Skip to main content
Log in

Choosing government R&D policies: Tax incentives vs. direct funding

  • Published:
Review of Industrial Organization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A major policy debate continues in many industrialized nations over the rationales for government support of technology development. This debate is unstructured due to the weakness of the underlying economics. Government intervention at any stage in the economic process is based on the recognition of market failure. In the case of technology-based markets, a rather vague allusion to excessive risk is often the best rationale put forward. Real risk/reward ratios are often distorted, leading to underinvestment, but the causes are several and vary significantly in character. As a result of this variance, the appropriate policy response also varies, ranging from varying tax incentives to direct government funding of R&D.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, J. and A. Jaffe (forthcoming), ‘On the Microeconomics of R&D Spillovers’, in Louis Lefebvre, (ed.), Technology Management, Paul Chapman Publishers, Ltd.

  • Bozeman, B. and A., Link, ‘Public Support for R&D: The Case of the Research Tax Credit’, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 4, 370–382.

  • Corcoran, Elizabeth (1994), ‘The Changing Nature of U.S. Corporate Research Labs’, Research Technology Management, (July–August), 14–20.

  • Council on Competitiveness (1996), Endless Frontier — Finite Resources: U.S. R&D Policy for Competitiveness, Washington, DC.

  • Fazzari and Herzon (1995), Capital Gains Tax Cuts, Investment and Growth, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY: The Jerome Levy Economics Institute of Bard College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geppert, Linda (1994), ‘Industrial R&D: the New Priorities’, IEEE Spectrum, (September), 30–41.

  • Hall, Bronwyn H. (1993), ‘R&D Tax Policy During the Eighties: Success or Failure?’, Tax Policy and The Economy, 7, 1–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, Charles F. (1994), ‘Trends in U.S. Industrial Research and Development’, in AAAS Science and Technology Policy Yearbook, Washington DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leyden, D. and A. N. Link (1992), Government's Role in Innovation, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N. And G. Tassey (1993), ‘The Technology Infrastructure of Firms: Investments in Infratechnology’, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 40(3), (August).

  • Link, A. N. (1995), ‘Fiscal Measures to Promote R&D and Innovation: Trends and Issues’, Opening Address, Conference on Fiscal Measures to Promote R&D and Innovation. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (January).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, Edwin et al. (1977), ‘Social and Private Rates of Return from Industrial Innovations’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 91 (May), 221–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation (1995a), National Patterns of R&D Resources: 1994. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, Science Resources Studies Division (NSF 95–304).

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation (1995b), Science and Engineering Indicators — 1995, Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, National Science Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) (1994), Science and Technology Policy: Review and Outloo,, 1994, Paris, France.

  • Office of Technology Assessment (1995), The Effectiveness of Research and Experimentation Tax Credits, Washington, DC: Congress of the United States (September).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoffregen, Philip A., (1995), ‘Giving Credit Where Credit is Due: A Brief History of the Administration of the R&D Credit’, Tax Notes (January 16), pp. 403–417.

  • Tassey, Gregory (1992), Technology Infrastructure and Competitive Position, Norwell, MA: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tassey, Gregory (1995a), Technology and Economic Growth: Implications for Federal Policy, Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology (October).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tassey, Gregory (1995b), ‘Market Failures and Policy Responses: Government Funding vs. R&D Tax Credits’, ISSUES in Science and Technology (Fall), pp. 31–33.

  • Tassey, Gregory (1995c), ‘The Roles of Standards as Technology Infrastructure’, in R. Hawkins and R. Mansell (eds.), Standards, Innovation, Competitiveness: The Politics and Economics of Standards in Natural and Technical Environments, Brookfield, VT: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tassey, Gregory (forthcoming), ‘Infratechnologies and Economic Growth’, in M. Teubal et al. (eds.), Technological Infrastructure Policy (TIP): An International Perspective, Norwell, MA: Kluwer.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

The author is indebted to Gerhard Rosegger and the editors for many useful comments on previous drafts.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tassey, G. Choosing government R&D policies: Tax incentives vs. direct funding. Rev Ind Organ 11, 579–600 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00214824

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00214824

Key words

Navigation