• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.1-48
• /
• 2009

Recently we have found some symptoms that R&D fiscal incentives might not work well what it has intended through the analysis of current statistics of firm's R&D data. Firstly, we found that the growth rate of R&D investment in private sector during the recent decade has been slowdown. The average of growth rate (real value) of R&D investment is 7.1% from 1998 to 2005, while it was 13.9% from 1980 to 1997. Secondly, the relative share of R&D investment of SME has been decreased to 21%('05) from 29%('01), even though the tax credit for SME has been more beneficial than large size firm, Thirdly, The R&D expenditure of large size firms (besides 3 leading firms) has not been increased since late of 1990s. We need to find some evidence whether fiscal incentives are effective in increasing firm's R&D investment. To analyse econometric model we use firm level unbalanced panel data for 4 years (from 2002 to 2005) derived from MOST database compiled from the annual survey, "Report on the Survey of Research and Development in Science and Technology". Also we use fixed effect model (Hausman test results accept fixed effect model with 1% of significant level) and estimate the model for all firms, large firms and SME respectively. We have following results from the analysis of econometric model. For large firm: i ) R&D investment responds elastically (1.20) to sales volume. ii) government R&D subsidy induces R&D investment (0.03) not so effectively. iii) Tax price elasticity is almost unity (-0.99). iv) For large firm tax incentive is more effective than R&D subsidy For SME: i ) Sales volume increase R&D investment of SME (0.043) not so effectively. ii ) government R&D subsidy is crowding out R&D investment of SME not seriously (-0.0079) iii) Tax price elasticity is very inelastic (-0.054) To compare with other studies, Koga(2003) has a similar result of tax price elasticity for Japanese firm (-1.0036), Hall((l992) has a unit tax price elasticity, Bloom et al. (2002) has $-0.354{\sim}-0.124$ in the short run. From the results of our analysis we recommend that government R&D subsidy has to focus on such an areas like basic research and public sector (defense, energy, health etc.) not overlapped private R&D sector. For SME government has to focus on establishing R&D infrastructure. To promote tax incentive policy, we need to strengthen the tax incentive scheme for large size firm's R&D investment. We recommend tax credit for large size film be extended to total volume of R&D investment.

• Proceedings of the Korea Technology Innovation Society Conference
• /
• 2012.05a
• /
• pp.85-98
• /
• 2012

• NEWSLETTER 전기공업
• /
• no.98-4 s.197
• /
• pp.3-7
• /
• 1998

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.436-446
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this study is to examine the priorities of innovation activities, business performance, and maximization factors of SMEs. Support programs for each government department are operated by various industries. Various supports, including subsidies, grants, marketing, planning, and education, are provided to each company. Therefore, this study aims to analyze and identify the priorities of innovation activities that have a positive effect on business performance. The efficacy of the proposed model and the psychometric properties of structure were analyzed using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The hierarchical structure of corporate innovation activities are composed of 'R&D' and 'government support', and 'Inside R&D, Outsourcing R &D, Consortium R&D'. As a result of analyzing companies that received more than one type of R&D government support, it can be seen that 'government support' (72.1%) is more important than 'research and development' (27.8%). In addition, this study found key sub-factors loadings including Assistant Support (30.1%), Tax Support (22.7%), Funding Support (18.8%), Inside R&D (10.8%), Outsourcing R&D (10.3%), and Consortium R&D (7.2%). Analysis results suggest that the priorities of detailed innovation activities of R&D and government support affect product innovation and process innovation, which in turn, influence business performance and maximization of SMEs. This implies that SMEs who want to participate in the government support project will be helpful in setting the direction of innovation activities. This study also suggests the importance of strategic priorities among the decision elements for CEOs.

• 전기산업
• /
• v.1 no.3
• /
• pp.38-43
• /
• 1990

• Proceedings of the Korea Technology Innovation Society Conference
• /
• 2014.10a
• /
• pp.426-442
• /
• 2014

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.99-121
• /
• 2010

The goal of this paper is to analyze the effects of various firm characteristics on the probability for a firm to receive government’s financial supports for R&D. In the empirical analysis, a Probit model is estimated for the 2008 Korea Innovation Survey data. The main contribution of the paper is to investigate the distribution of R&D supports at the national level, instead of the program level. Especially, it is the first academic effort to evaluate the effects of regional and industrial variables. The results show that: (1) firm size and export increase the probability of receiving government’s R&D support; (2) variables measuring firms’ innovative ability, such as official designation as innovative firm, running R&D institute, number of R&D personnel, also have significantly positive effects; (3) firms in the chemical and automobile industries are more likely to receive R&D supports; and (4) firms in Teakyoung and Bukyoung regions are more likely to receive R&D supports.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.57-104
• /
• 2022

The government has supported the innovation of private firms by intervening the market for various purposes, such as preventing market failure, alleviating information asymmetry, and allocating resources efficiently. Although the government's R&D budget increased rapidly in the 2000s, it is not clear whether the government intervention has made desirable impact on the market. To address this, the current study attempts to explore this issue by doing a systematic literature review on foreign and domestic papers in an integrated way. In total, 168 studies are analyzed using contents analysis approach and various lens, such as policy additionality, policy tools, firm size, unit of analysis, data and method, are adopted for analysis. Overlapping policy target, time lag between government intervention and policy effects, non-linearity of financial supports, interference between different polices, and out-dated R&D tax incentive system are reported as factors hampering the effect of the government intervention. Many policy prescriptions, such as program evaluation indices reflecting behavioral additionality, an introduction of policy mix and evidence-based policy using machine learning, are suggested to improve these hurdles.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.2 no.2
• /
• pp.219-232
• /
• 1999

