Instruments of State Financial Support for Scientific Research and Development and Innovation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31767/su.2(109)2025.02.05Keywords:
scientific research and development (R&D), financing instruments, institutional funding, grants, innovation vouchers, equity financing, tax benefits, tax credits, Science, technology and innovation policy (STIP) Compass.Abstract
The article is devoted to the topical issues of state support for scientific, technical and innovative activities in order to create a favorable environment for the development and implementation of new technologies and innovations. Significant investments and time spent on the implementation of scientific research and development (R&D) and innovations make them risky for the private sector, so the state as an investor and regulator can reduce risks and create incentives for private investment. The instruments of financial state support for R&D and innovation used in the EU and OECD countries are identified. It is determined that, depending on the type of impact on the object, R&D financing methods are classified into direct (directly influence the decision-making of economic entities) and indirect (create the prerequisites for choosing development directions that meet the economic goals of the state and provide an opportunity to stimulate entrepreneurial initiative). The theoretical foundations of direct methods of stimulation implemented by the state using the following instruments are considered: institutional funding; project grants for public R&D projects; grants for business R&D and innovation; grants from centers of excellence; public procurement programs for R&D and services; loans and credits for innovative activities for enterprise; equity financing; innovation vouchers; scholarships and loans for young researchers. It is noted that the advantages of direct funding are the targeting of provision and the possibility of state control over the use of funds. However, conditions are created for lobbying and corruption, and the level of administrative costs for supporting state initiatives increases. Indirect methods of stimulation require deferred budgetary costs compared to direct financing. These include various tax regimes implemented through the use of instruments such as tax credits or social contribution credits, tax credits for individuals, debt guarantees and risk-sharing schemes. The article highlights the features of each of the above types of instruments and determines their impact on the implementation of scientific, technical and innovation policies that contribute to ensuring the country’s technological independence, sustainable development and strengthening national security.
Downloads
References
Helene A. F., & Ribeiro P. L. (2011). Brazilian scientific production, financial support, established investigators and doctoral graduates. Scientometrics, 89, 677–686. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0470-2
Morris M., & Herrmann O. J. (2013). Beyond surveys: The research frontier moves to the use of administrative data to evaluate R&D grants. Research Evaluation, 22, 5, 298–306. DOI: 10.1093/reseval/rvt020
Hong, J., Hong, S., Wang, L., Xu, Y., & Zhao, D. (2015). Government grants, private R&D funding and innovation efficiency in transition economy. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27 (9), 1068–1096, https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2015.1060310
Meuleman, M., & De Maeseneire, W. (2012). Do R&D subsidies affect SMEs’ access to external financing? Research Policy, 41, 3, 580–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.01.001
Guo, D., Guo, Y., & Jiang, K. (2022). Government R&D support and firms’ access to external financing: funding effects, certification effects, or both? Technovation, 115, 102469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102469
Conti, A. (2018). Conti Entrepreneurial finance and the effects of restrictions on government R&D subsidies Organization Science. 29 (1), 134–153. http://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1168
Zhao, B. & Ziedonis, R. (2020). State governments as financiers of technology startups: Evidence from Michigan’s R&D loan program. Research Policy, 49 (4), 103926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.103926
Moon, B. (2022). Unleash liquidity constraints or competitiveness potential the impact of R&D grant on external financing on innovation. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 28, 3, 100195. DOI: 10.1016/j.iedeen.2022.100195
Kuranda, T. K., & Kochetkova, O. P. (2021). Stan ta problemy finansuvannia naukovoi sfery za pidsumkamy monitorynhu [Status and problems of financing the scientific sphere as a result of monitoring]. Nauka, tekhnolohii, innovatsii – Science, Technologies, Innovations, 4 (20), 3–13. DОІ: http://doi.org/10.35668/2520-6524-2021-4-01 [in Ukrainian].
Koba V, Tarnovska І., & Vlasova V. (2022). Finansove zabezpechennia naukovykh doslidzhen v Ukraini: suchasnyi stan ta shliakhy pokrashchennia [Financial support of scientific research in Ukraine: state and ways of improvement]. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats DUIT. Seriia “Ekonomika i upravlinnia” – Collection of scientific papers of the State University of Infrastructure and Technologies. Series “Economics and Management”, 52, 33–40. DOI: 10.32703/2664-2964-2022-52-33-40 [in Ukrainian].
Khalatur, S., & Khalatur, O. (2019). Metodychnyi instrumentarii finansuvannia innovatsiinoi diialnosti v APK [Methodological tools for financing innovative activities in the agricultural sector]. Svit finansiv – World of Finance, 3, 60, 65–75. Retrieved from http://sf.wunu.edu.ua/index.php/sf/article/view/1245 [in Ukrainian].
Kropyvnytskyi, R. S. (2020). Zarubizhnyi dosvid derzhavnoho rehuliuvannia naukovoiu diialnistiu [Foreing experience of public regulation of scientific activity]. Naukovyi visnyk: Derzhavne upravlinnia – Scientific Bulletin: Public Administration, 4 (6), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.32689/2618-0065-2020-4(6)-143-159 [in Ukrainian].
Nykonchuk, V. (2020). Derzhavna pidtrymka orhanizatsii naukovykh doslidzhen v natsionalnii ekonomitsi Ukrainy [State support for the organization of scientific research in the national economy of Ukraine]. Ekonomichnyy prostir – Economic space, 156, 86–89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2224-6282/156-15 [in Ukrainian].
Zhukovych, І. A. (2024). Vytraty na naukovi doslidzhennia i rozrobky: metodolohichni zasady rozrakhunku ta svitovi tendentsii finansuvannia naukovoi sfery [R&D Spending: The Methodological Framework for Measurement and Global Tendencies in R&D Financing]. Statystyka Ukrainy – Statistics of Ukraine, 2, 35–45. Doi: 10.31767/su.2(105)2024.02.04 [in Ukrainian].
Frascati Manual 2015: Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental Development, The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities. (2015). OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239012-en
STIP Compass database. OECD. Retrieved March 20, 2025 from https://stip.oecd.org/stip/pages/about
Ukraine. Country dashboard. STIP Compass. OECD. Retrieved March 20, 2025 from https://stip.oecd.org/stip/interactive-dashboards/countries/Ukraine
Russo, M., & Pavone, P. (2019). What innovation policy mix does matter for which countries? Patterns emerging from multidimensional analysis on STIP Compass platform. Working paper, DEMB Working Paper Series, 152. https://doi.org/10.25431/11380_1196321
Sanz-Menéndez, L. & Cruz-Castro, L. (2020). Instruments and instrument mixes for knowledge transfer and science industry relations. A pilot analysis using STIP Compass database in selected countries. European Commission. Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. R&I Paper Series. Doi: 10.2777/578790
Borowiecki, M., Machado, D., Paunov, C. & Planes-Satorra, S. (2019). Supporting research for sustainable development. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, 78. DOI: 10.1787/6c9b7be4-en
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Statistics of Ukraine
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
