所產生的效益。因此在面臨這樣的背景下，附加性(Additionality)的概念被用於解決這樣的困境。因此本文回顧國內外相關學術論文、美國政府先進技術計劃(ATP)自1993年至2007年所產出的86篇政策績效評估研究，及OECD委託12個國家於2004-2005年，提出一個以附加性為主軸的評估指標系統。
本研究以台灣1997年至2005年共127個業界開發產業技術計畫為驗證樣本，探討政府研發補助政策對受補助公司所產生的投入(Input)、行為(Behaviour)及產出(Output)附加性的類型以及驗證受補助公司在不同的產業環境及計畫特性下是否有不同的績效表現。本研究提出了三項研究發現：首先，因素分析結果顯示受補助公司的行為附加性可區分為計畫擴大性行為(Project Enlargement Behaviour)、策略建構性行為(Strategy Formulation Behaviour)及成本效益性行為(Cost-Effectiveness Behaviour)，且公司在不同產業及計畫創新類型，執行政府研發補助計畫所產生的行為改變不一樣；第二，透過集群分析，本研究發現政府研發補助政策績效表現的各種型態，包含理想型(Ideal)、順從型(Compliant)及邊緣型(Marginal)，位於理想型的受補助公司，其投入、行為及產出的績效附加性均最高，這類型的績效型態為政府計畫管理者及公司管理者所偏好；最後，本研究亦發現政府針對補助政策所制定的績效評估指標會影響受補助公司績效的表現。
The government rationalizes that government-sponsored R&D (GSP) support will result in competitive benefits for the firm, which will spill over into the economy and ultimately increase industry competitiveness. Therefore, traditional evaluation methods for governmental R&D subsidies use appropriate economic indicators to assess performance. However, traditional studies of the impact of public R&D grants on recipient firms have often failed to distinguish between a single sponsored project and the longer-term business innovation effort of which it is part. It is also difficult to define which effects to measure, and to attribute these to a specific government intervention. The concept of additionality – measuring the difference in firm innovation activities resulting from a government intervention – was developed to overcome such difficulties. By reviewing the evidence of academic evaluation studies, 86 ATP evaluation reports from 1993 to 2007 in US and a series of national studies carried out in 2004 and 2005 under the auspices of the OECD’s Working Party on Innovation and Technology Policy (ITP), we addressed a government-sponsored R&D evaluation model based on the additionality.
Based on 127 government-sponsored R&D programmes over 9 years in Taiwan, input additionality, behavioural additionality, and output additionality were examined. The empirical investigation demonstrates that behavioural additionality of recipient firms could be classified into project enlargement, strategy formulation, cost-effectiveness, and commercialization behaviour. Firms in different industry sectors and innovation categories emphasize different additionality respectively. Through cluster analysis three kinds of performance patterns in recipient firms are concluded: ideal, compliant and marginal. The firms with an ideal pattern have high additionality on input, behavioural and output and dimensions what government officers and firm managers greatly care about. The performance patterns are also different in different industry sectors. Besides, the results also showed that the government must carefully develop evaluation criteria for sponsored programmes in order to direct the behaviour of recipient firms.
Amit, R. and Shoemaker, P. J. H. (1993). “Strategic assets and organizational rent”, Strategic Management Journal, 14, 33-46.
ATP. (2001). “Performance of first 50 completed ATP projects: status report - number 2”, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., December.
Bach, L. and Matt, M. (2002). “Rationale for science and technology policy” in L. Georghiou and J. Rigby (eds.), Assessing the socio-economic impacts of the Framework Programme, Report to European Commission DG Research.
Bach, L., N. Conde-Molist, M. J., Ledoux, M. M. and Schaeffer, V. (1995). “Evaluation of the economic effects of BRITEEURAM programmes on the European industry”, Scientometrics, 34(3), 325-349.
Barney, J. B. (1991). “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage”, Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
Branscomb, L. M., Morse, K. P. and Roberts, M. J. (2000). “Managing technical risk, understanding private sector decision making on early stage technology-based projects”, National Institute of Standards and Technology Report NIST00-787, Gaithersburg, MD, April.
