7 Concluding Remarks
In this paper, we have evaluated a program which provides SMEs with small-size R&D incentives to carry out product innovation. The program had no specific sectoral or technological target and did not reflect any mission-oriented strategy, which means that it did not adapt by design to local specificities. Instead, it responded to a very inclusive strategy, which is far from being uncommon in many small-business programs around the world that try to encourage SMEs to approach R&D or to do it in a more continuous and organized way, in order to upgrade their competitiveness in the medium or long run. Therefore, we believe that our analysis is quite general and can be interesting well beyond local boundaries.
Our findings suggest that small-size R&D subsidies may bring some interesting effects. We find that subsidies induce former nonperformers of R&D to approach this practice and pursue an innovation model that more enduringly relies on R&D. Further positive effects refer to the upskilling of SMEs connected to the hiring of a better educated labor force. In our view, these are effects of no minor importance, as they reinforce prerequisites for the development of absorptive capacity. The latter is a key aspect for smaller firms that wish to take advantage from the currently prevailing innovation policy frameworks, where inter-firm and university-industry collaborations are strongly encouraged, as exemplified by the well-known Smart Specialization concept that underlies recent EU Cohesion Policy (McCann and Ortega-Argilés 2015). Therefore, we argue that the main implication of this study for policymakers is that small subsidization programs, like the one analyzed here, are not to be viewed as alternative to collaboration policies but rather as complementary to the latter, in that they pave the way to the involvement of SMEs in more complex collaborative projects.
