Presentation on theme: "Example from enterprise support in Poland"— Presentation transcript:
1Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał TrzcińskiExample from enterprise support in PolandImpact Evaluation SeminarWarsaw,
2Purpose of the evaluation Estimation of the impact of grants on growth of SMEs in Poland.Measure covered by the study:Improvement of competitiveness of SMEs through investments (Measure 2.3) implemented within Sectoral Operational Programme Improvement of the Competitiveness of Enterprises, years (SOP-ICE).Measure 2.3 was aimed at improvement of competitiveness of Polish SMEs through modernisation of their product offer and their technology base.Average value of the subsidy amounted to PLN 532 thousand.
3Impact evaluation problem SELECTION BIASFactor x1Effects?Factor x2SOP-ICEProblem: low competitiveness of enterprises
4The approachCounterfactual framework -> Q: what would have happened in the absence of the intervention?Quasi-experimental approach was chosen.Control group was selected from unsuccessful applicants.Method used to reduce the selection bias: Propensity Score Matching.
5Data sets used in the evaluation PARP data sets (databases of all applicants, with employment +9);19 covariates were controlled, such as: age, revenues, size, legal form, assets, the use of other subsidies, etc.Central Statistical Office data sets (Report on revenues, costs and financial results and the cost of fixed assets);31 outcome variables were estimated, such as: net revenues from sales, employment, expenditures, profits, etc.
7Selection bias Variable Treated (mean value) Untreated (mean value) Control group (mean value)The standardized difference in percent (before matching)The standardized difference in percent (after matching)Age of the company10,3110,4110,13-1,122,28Revenues (in total)50409,2474320,0562275,93-4,74-2,35Revenue growth before the programe (comparing 2 periods)0,720,590,7326,72Assets (in toatal)32676,7075478,1830319,08-2,780,15Assets growth before the programe (comparing 2 periods)0,700,6020,12-0,35Value of deminimis13802,679826,1711593,885,222,90Total employment70,3444,7771,1547,44-1,50Employment growth before the programme0,660,5718,88-0,46Difference in employment7,294,207,7317,62-2,49Percentage of women0,270,33-25,820,98Number of contracts signed in Phare1,150,451,0653,956,87Value of signed contracts in Phare15502,535301,3613934,8846,737,18Application in SOP-ICE Measure 2.10,060,0221,452,77Contract in SOP-ICE Measure 2.10,040,010,0320,242,60Contract in SOP-HRD Measure 2.30,080,0915,92-2,28Credit0,530,6834,684,86Project area…RegionLegal formPKD code
22Summary Main positive impacts: Employment and wages. Export and import (production activity).Profits.Expenditures on tangible fixed assets in use (machinery and technical equipment).Main negative impacts, or no impact:Productivity of the enterprises.Losses and their amount.Liquidity of the enterprises.