Agric. Econ. - Czech, 2017, 63(8):356-369 | DOI: 10.17221/367/2015-AGRICECON

Effects of the investment support in the Czech meat processing industryOriginal Paper

Jindrich SPICKA*,1, Zdenka NAGLOVA1, Martin GURTLER2
1 Institute of Agricultural Economics and Information, Prague, Czech Republic
2 Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic

The goal of the paper is to quantify and evaluate the effects of investment subsidies in the Czech meat processing industry. The investment subsidies should enhance the economic results of the supported companies and increase their competitiveness. The analysis is based on the fixed-effect modelling of balanced panel data of 130 meat processors in the period 2008-2013. It quantifies the impact of investment subsidies from the Rural Development Programme (RDP) and the national support programme (Decree of MoA) on profitability, labour productivity, credit debt ratio and the efficiency of production consumption. The conclusions can be generalized for medium-sized and large companies. The results show that investment subsidies from the RDP had not such a significant effect as expected. Investment subsidies from the RDP affected only the labour productivity of large meat processors and the ROA of non-family companies. However, they should preferably help small and medium-sized companies to be more competitive. Subsidies from the national programme increased the profitability of family-owned and medium-sized companies and changed the capital structure of the supported companies which used more bank loans for upgrading the technology.

Keywords: fixed-effect model, impact assessment, national subsidies, Rural Development Programme

