Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/236328 
Year of Publication: 
2021
Series/Report no.: 
IZA Discussion Papers No. 14297
Publisher: 
Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), Bonn
Abstract: 
When investing in research and development (R&D), institutions must decide whether to take a top-down approach – soliciting a particular technology – or a bottom-up approach in which innovators suggest ideas. This paper examines a reform to the U.S. Air Force Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program that transitioned from "Conventional topics," which solicit specific technologies, to "Open topics," which invite firms to suggest any new technology that may be useful to the Air Force. The reform seeks to address challenges facing military R&D, in particular a less innovative defense industrial base. We show that the Open program attracts new entrants, defined as younger firms and those without previous defense SBIR awards. In a regression discontinuity design that offers the first causal evaluation of a defense R&D program, we show that winning an Open award increases future venture capital investment, non-SBIR defense contracting, and patenting. Conventional awards have no effect on these outcomes but do increase the chances of future defense SBIR contracts, fostering incumbency. The bottom-up approach appears to be a mechanism behind Open's success. For example, winning has a positive effect on innovation even in less specific Conventional topics. The results suggest that government (and perhaps private sector) innovation could benefit from more bottom-up, decentralized approaches that reduce barriers to entry, minimize lock-in advantages for incumbents, and attract a wider range of new entrants.
Subjects: 
innovation
defense
R&D
procurement
JEL: 
O31
O32
O38
H56
H57
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
10.43 MB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.