Measuring relative efficiency of government-sponsored R&D projects: A three-stage approach

Evaluation and Program Planning

Volumn 32, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 178-186

  Hsu, Fang Ming ^a   Hsueh, Chao Chih ^b  

^a NATIONAL DONG HWA UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b YUANPEI UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Data envelopment analysis; Government sponsored R D project; Relative efficiency; Tobit regression

Indexed keywords

DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS; FIRM SIZE; POLICY MAKING; PUBLIC SPENDING; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT; SUBSIDY SYSTEM; TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY;

ARTICLE; ECONOMICS; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; QUALITY CONTROL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TAIWAN; PROCEDURES; PROGRAM EVALUATION;

BENCHMARKING; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; EFFICIENCY, ORGANIZATIONAL; GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS; HUMANS; MODELS, ORGANIZATIONAL; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; PROGRAM EVALUATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RESEARCH SUPPORT AS TOPIC; TAIWAN;

ASIA; EURASIA; FAR EAST; TAIWAN;

EID: 61449123128     PISSN: 01497189     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2008.10.005     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Acs Z.J., and Audretsch D.B. Innovation in large and small firms: A empirical analysis. American Economic Review 78 (1988) 678-690
2. Bach L., Conde-Molist M.J., Ledoux M.M., and Schaeffer V. Evaluation of the economic effects of BRITEEURAM programmes on the European industry. Scientometrics 34 (1995) 325-349
3. Backes-Gellner U., and Sadowski D. Organizational implementation of bibliometric indicators. Scientometrics 18 (1990) 385-395
4. Banker R.D., Charnes A., and Cooper W.W. Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiency in data envelopment analysis. Management Science 30 (1984) 1078-1092
5. Bizan O. The determinants of success of R&D projects: Evidence from American Israeli Research alliances. Research Policy 32 (2003) 1619-1640
6. Buisseret T.J., Cameron H., and Georghiou L. What difference does it make? Additionality in the public support of R&D in large firms. International Journal of Technology Management 10 4-6 (1995) 587-600
7. Chapelle K., and Plane P. Productive efficiency in the Ivorian manufacturing sector: An exploratory study using a data envelopment analysis approach. The Developing Economies 43 4 (2005) 450-471
8. Charnes A., Cooper W.W., and Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research 2 (1978) 429-444
9. Clarysse B. Study and evaluation of the behavioural additionality of R&D subsidies (2006), IWT, Brussels
10. Coelli T., Prasada-Rao D.S., O'Donnell J., and Battese G.E. An introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis. 2th ed. (1998), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston
11. Corley E.A. A use-and-transformation model for evaluating public R&D: Illustrations from polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) research. Evaluation and Program Planning 30 (2007) 21-35
12. Davenport S., Grimes C., and Davies J. Research collaboration and behavioural additionality: A New Zealand case study. Technological Analysis and Strategic Management 10 1 (1998) 55-67
13. Drake L., Gall M.J.B., and Simper R. The impact of macroeconomic and regulatory factors on bank efficiency: A non-parametric analysis of Hong Kong's banking system. Journal of Banking & Finance 30 5 (2006) 1443-1466
14. Farrell M.J. The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A (General) 120 3 (1957) 253-290
15. Farris J.A., Groesbeck R.L., Van-Aken E.M., and Letens G. Evaluating the relative performance of engineering design projects: A case study using data envelopment analysis. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 53 3 (2006) 471-482
16. Fried H.O., Schmidt S.S., and Yaisawarng S. Incorporating the operating environment into a nonparametric measure of technical efficiency. Journal of Productivity Analysis 12 (1999) 249-267
17. Georghiou L. Socio-economic effects of collaborative R&D-European experiences. Journal of Technology Transfer 24 1 (1999) 69
18. GIO. Taiwan yearbook 2004 (2004), Government Information Office, Taipei
19. Glass C.J., McCallion G., and McKillop D.G. Implications of variant efficiency measures for policy evaluations in UK higher education. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 40 (2006) 119-142
20. Griliches Z. Patent statistics as economic indicator: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature 18 4 (1990) 1661-1707
21. Hagedoorn J., and Cloodt M. Measuring innovative performance: Is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?. Research Policy 32 (2003) 1365-1379
22. Hobday M., Rush H., and Martin J.A. Approaching the innovation frontier in Korea: The transition phases to leadership. Research Policy 33 (2004) 1433-1457
