Industrial policy evaluation in the presence of spillovers
Tóm tắt
The shortage of studies on spatial spillovers of capital subsidy policies is rather surprising, considering that such policies are usually designed to generate spatial externalities. We propose a new framework that allows positive agglomeration effects to be contrasted with the negative cross-sectional substitution and the crowding-out effect. The global evaluation of the ATT and the spillover parameters shifts the spotlight from the policy effect on subsidised firms to the global effect of capital subsidy policies on the targeted territory. The empirical evaluation of a policy in Italy mainly directed towards small- and medium-sized firms shows that the impact on investments, turnover and employment is positive and large, but is negative on TFP. However, the employment growth is partially determined to the detriment of the untreated firms.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Accetturo, A., & de Blasio, G. (2012). Policies for local development: An evaluation of Italy's “Patti Territoriali”. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 42, 15–26. doi:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2011.04.005.
Arpino, B., & Mattei, A. (2016). Assessing the causal effects of financial aids to firms in Tuscany allowing for interference. Ann. Appl. Stat., 10(3), 1170–1194. doi:10.1214/15-AOAS902.
Barca, F., McCann, P., & Rodrìguez-Pose, A. (2012). The case for regional development intervention: Place-based versus place-neutral approaches. Journal of Regional Science, 52(1), 134–152. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9787.2011.00756.x.
Baum-Snow, N., & Ferreira, F. (2015). Causal inference in urban and regional economics. In G. Duranton, V. Henderson, & W. Strange (Eds.), Handbook of urban and regional economics 5 (pp. 3–68). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Becker, S. O., Egger, P. H., & von Ehrlich, M. (2013). Absorptive capacity and the growth and investment effects of regional transfers: A regression discontinuity design with heterogeneous treatment effects. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 5(4), 29–77. doi:10.1257/pol.5.4.29.
Bernini, C., & Pellegrini, G. (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. doi:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2011.01.005.
Blackwell, M., Iacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2009). Cem: Coarsened exact matching in Stata. The Stata Journal, 9(4), 524–546.
Blundell, R., & Costa Dias, M. (2009). Alternative approaches to evaluation in empirical microeconomics. Journal of Human Resources, 44(3), 565–640. doi:10.3368/jhr.44.3.565.
Bondonio, D. (2009). Impact identification strategies for evaluating business incentive programs. POLIS Working Paper, 129.
Borck, R., Hyun-Ju, K., & Pfluger, M. (2012). Inefficient lock-in and subsidy competition. International Economic Review, 53(4), 1179–1204. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2354.2012.00716.x.
Cainelli, G., Montresor, S., & Vittucci Marzetti, C. (2014). Spatial agglomeration and firm exit: A spatial dynamic analysis for Italian provinces. Small Business Economics, 43(1), 213–228. doi:10.1007/s11187-013-9532-6.
Cerqua, A., & Pellegrini, G. (2014). Do subsidies to private capital boost firms’ growth? A multiple regression discontinuity design approach. Journal of Public Economics, 109, 114–126. doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2013.11.005.
Criscuolo, C., Martin, R., Overman, H., & Van Reenen, J. (2016). The causal effects of an industrial policy. CEP Discussion Paper 1113.
De Castris, M., & Pellegrini, G. (2012). Evaluation of spatial effects of capital subsidies in the south of Italy. Regional Studies, 46(4), 525–538. doi:10.1080/00343404.2010.509130.
Decramer, S., & Vanormelingen, S. (2016). The effectiveness of investment subsidies: Evidence from a regression discontinuity design. Small Business Economics, published online: 22 June 2016. doi:10.1007/s11187-016-9749-2
Devereux, M., Griffith, R., & Simpson, H. (2007). Firm location decisions, regional grants and agglomeration externalities. Journal of Public Economics, 91(3–4), 413–435. doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2006.12.002.
