Search results

The article investigates whether variety of democracy affects the probability to employ public subsidies for credit support by small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) led by female entrepreneurs.

Building on the literature on democracy and on gender differences, it leverages a large firm- and country-level dataset (SAFE) of 31 democracies in Europe (EU and non-EU) over the 2009–2014 period by using probit models and instrumental variable approaches.

Results from the different econometric techniques and samples suggest that variety of democracy affects female-led SMEs in using public subsidies for credit support. The evidence is robust to endogeneity concerns.

The empirical evidence presents a time frame limitation. At the same time, SAFE is the only database that supplies information about the gender of firms and public subsidies for credit support, rendering it the only resource that allows the test of the hypothesis proposed. The article therefore offers insights for scholars to revisit our results in future studies that make use of datasets with a longer time span – when they will become available.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, the article is the first to study the effect of democracy on female entrepreneurial behavior in the use of public subsidies for credit support.

This paper aims to draw attention to an urgent need for reform of the regulatory framework of the broader export credit system to ensure a new and comprehensive “safe haven” for officially supported export credits. The purpose is to analyse the complex debate on disciplines of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), creating a point of reference for future analysis of and debates around the “carve-out clause” of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (ASCM) and a “safe haven” in a broader sense.

This paper takes inspiration from legal, economic and political science literature on subsidies and officially supported export credits, as well as on legal documents related to the WTO and the OECD. It examines the WTO subsidy and the OECD export credits framework, focusing on main legal and economic governance aspects. Then, it gives a critical analysis how “safe” a “safe haven” in a broader sense might be, assessing frictions of and solutions for the fundamentally different set of disciplines, limitations, financial instruments not covered by OECD regulations, as well as new challenges related to climate finance.

After assessing the challenges regarding the “carve-out clause” of the WTO subsidy framework and two tracks aiming to create a new “safe haven”, requirements for comprehensive disciplines for officially supported export credits are pointed out. Furthermore, several misunderstandings and mistakes appearing in the debate are clarified.

Desktop research rather than empirical field work.

This paper creates awareness for governments and exporters how to deal with a complex system of interrelated disciplines. The question, how “safe” a “safe haven” in a broader sense can be, has not been resolved yet. Some authors focus on the WTO disciplines not taking into account the need for an effective matching procedure of the Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits (the Arrangement). Furthermore, the introduction of several new pre-export financing programmes and the growing significance of climate finance-related instruments for export credit agencies creates both opportunities and challenges. This paper can serve as a reference point for the academic debate and further research. This paper also offers newcomers to the topic a comprehensive overview.

Although the “carve-out clause” and the Arrangement have been much discussed, there is limited literature review structuring both existing and new aspects of the debate, assessing (dis)advantages of arguments and interpretations. This paper both adds to the corpus of literature about the ASCM, as well as the Arrangement, and takes this corpus as the object of its analysis.

This paper aims to examine the effect of government support on the innovation performance of firms in the Chinese context.

We divided government support into vertical support and horizontal support, and adopted an empirical research approach in this study. We collected the data of 343 enterprises in China that had been identified as innovative enterprises, including their characteristic data, government support data and patent data. Negative binomial regression was used to quantitatively examine the relationship between government support and the innovation performance of firms.

Both vertical support in the form of direct research and development (R&D) subsidies and horizontal support in the form of regional innovation policy positively influence the innovation performance of firms. In addition, direct R&D subsidies are more likely to experience the enhanced benefits of carrying out tax credit policy on the innovation performance of firms.

This study contributed to the innovation literature by distinguishing two types of government support, namely, vertical support and horizontal support, and assessing the effects of government support on firm innovation in the Chinese context.

There are striking similarities between publicly-held government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and investor-owned public utilities. Each firm enjoys large scale economies that give a significant competitive advantage over other companies, possesses a dominant market position that it may be able to exploit to earn profits above competitive levels, and has a strong incentive to enter new markets when the life cycle of its core markets constrain its ability to increase profits. The recent behavior of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac indicates that the government must impose more stringent economic regulation on those GSEs in order to be sure that they achieve their public purposes.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac receive explicit and implicit off-budget subsidies from the federal government. This paper reviews the methods to estimate the dollar amount of the subsidies. None of the three techniques to estimate the indirect subsidy yield accurate point estimates. They do suggest that Fannie and Freddie could receive billions of dollars in subsidies in some years and much smaller amounts in other years. However, assessing the size of the implied subsidies is most valuable in demonstrating that Fannie and Freddie, not the federal government, control their size. Efforts to improve federal control face significant difficulties including informational asymmetries and the political incentives that have led to the status quo. These drawbacks bolster the rationale for eliminating federal support for Fannie and Freddie.

The economic situation in Europe is improving, nevertheless in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) entrepreneurs and small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are still lacking in finances. In this situation, public funding can play an important role. Besides grants, the use of financial instruments (FIs) has become increasingly popular lately in CEE as well. This paper aims to examine the micro-level effects of the different financial tools to understand which type of finance could be most recommended for policymakers in relation to improving access to finance for SMEs, and thus achieving long-term, sustainable economic growth.

The database used is a panel with firm-years as the units of analysis, the variables contain firm-level characteristics, yearly aggregated information on European Union (EU) subsidies and yearly aggregated information on credits received by the firms. The analyses are done using propensity score matching. The ultimate goal is to show whether the EU funds – grants and FIs – have contributed to the development of the Hungarian post-communist economy at micro level or not.