Published: August 31, 2017  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
SPICKA J, NAGLOVA Z, GURTLER M. Effects of the investment support in the Czech meat processing industry. Agric. Econ. - Czech. 2017;63(8):356-369. doi: 10.17221/367/2015-AGRICECON.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Aghion P., Howitt P. (1992): A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, 60: 323-351. Go to original source...
    2. Anderson R., Reeb D. (2003): Founding family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. Journal of Finance, 58: 1301-1328. Go to original source...
    3. Arellano M. (2003): Panel Data Econometrics. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Go to original source...
    4. Arellano M., Bond S. (1991): Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations, The Review of Economic Studies, 58: 277-297. Go to original source...
    5. Arkarhem M., Daunfeldt S.O., Quoreshi S., Rudholm N. (2010): Do regional investment grants improve firm performance? Evidence from Sweden. Technology and Investment, 1: 221-227. Go to original source...
    6. Baltagi B.H. (2008): Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.
    7. Bascou P., Londero P., Munch W. (2006): Policy reform and adjustment in the European Union: Changes in the CAP and enlargement. In: Blandford D., Hill B. (eds): Policy Reform and Adjustment in the Agricultural Sectors of Developed Countries. CABI, Wallingford. Go to original source...
    8. Bergström F. (2000): Capital subsidies and the performance of firms. Small Business Economics, 14: 183-193. Go to original source...
    9. Bernini C., Pellegrini G. (2011): How are growth and productivity in private firms affected by public subsidy? Evidence from a regional policy. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 41: 253-265. Go to original source...
    10. Božík M. (2012): Impacts assessment of the agroenvironmental support in the Rural Development Programme 2007-2013 at the farm level. Economic of Agriculture, 1: 34-46.
    11. Caliendo M., Kopeinig S. (2008): Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22: 31-72. Go to original source...
    12. Čechura L., Šobrová L. (2008): The price transmission in pork meat agri-food chain. Agricultural Economics - Czech, 54: 77-84. Go to original source...
    13. Cesaratto S., Stirati A. (1996): The Economic Consequences of Innovation in Italian Manufacturing Firms: Theory and Results from the Community Innovation Survey. WP 40, ESRC Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    14. Chen H.T. (1990): Theory-driven Evaluations. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
    15. Chow G.C. (1960): Test of equality between sets of coefficients in two linear regressions. Econometrica, 28: 591-605. Go to original source...
    16. Coad A., Rao R. (2008): Innovation and firm growth in hightech sectors: A quantile regression approach. Research Policy, 37: 633-648. Go to original source...
    17. Delmar F. (1997): Measuring growth: methodological considerations and empirical results. In: Donckels R., Miettinen A. (eds): Entrepreneurship and SME Research: On the Way to the Next Millennium. Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot.
    18. Dibrell C., Craig J.B. (2006): The natural environment, innovation, and firm performance: a comparative study. Family Business Review, 19: 275-288. Go to original source...
    19. European Commission (2012): Ex-post Evaluations of Rural Development Programmes 2000-2006, Kantor. Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, Brussels.
    20. European Commission (2014): Investment Support under Rural Development Policy. Final Report. DirectorateGeneral for Agriculture and Rural Development, Brussels.
    21. Freel M.S. (2000): Do small innovating firms outperform non innovators? Small Business Economics, 14: 195-210. Go to original source...
    22. Geroski P.A. (2005): Understanding the implications of empirical work on corporate growth rates. Managerial and Decision Economics, 26: 129-138. Go to original source...
    23. Geroski P.A., Machin S. (1992): Do innovating firms outperform non-innovators? Business Strategy Review, 3: 79-90. Go to original source...
    24. Gohin A., Latruffe L. (2006): The Luxembourg Common Agricultural Policy reform and the European food industries: What's at stake? Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 54: 175-194. Go to original source...
    25. Greene W.H. (2000): Econometric Analysis. Pearson Education, Harlow.
    26. Habbershon T.G., Williams M. (1999): A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Family Business Review, 12: 1-25. Go to original source...
    27. Hanley N., Whitby M., Simpson I. (1999): Assessing the success of agri-environmental policy in the UK. Land Use Policy, 16: 67-80. Go to original source...
    28. Harris R. (1991): Regional Economic Policy in Northern Ireland 1945-1988. Aldershot, Avebury.
    29. Harris R., Robinson C. (2004): Industrial policy in Great Britain and its effect on total factor productivity in manufacturing plants, 1990-1998. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 51: 528-543. Go to original source...
    30. Harris R., Trainor M. (2005): Capital subsidies and their impact on total factor productivity: firm-level evidence from Northern Ireland. Journal of Regional Science, 45: 49-74. Go to original source...
    31. Harrison R., Jaumandreu J., Mairesse J., Peters B. (2014): Does innovation stimulate employment? A firm-level analysis using comparable micro-data from four European countries. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 35: 29-43. Go to original source...
    32. Harvey D.R. (1990): Agricultural sector modelling for policy development. In: Jones J.G.W., Street P.R. (eds): Systems Theory Applied to Agriculture and the Food Chain. Elsevier, London.
    33. Hay M., Kamshad K. (1994): Small firm growth: intentions, implementation and impediments. Business Strategy Review, 5: 49-68. Go to original source...
    34. Heunks F. (1998): Innovation, creativity and success. Small Business Economics, 10: 263-272. Go to original source...
    35. High C., Nemes G. (2007): Social learning in LEADER: Exogenous, endogenous and hybrid evaluation in rural development. Sociologia Ruralis, 47: 103-119. Go to original source...
    36. Horská E., Orémus P. (2008): Processes and problems of the marketing management adaptation at the EU market: The case of the Slovak meat processing industry. Agricultural Economics - Czech, 54: 392-398. Go to original source...
    37. Kachaner N., Stalk G., Bloch A. (2012): What you can learn from family business. Harvard Business Review, 90: 102-106.
    38. Lefebvre E., Lefebvre L.A., Bourgault M. (1998): R&D-related capabilities as determinants of export performance. Small Business Economics, 10: 365-377. Go to original source...
    39. Massis A., Sharma P., Chua J. H., Chrisman J. J. (2012): Family Business Studies - an Annotated Bibliography. Edward Elgar Publishing, Northhampton. Go to original source...
    40. Mezera J., Špička J. (2013): Economic effects of investment support of adding value to food products. Agris on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, 5: 39-49.
    41. Midmore P. (1993): Input-output forecasting of regional agricultural policy impacts. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 44: 284-300. Go to original source...
    42. MoA (2015): Situační a výhledová zpráva vepřové maso 2014. Ministry of Agriculture, Prague.
    43. Moore B. (1995): What Differentiates Innovative Small Firms? Innovation Initiative Paper No. 4, ESRC Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    44. Ollinger M. (2011): Structural change in the meat and poultry industry and food safety regulations. Agribusiness, 27: 244-257. Go to original source...
    45. Pearce D. (2005): What Constitutes a Good Agri-environmental Policy Evaluation? In Evaluating Agri-Environmental Policies. OECD Publishing. Go to original source...
    46. Pohlova K., Mezera J. (2014): Analysis of development of Czech foreign trade in foods and beverages. Agris online Papers in Economics and Informatics, 6: 121-131.
    47. Psaltopoulos D., Thomson K.J., Efstratoglou S., Kola J., Daouli A. (2004): Regional SAMs for structural policy analysis in lagging EU rural regions. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 31: 149-178. Go to original source...
    48. Purvis G., Louwagie G., Northey G., Mortimer S., Park J., Mauchline A., Finn J., Primdahl J., Vejre H., Vesterager J.P., Knickel K., Kasperczyk N., Balázs K., Vlahos G., Christopoulos S., Peltola J. (2009): Conceptual development of a harmonised method for tracking change and evaluating policy in the agri-environment: the agrienvironmental footprint index. Environmental Science and Policy, 12: 321-337. Go to original source...
    49. Ratinger T., Medonos T., Hruška M. (2013): An assessment of the differentiated effects of the investment support to agricultural modernisation: The case of the Czech Republic. Agris On-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, 5: 153-164.
    50. Roper S. (1997): Product innovation and small business growth: a comparison of the strategies of German, U.K and Irish companies. Small Business Economics, 9: 523- 537. Go to original source...
    51. Scherer F.M. (1965): Corporate inventive output, profits, and growth. Journal of Political Economy, 73: 290-297. Go to original source...
    52. Storey D. (1994): Understanding the Small Business Sector. Routledge, London.
    53. Špička J., Krause J. (2013): Selected socioeconomic impacts of public support for agricultural biogas plants: the case of the Czech Republic. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science, 19: 929-938.
    54. Tether B.S., Massini S. (1998): Employment creation in small technological and design innovators in the UK during the 1980s. Small Business Economics, 11: 353-370. Go to original source...
    55. Troy D.J., Kerry J.P. (2010): Consumer perception and the role of science in the meat industry. Meat Science, 86: 214-226. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    56. Wren C. (2005): Regional grants. Are they worth it? Fiscal Studies, 26: 245-75. Go to original source...
    57. Wynarczyk P., Thwaites A. (1997): The economic performance, survival and non-survival of innovative small firms. In: Oakey R., Mukhtar S. (eds): New Technology Based Firms in the 1990s. Vol. III, Paul Chapman, London.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content