Buisseret, T. J., Cameron, H. and Georghiou, L. (1995). “What difference does it make? additionality in the public support of R&D in large firms”, International Journal of Technology Management, 10(4/5/6), 587-600.
Chang, P. C., Wang, C. P., Yuan, J. C. and Chuang, K. T. (2002). “Forecast of development trend in Taiwan’s machinery industry”, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 69, 781-802.
Clarysse, B., Bilsen, V., Steurs, G. and Larosse, J. (2004), “Measuring additionality of R&D subsidies with surveys: towards an evaluation methodology for IWTFlanders”, IWT.
CONSAD Research Corporation (1997). “Advanced Technology Program case study: the development of advanced technologies and systems for controlling dimensional variation in automobile manufacturing”, National Institute of Standards and Technology Report NIST GCR97-709, Gaithersburg, MD, March.
Coombs, R. and Georghiou L. (2002). “A new industrial ecology”, Science, 296, 471.
Cordero, R. (1990). “The measurement of innovation performance in the firm: an overview”, Research Policy, 19, 185-192.
Cozzarin, B. P. (2006). “Performance measures for the socio-economic impact of government spending on R&D”, Scientometrics, 68(1), 41-71.
Czarnitzki, D. and Licht, G. (2006). “Additionality of public R&D grants in a transition economy”, Economics of Transition, 14(1), 101-131.
Darby, Zucker, D. and Wang, A. (2002). “Program design and firm success in the Advanced Technology Program: project structure and innovation outcomes”, National Institute of Standards and Technology Report NISTIR 6943, Gaithersburg, MD, December.
Davenport, S., Grimes, C. and Davies J. (1998). “Research collaboration and behavioural additionality: a New Zealand case study”, Technological Analysis and Strategic Management, 10(1), 55-67.
David, P. A., Hall, B. H. and 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(4/5), 97-529.
Ehlen, M. (1999). “Economic impacts of flow-control machining technology: early applications in the automobile industry”, National Institute of Standards and Technology Report NISTIR 6373, Gaithersburg, MD, October.
Eisenhardt, K. M. and Martin, J. A. (2000). “Dynamic capabilities: what are they?”, Strategic Management Journal, 21, 1105-1121.
Eisenhardt, K. M. and Schoonhoven, C. B. (1996). “Resource-based view of strategic alliance formation: strategic and social effects in entrepreneurial firms”, Organization Science, 7(2), 136-150.
Feldman, M. P. and Kelley, M. R. (2001). “Winning an award from the Advanced Technology Program: pursuing R&D strategies in the public interest and benefiting from a Halo Effect”, National Institute of Standards and Technology Report NISTIR 6577, Gaithersburg, MD, March.
Flynn, B., Sakakibara, S., Schroeder, R., Bates, K. and Flynn, E. (1990). “Empirical research methods in operations management”, Journal of Operations Management, 250-284.
Georghiou, L. (1994). “Impact of the Framework Programme on European industry”, EUR 15907 EN, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
Georghiou, L. (1999). “Socio-economic effects of collaborative R&D--European experiences”, Journal of Technology Transfer, 24(1), 69.
Georghiou, L. (2002). “Impact and Additionality of Innovation Policy”, in P. Boekholt (eds.), Innovation Policy and Sustainable Development: Can Innovation Incentives Make a Difference?, IWT-Observatory: Brussels.
Georghiou, L. and Roessner, D. (2000). “Evaluating technology programs: tools and methods”, Research Policy, 29(4/5), 657.
Georghiou, L., Clarysse, B., Steurs, G., Bilsen, V. and Larosse, J. (2004). “Making the difference－the evaluation of behavioural additionality of R&D subsidies”, IWT-STUDIES 48, June, 7-20.
GIO. (2004). Taiwan Yearbook 2004. Available at http://ecommerce.taipeitimes.com/ yearbook2004/P321.htm. Government Information office, Taipei.