연구개발 지원산업은 연구개발 활동을 직·간접적으로 지원하는 산업을 의미한다. 이러한 산업에 대한 개념화는 연구개발 활동의 전문화(professionalization), 분업화(division of labor)가 진행되고 있음을 의미하는 동시에 연구개발체제의 유연성 제고 및 고도화, 효율화가 이루어지고 있음을 나타내고 있다. 우리의 경우 (과학기술혁신을 위한 특별법) 제 15조 등을 통하여 연구개발 지원사업에 대한 특별지원제도의 시행을 명시하고 있으나 현재까지 연구개발 지원사업자를 지정·육성하기 위한 기본현황 파악이나 분석이 이루어지지 않은 실정이다. 본고는 이러한 수요를 반영하여 국내에서의 연구개발 지원산업에 대한 수요를 중심으로 실태를 파악 ·분석하는 동시에 산업지원 육성방안을 제시하고 있다. 국내 연구개발 지원산업의 규모를 추정해 보면 97년 현재 약 3,000억원에서 4,000억원의 규모로 나타나며, 이중 기술정보서비스업이 약 27.0%, 연구장비 및 시험 ·평가 ·검색 ·분석업이 약 38.4%, 연구개발 설계·자문업 등 기타사업이 34.6% 로 나타나고 있다. 연구개발지원 기능은 시험·검사 기능과 기술정보제공 기능이 대부분을 차지하고 있고, 전자의 경우는 내부처리의 비중이 높고 후자의 경우 외부의 전문기관을 이용하는 비중이 높게 나타나고 있다. 특히 기업이 연구개발활동 수행시에 필요한 지원기능을 외부에 위탁할 경우에 느끼는 애로사항은 첫째, 외부 전문위탁기관의 부족 및 정보 미흡이 가장 크고, 둘째, 전문기관의 해외정보력·경쟁력 부족이 다음이며, 공공기관의 지원기능이 미흡하다는 애로사항에 대한 비중이 상대적으로 낮게 나타나고 있다. 연구개발 지원산업을 특별지원·육성하기 위한 기본관점은 특별법의 시행령을 구체적으로 실행하기 위한 시행계획의 수립과 연구개발 지원산업의 육성 시책의 추진 절차의 결정, 사업자 선정, 지원 사항 등으로 제시될 수 있다. 먼저, 기업 연구개발활동의 고도화·효율화를 위해 연구개발 및 기술개량에 필요한 업무 중 기술정보서비스와 연구시험·평가·검사·분석 그리고 중소기업 기술집약화를 지원하는 사업 등을 연구개발 지원산업으로 범위를 정할 필요성이 있다. 다음으로 연구개발 지원사업자를 별도로 선정·인정하는 방식으로 지원해야 할 필요성이 있다. 기존의 산업 지원방식으로는 연구개발 지원기능이 주된 활동으로 인정받을 수 없으므로 국내 연구개발 지원기능의 발전에 한계가 있다. 따라서 취약한 여건을 감안하여 연구개발 지원산업을 육성하지 않게 되면, 각 분야별로 민간사업자의 참여가 거의 이루어지지 않거나, 참여해도 연구개발 지원 기능의 발전보다는 기존의 사업이 주가 될 가능성이 크다. 연구개발 지원 사업자의 지정 지원방식과는 별도로 이루어질 수 있는 지원활동에 대한 지원은 기업회계처리상의 문제와 일관성이 있는 시책추진 및 효과를 기대하기 어렵기 때문에 사전에 동산업의 참여 자격·능력을 갖춘 사업자에 대해서는 제한없이 참여할 수 있도록 Positive System으로 추진해야 할 것이다. 그리고 연구개발 지원사업자에 대한 지원내용을 조세·금융 등 직접적 지원과 타 제도와의 연계지원 그리고 정부구매 등 시장지원 등이 아울러 다양하게 추진될 필요가 있다.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.27 no.1
• /
• pp.1-43
• /
• 2019

The significance of SMEs (small and medium-sized enterprises) is gradually highlighted as we have entered the age of "New Normal." The South Korean government support these enterprises to boost economic growth and create more jobs. It also releases numerous policies such as national R&D projects and expanding tax incentive services particularly aiming at promoting dramatic investment in R&D and technological innovation. There is a sharp contrast regarding the efficiency of direct or indirect supports for encouraging R&D investment launched by SMEs depending on researchers. However, there has been little attempt to explore the optimal combination of two policy tools. Amid promoting affiliated governmental departments in charge of SMEs policies and constantly growing R&D investment, it is an appropriate time to discuss the medium and long-term direction for the optimal policy mix of direct and indirect supports. In this study, the author obtained 32 relevant studies published earlier in the domestic journals, explored literatures more systematically, and further conducted a meta-analysis. It is dedicated to summarizing relevant controversies and organizes them empirically beyond merely verifying whether policy support stimulates private R&D investment by SMEs. The meta-analysis showed that it would be effective to support as tax for large enterprises, while subsidiary support for SMEs. However, indirect support needs to be progressively increased as direct support primarily accounts for the entire R&D support for South Korean SMEs.