Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society (기술혁신학회지)

Korea Technology Innovation Society (한국기술혁신학회)
권호 표지

Study on the Overlapping Effect of Certification Policies: Focusing on the ICT Industry

벤처인증정책과 이노비즈인증정책의 중복효과에 대한 연구: ICT산업을 중심으로

  • 오승환 (과학기술정책연구원) ;
  • 심동녘 (서울대학교 기술경영경제정책 협동과정) ;
  • 김규남 (정보통신정책연구원)
  • Received : 2015.03.04
  • Accepted : 2015.06.29
  • Published : 2015.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to evaluate policy impact of Inno-biz verification and Venture verification, especially focusing on the complementarity effect according to the overlapped support in Korean ICT industry. Alongside the implementation of various government innovation policies, discussions regarding evaluations of such policies have been consistently undertaken in economics, because it is very important to evaluate whether public policies have played a proper role. However, one of the distinguished point of this research from previous studies is that this paper not only includes evaluations of a single policy, but also the discussion about interaction between different innovation policies. The main result of this paper is that, in the case of overlapping homogeneous policies such as Inno-biz and venture verification, the complementarity effect is negative. Compared with previous studies, the uniqueness of this research is as follows. First, deviating from the view of previous studies that focused on the evaluation of a single policy, this paper has considered interactions and the complementarity effect of innovation policy through "policy mix," an economic term. Second, based on this concept, the paper suggests an analysis framework for the evaluation of interactions and the complementarity effect of innovation policy.