23. Iraizoz B., Rapun M., and Zabaleta I. Assessing the technical efficiency of horticultural production in Navarra, Spain. Agricultural Systems 78 (2003) 387-403
24. Jaffe A.B. Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: Evidence from firms' patents, profits, and market value. American Economic Review 76 (1986) 984-1001
25. Lee J.Y. Application of the three-stage DEA in measuring efficiency-An empirical evidence. Applied Economics Letters 15 (2008) 49-52
26. Levin R.C., Klevorick A.K., Nelson R.R., and Winter S.G. Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 3 (1987) 783-820
27. Linton J.D., Walsh S.T., and Morabito J. Analysis, ranking and selection of R&D projects in a portfolio. R&D Management 32 2 (2002) 139
28. Lin B.W., Lee Y., and Hung S.C. R&D intensity and commercialization orientation effects on financial performance. Journal of Business Research 59 (2006) 679-685
29. Luukkonen T. The difficulties in assessing the impact of EU Framework Programmes. Research Policy 27 (1998) 599-610
30. Luukkonen T. Additionality of EU Framework Programmes. Research Policy 29 (2000) 711-724
31. Mark M.M., Henry G.T., and Julnes G. Evaluation: An integrated framework for understanding, guiding and improving policies and programs (2000), Jossey-Bass, San-Francisco, CA
32. McDonough E.F. Faster new product development: Investigating the effects of technology and characteristics of the project leader and team. Journal of Product Innovation Management 10 (1993) 241-250
33. National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST. ATP proposal preparation kit (2007), NIST, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-4701
34. O'Brien J.P. The capital structure implications of pursuing a strategy of innovation. Strategic Management Journal 24 5 (2003) 415-431
35. OECD. Proposed guidelines for collection and interpreting technological innovation data (Oslo Manual) (1997), Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France
36. Powell J., and Lellock K. Development, commercialization, and diffusion of enabling technologies: Progress report (2000), National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD NISTIR 6491
37. Premkumar G., Ramamurphy K., and Grum M. Determinants of EDI adoption in the transportation industry. European Journal of Information Systems 6 (1997) 107-121
38. Revilla E., Sarkis J., and Modrego A. Evaluating performance of public-private research collaborations: A DEA analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society 54 (2003) 165-174
39. Ruegg R., and Feller I. A toolkit for evaluating public R&D investment models, methods, and findings from ATP's first decade (2003), National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD NISTGCP 03-857
40. Science and Technology Advisory Group of Executive Yuan, STAG. In 2005-2007 the survey on the supply and demand of R&D engineers (2006), STAG, Taipei (in Chinese)
41. Seiford L.M., and Zhu J. Infeasibility of super efficiency data envelopment analysis models. INFOR 37 2 (1999) 174-187
42. Shang J.K., Hung W.T., Lo C.F., and Wang F.C. Ecommerce and hotel performance: Three-stage DEA analysis. The Service Industries Journal 28 4 (2008) 529-540
43. Sohn S.Y., and Moon T.H. Structural equation model for predicting technology commercialization success index (TCSI). Technological Forecasting & Social Change 70 9 (2003) 819-969
44. Sohn S.Y., and Moon T.H. Decision tree based on data envelopment analysis for effective technology commercialization. Expert Systems with Applications 26 (2004) 279-284
45. Sohn S.Y., Joo Y.G., and Han H.K. Structural equation model for the evaluation of national funding on R&D project of SMEs in consideration with MBNQA criteria. Evaluation and Program Planning 30 (2007) 10-20
46. Tatikonda M.V., and Rosenthal S.R. Technology novelty, project complexity, and product development project execution success: A deeper look at task uncertainty in product innovation. IEEE Transaction Engineering Management 47 (2000) 74-87
47. Tatikonda M.V., and Montoya-Weiss M.M. Integrating operations and marketing perspectives of product innovation: The influence of organizational process factors and capabilities on development performance. Management Science 47 (2001) 151-172
48. Teece D.J., Pisano G., and Shuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal 18 7 (1997) 509-533
49. Thong J., and Yap C. CEO characteristics, organizational characteristics and information technology adoption in small business. Omega 23 4 (1995) 429-442
50. Vossen R.W., and Nooteboom B. Firm size and participation in R&D. In: Kleinknecht A. (Ed). Determinants of innovation-the message from new indicators (1996), Macmillan Press 155-168
51. Walwyn D. Finland and the mobile phone industry: A case study of the return on investment from government-funded research and development. Technovation 27 (2007) 335-341
52. Wang E.C., and Huang W. Across-country study accounting for environmental factors in the DEA approach. Research Policy 36 (2007) 260-273