The result shows that the use of subsidies has a positive impact on employment, sales and in certain settings on productivity. It is very important to notice, that grants seem to be used effectively. However, the results also show that the provision of the FI holds more direct relevance to advanced productivity. The conclusion is that FIs have more positive impact on the Hungarian economy.

At the time of the programming for the EU 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework, the paper presents original research in the field of access to finance showing evidence and evaluating the effect of using grants versus FIs, emphasiing differences between the two development tools. It is providing an invaluable insight to the policymaker for planning policy tools and use of funds in a most effective and efficient way.

The study aims to empirically estimate the role of public supports for energy efficiency financing and presents the way forward to mitigate the energy financing barriers that incurred during the COVID-19 crisis.

Using the G7 countries data, the study estimated the nexus between the constructs. Generalized method of moments (GMM) and conventional increasing-smoothing asymptotic of GMM are applied to justify the study findings. Wald econometric technique is also used to robust the results.

The study findings reported a consistent role of public support on energy efficiency financing indicators, during the COVID-19 crisis period. G7 countries raised funds around 17% through public supports for energy efficiency financing, and it raised 4% of per unit energy usage to GDP, accelerated 16% energy efficiency and 24% output of renewable energy sources, during COVID-19. By this, study findings warrant a maximum support from public offices, energy ministries and other allied departments for energy efficiency optimization.

The study presents multiple policy implications to enhance energy efficiency through different alternative sources, such as, on-bill financing, direct energy efficiency grant, guaranteed financial contracts for energy efficiency and energy efficiency credit lines. If suggested policy recommendations are applied effectively, this holds the potential to diminish the influence of the COVID-19 crisis and can probably uplift the energy efficiency financing during structural crisis.

The originality of the recent study exists in a novel framework of study topicality. Despite growing literature, the empirical discussion in the field of energy efficiency financing and COVID-19 is still shattered and less studied, which is contributed by this study.

It was not until the late 1960s that housing attracted much attention from academic social scientists. Since that time the literature has expanded widely and diversified, establishing housing with a specialised status in economics, sociology, politics, and in related subjects. As we would expect, the new literature covers a technical, statistical, theoretical, ideological, and historical range. Housing studies have not been conceived and interpreted in a monolithic way, with generally accepted concepts and principles, or with uniformly fixed and precise methodological approaches. Instead, some studies have been derived selectively from diverse bases in conventional theories in economics or sociology, or politics. Others have their origins in less conventional social theory, including neo‐Marxist theory which has had a wider intellectual following in the modern democracies since the mid‐1970s. With all this diversity, and in a context where ideological positions compete, housing studies have consequently left in their wake some significant controversies and some gaps in evaluative perspective. In short, the new housing intellectuals have written from personal commitments to particular cognitive, theoretical, ideological, and national positions and experiences. This present piece of writing takes up the two main themes which have emerged in the recent literature. These themes are first, questions relating to building and developing housing theory, and, second, the issue of how we are to conceptualise housing and relate it to policy studies. We shall be arguing that the two themes are closely related: in order to create a useful housing theory we must have awareness and understanding of housing practice and the nature of housing.

The study examines the impacts of debt financing on infrastructure development, investment, creation of new business entities, subsidies to private sector and GDP growth.

The methodology is based on five simultaneous equations which have been estimated through panel least square.

The most important conclusion of this study is the significant role of sovereign bonds in determination of subsidies to private sector. The role of domestic credit is important in South Asian context because of its significant role in creation of new businesses.

This study supports the enhancement in credit financing to private sector for creation of new business activities in the economy.

The improvement in liquidity position by enhancing domestic credit facilities may ensure the sustainability and continuity of business activities. Such activities may improve GDP growth in future.

The most important aspect of the study is to identify the role of debt financing in subsidies and creation of new businesses which are important elements of social economics.

Usually the impacts of sovereign bonds and external debts on infrastructure development and GDP growth are examined. But, to relate these debts to creation of business entities and subsidies is a new dimension.

Business research and development (R&D) is of critical importance for innovation and economic growth. The purpose of this study is to present an application of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to select the most appropriate policy measure to support the business expenditure on R&D (BERD).

AHP method adopts a multi-criteria approach that can be used to analyse and prioritize the policy measures based on pairwise comparisons between several attributes that affect the selection of a policy tool. The model formulated in this study is applied to a real case of supporting decision-makers in some high-tech sectors in Iran.

The results highlight the four main financial policy measures implemented in Iran to enhance the BERD; those are, public procurement for R&D, direct subsidies for R&D, grants for R&D and income tax credit for firms have the priority values of 0.280, 0.260, 0.249 and 0.211, respectively.

The findings of this study are based on subjective evaluation of policy measures by experts of designing policy measures. Objective assessment of policy measures is important too because the preferences of policy interventions change during the time. Another significant point is that the priorities of specific policy measures depend on the effectiveness of their implementing arrangement and the previously successful experience of firms in receiving them.

This paper presents an application of the AHP to select the most appropriate policy measure to support the BERD. This method could be used to prioritize the policies and interventions that governments implement to solve different problems, especially at the innovation system level.