Grant, R. M. (1991). “The resource-based theory of competitive advantage”, California Management Review, 33(3), 114-135.
Griliches, Z. (1991). “Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey”, Journal of Economic Literature, 28(4), 1661-1707.
Hayashi, T. (2003). “Bibliometric analysis on additionality of Japanese R&D programmes”, Scientometrics, 56(3), 301-316.
Henderson, R. and Cockburn, I. (1994). “Measuring competence? exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research”, Strategic Management Journal, 15, 63-84.
Hsu, C. and Chang, H. (2001). “The government strategy for the upgrading of industrial technology in Taiwan”, Technovation, 21, 123-132.
Jaffe, A. B. (1996). “Economic analysis of research spillovers: implications for the Advanced Technology Program”, National Institute of Standards and Technology Report NIST GCR 97-708, Gaithersburg, MD, December.
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1992). “Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities and the replication of technology”, Organization Science, 3(3), 383-397.
Laidlaw, F. J. (1997). “Acceleration of technology development by the Advanced Technology Program”, National Institute of Standards and Technology Report NISTIR- 6047, September.
Lee, J. D. and Park, C. (2006). “Research and development linkages in a national innovation system: factors affecting success and failure in Korea”, Technovation, 26, 1045-1054.
Link, A. N. (1997). “ATP early stage impacts of the printed wiring board”, National Institute of Standards and Technology Report, Gaithersburg, MD, November.
Long, W. F. (1999). “Performance of completed projects: status reports”, National Institute of Standards and Technology Report , Gaithersburg, MD, March.
Luiten, E., Lente, H. V. and Blok, K. (2006). ”Slow technologies and government intervention: energy efficiency in industrial process technologies”, Technovation, 26, 1029-1044.
Luukkonen, T. (1998). “The difficulties in assessing the impact of EU Framework Programmes”, Research Policy, 27, 599-610.
Luukkonen, T. (2000). “Additionality of EU Framework Programmes”, Research Policy, 29, 711-724.
Mahoney, J. T. (1995). “The management of resources and the resource of management”, Journal of Business Research, 33, 91-101.
Mansfield, E. (1996). “Estimating social and private returns from innovations based on the Advanced Technology Program: problems and opportunities”, National Institute of Standards and Technology Report NISTGCR 99-780, Gaithersburg, MD, January.
Martin, S. A., Winfield, D. L., Kenyon, A. E., Farris, J. R., Bala, M. V. and Bingham, T. H. (1998). “A framework for estimating the national economic benefits of ATP funding of medical Technologies”, Research Triangle Institute, Center for Economic Research Raleigh, NC, GCR 97-797, April.
Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA). (2000). “Machinery and Equipment Industry Promotion Office”, Taipei. Internal document (in Chinese).
Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA). (2001). “Introduction to investment in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries in Taiwan”, R.O.C. Taipei: MOEA.
Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA). (2007). “Measuring ITDP Impact: 2007 Report on Economic Progress. Republic of China,2007”, MOEA, Taipei (in Chinese).
National Science Council (NSC). (2002). “Indicator of Science and Technology, Republic of China, 2000”, National Science Council, Taipei.
National Science Council (NSC). (2006). “Indicator of Science and Technology, Taiwan, 2006”, National Science Council, Taipei.
Nelson, R. R. (1991). “Why do firms differ, and how does it matter?”, Strategic Management Journal, 12, 61-74.
Nohira, N. (1992). “Is network perspective a useful way of studying organizations?”, in N. Nohria and R.G. Eccles (eds.), Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action, Boston, Harvard Business School Press, 1-22.
OECD. (2006). “Government R&D funding and company behaviour- measuring behavioural additionality”, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.
Pearce, J. A. and Robinson, R. B. (1998). “Formulation and implementation of competitive strategy. Irwin, Boston.
Pelsoci, T. M. (2001). “Closed-cycle air refrigeration technology for cross-cutting applications in food processing, volatile organic compound recovery, and liquid natural gas industries”, NISTIR GCR 01-819, Gaithersburg, MD, December.