본 논문에서는 유사한 성격을 지닌 정부 혁신 정책의 이중지원으로 발생하는 중복효과에 대해서 살펴보고자 하였다. 이를 위해 혁신형 중소기업에 대한 대표적인 지원정책인 벤처인증정책과 이노비즈인증 정책을 대상으로 중복지원의 효과에 대한 분석을 수행하였으며, 특히 혁신형 중소기업들이 다수 분포되어 있는 ICT 산업에 초점을 맞추어 논의를 진행하였다. 또한 정부의 정책 지원에 따른 성과 평가를 함에 있어서 흔히 발생할 수 있는 선택편의 문제를 해결하기 위해 성향점수매칭법(Propensity score matching)을 활용하였다. 분석 결과를 살펴보면 두 정책을 중복으로 지원받고 있는 기업들은 하나의 정책만을 지원받는 기업들보다 기업의 성장성, 자금조달능력, 혁신성 등에서 양의 효과가 나타남을 확인할 수 있었다. 이 결과를 그대로 받아들이면 인증 정책의 중복 지원은 크게 문제가 되지 않는 것으로 해석될 수 있다. 하지만 본 논문에서 제시하고 있는 중복 효과 개념에서 바라보면 이 결과는 다른 해석이 가능하다. 우선, 기업의 성장성을 보여주는 종업원수 증가율에서 벤처인증과 이노비즈인증은 시너지 효과가 나타났는데, 이는 정부로부터의 복수의 지원을 받은 기업들이 고용 시장에 더 유리한 위치를 선점할 수 있다는 것을 보여주는 결과이다. 반면, 기업의 자금조달능력이나 혁신성 지표에서는 중복 효과는 비효율적임을 확인할 수 있었다. 이는 정부가 정책을 지원함에 있어서 이미 정책 지원을 받고 있는 기업에게 정책을 중복하여 지원하는 방식보다는 아직 정부로부터 정책 지원을 받지 못한 기업들에게 지원하는 방식이 더 큰 정책 효과를 보일 수 있음을 시사하는 결과라고 볼 수 있다. 특히, 벤처인증이나 이노비즈인증은 기업의 혁신역량을 강화하려는 목표를 가지고 있다는 점에서 지원 받은 기업의 혁신성과가 더 크게 나타날 수 있도록 관련 협회 간 기능 조정이나 제도 정비가 필요할 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. 유연우.노재확 (2011), "제조 벤처기업에 대한 벤처인증과 이노비즈 인증의 효과 차이 분석", 기술혁신학회지, 14(4): 1000-1023.
  2. 중소기업청 (2010), 벤처기업 육성에 관한 특별조치법.
  3. 중소기업청 (2010), 중소기업기술혁신촉진법.
  4. Amir, R. (2005), "Supermodularity and Complementarity in Economics: An Elementary Survey", Southern Economic Journal, 71(3): 636-660. https://doi.org/10.2307/20062066
  5. Aziz, J. and Westcott, R. F. (1997), Policy Complementarities and the Washington Consensus, International Monetary Fund.
  6. Bache, I. and Flinders, M. (2004), Multi-level Governance, Oxford University Press.
  7. Borras, S. (2008), The Widening and Deepening of Innovation Policy: What Conditions Provide for Effective Governance?, PRIME International Conference 2008.
  8. Branscomb, L. M. and Florida, R. (1998), "Challenges to Technology Policy in a Changing World", Chemtech, 28(6): 13-22.
  9. Caliendo, M. (2006), Microeconometric Evaluation of Labour Market Policies, Springer Science & Business Media.
  10. Dawid, A. P. (1979) "Conditional Independence in Statistical Theory", Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Methodological), 41(1): 1-31.
  11. De Macedo, J. B. and Martins, J. O. (2008), "Growth, Reform Indicators and Policy Complementarities", Economics of Transition, 16(2): 141-164. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0351.2008.00323.x
  12. Dosi, G. (1988), "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation", Journal of Economic Literature, 26(3): 1120-1171.
  13. Dunleavy, P. and Hood, C. (1994), "From Old Public Administration to New Public Management", Public Money & Management, 14(3): 9-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540969409387823
  14. Edler, J. and Georghiou, L. (2007), "Public Procurement and Innovation-Resurrecting the Demand Side", Research Policy, 36(7): 949-963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.03.003
  15. Edquist, C., Hommen, L. and Tsipouri, L. J. (2000), Public Technology Procurement and Innovation, Massachusetts Norwell: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  16. Flanagan, K., Uyarra, E. and Laranja, M. (2011), "Reconceptualising the 'Policy Mix' for Innovation", Research Policy, 40(5): 702-713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.02.005
  17. Gore, A. (1993), From Red Tape to Results: Creating a Government That Works Better & Costs Less, Washington, DC.: Office of the Vice President.
  18. Ichniowski, C., Shaw, K. and Prennushi, G. (1997), "The Effects of Human Resource Management Practices on Productivity: A Study of Steel Finishing Lines", The American Economic Review, 87(3): 291-313.
  19. Landau, M. (1969), "Redundancy, Rationality, and the Problem of Duplication and Overlap", Public Administration Review, 29(4): 346-358. https://doi.org/10.2307/973247
  20. Lerner, J. (2002), "When Bureaucrats Meet Entrepreneurs: The Design of Effective Public Venture Capital Programmes", The Economic Journal, 112(477): 73-84. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00684
  21. Milgrom, P. and Roberts, J. (1995), "Complementarities and Fit Strategy, Structure, and Organizational Change in Manufacturing", Journal of Accounting and Economics, 19(2): 179-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(94)00382-F
  22. Mohnen, P. and Roller, L.-H. (2005), "Complementarities in Innovation Policy", European Economic Review, 49(6): 1431-1450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2003.12.003
  23. Morlacchi, P. and Martin, B. R. (2009), "Emerging Challenges for Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Research: A Reflexive Overview", Research Policy, 38(4): 571-582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.01.021
  24. Mundell, R. A. (1962), "The Appropriate Use of Monetary and Fiscal Policy for Internal and External Stability". In Ugur, M. (Ed.), An Open Economy Macroeconomics Reader, New York : Routledge Press, 132-138.
  25. Nauwelaers, C. and Wintjes, R. (2008), Innovation Policy in Europe: Measurement and Strategy, Cheltenham : Edward Elgar Press.
  26. Neyman, J. and Iwaszkiewicz, K. (1935), "Statistical Problems in Agricultural Experimentation", Supplement to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 2(2): 107-180. https://doi.org/10.2307/2983637
  27. Osborne, D. (1993), "Reinventing Government", Public Productivity & Management Review, 16(4): 349-356. https://doi.org/10.2307/3381012
  28. Quandt, R. E. (1972), "A New Approach to Estimating Switching Regressions", Journal of the American Statistical Association, 67(338): 306-310. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1972.10482378
  29. Rammer, C., Sellenthin, O. and Holmberg, R. (2007), "Monitoring and Analysis of Policies and Public Financing Instruments Conducive to Higher Levels of R&D Investments", Retrieved from Czech Republic, The "Policy Mix" Project.
  30. Ringeling, A. (2005), "Instruments in Four: The Elements of Policy Design", In Eliadis, P., Hill, M. M. and Howlett, M. (Ed.), Designing Government: From Instruments to Governance, Montreal: McGill-Queen's Press-MQUP, 185-202.
  31. Rosenbaum, P. R. and Rubin, D. B. (1983), "The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects", Biometrika, 70(1): 41-55. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/70.1.41
  32. Rubin, D. B. (1974), "Estimating Causal Effects of Treatments in Randomized and Nonrandomized Studies", Journal of Educational Psychology, 66(5): 688. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037350
  33. Smith, K. (1994), New Directions in Research and Technology Policy: Identifying the Key Issues. Retrieved from The STEP Group.
  34. Soete, L. and Corpakis, D. (2003), R&D for Competitiveness and Employment-The role of Benchmarking, Retrieved from IPTS.
  35. Topkis, D. M. (1998), Supermodularity and Complementarity, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  36. Vives, X. (1990), "Nash Equilibrium with Strategic Complementarities", Journal of Mathematical Economics, 19(3): 305-321. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4068(90)90005-T
  37. Wieczorek, A. J., Hekkert, M. P. and Smits, R. E. (2009), Contemporary Innovation Policy and Instruments: Challenges and Implications, Retrieved from Utrecht University, Program on Department of Innovation Studies.
  38. Witt, U. (2003), "Economic Policy Making in Evolutionary Perspective", Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 13(2): 77-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-003-0148-x