Publicação
Counterfactual impact evaluation of EU funded enterprise support in Portugal
| Resumo: | This paper uses a counterfactual approach to assess the impact of the main Operational Program of the EU Structural Funds in Portugal during the period 2000-2006 (POE/PRIME) on the performance of beneficiary firms. We find that public support to firms’ investment increases their likelihood of survival after three years by 11 percentage points, and leads to the net creation of 2.1 additional jobs in the same period. The positive results obtained in our study suggest that the public support to firms’ investment in Portugal in 2000-2006 was mostly well designed, at least in the light of the impact dimensions under analysis. The incentives were particularly effective in the case of firms that are typically more fragile (particularly, new firms and/or firms with low financial autonomy). We also find that the support had greater impacts in the case of large firms, and that the average cost per additional job created as a result of incentives was relatively modest |
|---|---|
| Autores principais: | Mamede, R. P. |
| Outros Autores: | Fernandes, T.; Silva, A. A. |
| Assunto: | Policy evaluation Counterfactual impact evaluation Enterprise support EU Structural funds |
| Ano: | 2015 |
| País: | Portugal |
| Tipo de documento: | working paper |
| Tipo de acesso: | acesso aberto |
| Instituição associada: | ISCTE |
| Idioma: | inglês |
| Origem: | Repositório ISCTE |
| Resumo: | This paper uses a counterfactual approach to assess the impact of the main Operational Program of the EU Structural Funds in Portugal during the period 2000-2006 (POE/PRIME) on the performance of beneficiary firms. We find that public support to firms’ investment increases their likelihood of survival after three years by 11 percentage points, and leads to the net creation of 2.1 additional jobs in the same period. The positive results obtained in our study suggest that the public support to firms’ investment in Portugal in 2000-2006 was mostly well designed, at least in the light of the impact dimensions under analysis. The incentives were particularly effective in the case of firms that are typically more fragile (particularly, new firms and/or firms with low financial autonomy). We also find that the support had greater impacts in the case of large firms, and that the average cost per additional job created as a result of incentives was relatively modest |
|---|