Presentation on theme: "Example from enterprise support in Poland"— Presentation transcript:
1 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał TrzcińskiExample from enterprise support in PolandImpact Evaluation SeminarWarsaw,
2 Purpose 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.
3 Impact evaluation problem SELECTION BIASFactor x1Effects?Factor x2SOP-ICEProblem: low competitiveness of enterprises
4 The 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.
5 Data 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.
7 Selection 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
22 Summary 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.
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.