2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw,...

24
2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011

Transcript of 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw,...

Page 1: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

2011

Example from enterprise support in Poland

Rafał Trzciński

Impact Evaluation Seminar

Warsaw, 12.12.2011

Page 2: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

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

2004-2006 (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.

Page 3: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Impact evaluation problem

?

Factor x1

Factor x2

Problem: low

competitiveness of enterprises

SOP-ICE

EffectsSELECTION

BIAS

Page 4: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

The approach

Counterfactual 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.

Page 5: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

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.

Page 6: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Unsuccessful applicantsControl group

ps= 0,6ps= 0,5

ps= 0,8ps= 0,1

ps= 0,2

ps= 0,3ps= 0,2

ps= 0,01

ps= 0,4

ps= 0,9

Beneficiaries

ps= 0,8ps= 0,3

ps= 0,9ps= 0,4

ps= 0,1

Propensity Score Matching (1-1; nearest neighbour)

Page 7: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

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 company 10,31 10,41 10,13 -1,12 2,28Revenues (in total) 50409,24 74320,05 62275,93 -4,74 -2,35Revenue growth before the programe (comparing 2 periods)

0,72 0,59 0,73 26,72 -2,35

Assets (in toatal) 32676,70 75478,18 30319,08 -2,78 0,15Assets growth before the programe (comparing 2 periods)

0,70 0,60 0,70 20,12 -0,35

Value of deminimis 13802,67 9826,17 11593,88 5,22 2,90Total employment 70,34 44,77 71,15 47,44 -1,50Employment growth before the programme

0,66 0,57 0,66 18,88 -0,46

Difference in employment 7,29 4,20 7,73 17,62 -2,49Percentage of women 0,27 0,33 0,27 -25,82 0,98Number of contracts signed in Phare

1,15 0,45 1,06 53,95 6,87

Value of signed contracts in Phare 15502,53 5301,36 13934,88 46,73 7,18Application in SOP-ICE Measure 2.1 0,06 0,02 0,06 21,45 2,77Contract in SOP-ICE Measure 2.1 0,04 0,01 0,03 20,24 2,60Contract in SOP-HRD Measure 2.3 0,08 0,04 0,09 15,92 -2,28Credit 0,70 0,53 0,68 34,68 4,86Project area … … … … …Region … … … … …Legal form … … … … …PKD code … … … … …

Page 8: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Date of measurement

Page 9: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Employment and wages costs

Impact: +14 FTEs Impact: +PLN 511thousand

Page 10: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Net revenues from sales

Impact: +PLN 5 211 thousand

Page 11: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Operating expenses

Impact: +PLN 5 006 thousand

Page 12: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Losses – scale of the phenomenon

Impact: +3,3% Impact: zero

Page 13: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Losses

Impact: +PLN 360 thousandImpact: +PLN 3 335 thousand

Page 14: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Profits

Impact: +PLN 412 thousand Impact: +PLN 248 thousand

Page 15: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Asset Turnover

Impact: -0,10

Page 16: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Total expenditures on tangible fixed assets in use

Impact: +PLN 434 thousand Impact: +PLN 395 thousand

Page 17: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Liabilities

Impact: +PLN 458 thousand Impact: +PLN 372 thousand

Page 18: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Export

Impact: +PLN 1 479 thousand Impact: -PLN 753 thousand

Page 19: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Value of purchases in total imports

Impact: +PLN 1 307 thousand

Page 20: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Structure of imports

Impact: +PLN 1 158 thousand Impact: -PLN 109 thousand

Page 21: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Current ratio

Impact: -0,07

Page 22: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

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.

Summary

Page 23: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

More on this…

www.parp.gov.pl/index/more/24238

Page 24: 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Thank you for your attention!

Polish Agency for Enterprise Development81/83 Pańska Street

00-834 Warsaw, Poland

Tel + 48 (22) 432 80 80Fax + 48 (22) 432 86 20

+ 48 (22) 432 84 04

Infoline: + 48 (22) 432 89 91/92/93www.parp.gov.pl