Powell, J. (1996). “The ATP’s Business Reporting System: a tool for economic evaluation, proceedings”, Conference on Comparative Analysis of Enterprise Data Helsinki, Finland, June.
Powell, J. (1999). “Business planning and progress of small business firms engaged in technology development through the Advanced Technology Program”, NISTIR 6375, Gaithersburg, MD, October.
Powell, J. and Lellock, K. (2001) “Development, commercialization, and diffusion of enabling technologies: progress report”, NISTIR 6491, Gaithersburg, MD, April.
Punj, G. and Stewart, D. W. (1983). “Cluster analysis in marketing research: review and suggestions for application”, Journal of Marketing Research, 20, 134-148.
Quintas, P. and Guy, K. (1995). “Collaborative, pre-competitive R&D and the firm”, Research Policy, 24, 325-348.
Ruegg, R. (1996). “Guidelines for proposing economic evaluation studies, NISTIR-6896, Gaithersburg, MD, November.
Ruegg, R. (1999). “Advanced Technology Program’s approach to technology diffusion”, Paper presented at Advanced Research Workshop “Industry as a Stimulator of Technology Transfer.” NISTIR 6385, September.
Ruegg, R. and Feller, I. (2003). “A toolkit for evaluating public R&D investment models, methods, and findings from ATP''s first Decade”, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, NISTGCP 03-857.
Rumelt, R. P. (1984). “Towards a strategic theory of the firm”, in R.G. Lamb (ed.), Competitive Strategic Management, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 566-570.
Sakakibara, M. (1997). “Evaluating government-sponsored R&D consortia in Japan: who benefits and how?”, Research Policy, 26(4/5), 447.
Sakakibara, M. and Branstetter, L. (2002). “Measuring the impact of ATP-Funded research consortia on research productivity of participating firms: a framework using both U.S. and Japanese Data”, NIST GCR 02-830, Gaithersburg, MD, December.
Sanz-Menendez, L. (1995). “Policy choices, institutional constraints and policy learning: The Spanish science and technology policy in the eighties”, International Journal of Technology Management, 10(4/5/6), 622-641.
Schachtel, M. R. B. and Feldman, M. (2000). “Reinforcing interactions between the Advanced Technology Program and State Technology Programs: volume 1: a guide to State Business Assistance Programs for new technology creation and commercialization, NIST GCR 00-788, April.
Silber and Associates (1996). “Survey of Advanced Technology Program 1990-1992 awardees: company opinion about the ATP and its early effects”, Gaithersburg, MD, January.
Solomon Associates (1993) “Advanced Technology Program: an assessment of short-term impacts—first competition participants”, Gaithersburg, MD, February.
Strickland, A. J. and Thompson, A. A. (1998). “Crafting and Implementing strategy: Text and Readings”, Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA.
Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO). (2004). “2003 Annual Report”, Taipei: Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA), TIPO, May (in Chinese).
Teece, D. J. (1986), “Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy”, Research Policy, 15, 285-305.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997). “Dynamic capabilities and strategic management”, Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.
Wade, R. (1990). “Governing the Market: economic theory and the role of government in East Asian industrialization”, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Walwyn, D. (2007). “Finland and the mobile phone industry: a case study of the return on investment from government-funded research and development”, Technovation, 27, 335-341.
Watanabe, C., Tsuji,Y. S. and Griffy-Brown, C. (2001). “Patent statistics: deciphering a ‘real’ versus a ‘pseudo’ proxy of innovation”, Technovation, 21, 783-790.
Wernerfelt, B. (1984). “A Resource-based view of the firm”, Strategic Management Journal, 5, 171-180.
White, W. J. and Gallaher, M. P. (2002). “Benefits and costs of ATP investments in component-based software”, NISTIR GCR 02-834, Gaithersburg, MD, November.
Wonglimpiyarat, J. (2006). “The dynamic economic engine at Silicon Valley and US government programmes in financing innovations”, Technovation, 26, 1081-1089.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1114（臺灣：1102，外國：12） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1972506 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67787734
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上