Drucker, J. (2012). The spatial extent of agglomeration economies: Evidence from three U.S. manufacturing industries. Center for Economic Studies, 12–01.
Einiö, E., & Overman, H.G. (2016). The (displacement) effects of spatially targeted enterprise initiatives: Evidence from UK LEGI. SERC Discussion paper 191.
Espa, G., Arbia, G., & Giuliani, D. (2013). Conditional versus unconditional industrial agglomeration: Disentangling spatial dependence and spatial heterogeneity in the analysis of ICT firms’ distribution in Milan. Journal of Geographical Systems, 15(1), 31–50. doi:10.1007/s10109-012-0163-2.
Faini, R. (1999). Trade unions and regional development. European Economic Review, 43, 457–474. doi:10.1016/S0014-2921(98)00062-2.
GEFRA-IAB (2010). Final Report, Work Package 6c: Enterprise support - an exploratory study using counterfactual methods on available data from Germany. Ex post evaluation of cohesion policy programmes 2000–2006 financed by the European regional development fund, June 2010.
Goolsbee, A. (1998). Investment tax incentives, prices, and the supply of capital goods. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113, 121–148. doi:10.1162/003355398555540.
Ham, J. C., Swenson, C., Imrohoroglu, A., & Song, H. (2011). Government programs can improve local labor markets: Evidence from state enterprise zones, federal empowerment zones and federal enterprise community. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7–8), 779–797. doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.11.027.
Hanson, A., & Rohlin, S. (2013). Do spatially targeted redevelopment programs spillover? Regional Science and Urban Economics, 43(1), 86–100. doi:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2012.05.002.
Hong, G., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2013). Heterogeneous agents, social interactions, and causal inference. In S. L. Morgan (Ed.), Handbook of causal analysis for social research (pp. 331–352). Houten: Springer Netherlands.
Iacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2011). Multivariate matching methods that are monotonic imbalance bounding. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 106(493), 345–361. doi:10.1198/jasa.2011.tm09599.
Iacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2012). Causal inference without balance checking: Coarsened exact matching. Political Analysis, 20, 1–24. doi:10.1093/pan/mpr013.
Johansson, B. (2004). Parsing the menagerie of agglomeration and network externalities. CESIS Electronic Working Paper Series, 2, Royal Institute of Technology.
Kline, P., & Moretti, E. (2014). Local economic development, agglomeration economies, and the big push: 100 years of evidence from the Tennessee valley authority. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129, 275–331. doi:10.1093/qje/qjt034.
Manski, C. (1993). Identification of endogenous social effects: The reflection problem. Review of Economic Studies, 60, 531–542. doi:10.2307/2298123.
Mealli, F., Pacini, B., & Rubin, D. B. (2011). Statistical inference for causal effects. In R. S. Kenett & S. Salini (Eds.), Modern analysis of customer satisfaction surveys: With applications using R (pp. 173–192). Chichester: Wiley.
Neumark, D., & Kolko, J. (2010). Do enterprise zones create jobs? Evidence from California’s enterprise zone program. Journal of Urban Economics, 68(1), 1–19. doi:10.1016/j.jue.2010.01.002.
Neumark, D., & Simpson, H. (2015). Place-based policies. In G. Duranton, V. Henderson, & W. Strange (Eds.), Handbook of urban and regional economics 5 (pp. 1197–1287). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Pike, A., Rodrìguez-Pose, A., & Tomaney, J. (2006). Local and regional development. London: Routledge.
Rosenthal, S. S., & Strange, W. C. (2003). Geography, industrial organization, and agglomeration. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(2), 377–393. doi:10.1162/003465303765299882.
Rubin, D. B. (1986). Comment: Which ifs have causal answers. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81, 961–962. doi:10.1080/01621459.1986.10478355.
Syverson, C. (2014). The importance of measuring dispersion in firm-level outcomes. IZA World of Labor, 53. doi: 10.15185/izawol.53