Economy

Governments are increasingly utilising research and innovation (R&I) policy to foster economic and societal change. Yet, the empirical correlation between these policies and socio-technical transformations remains under-explored. The report investigates this relationship by comparing the Recovery and Resilience Plans (RRPs) of Austria, Finland and Sweden, initiated under the NextGenerationEU framework post Covid-19. The report finds significant disparities in the content, process and transformative value of the RRPs among these countries. The differences in the content of the national RRPs, and the ability and willingness to seize the opportunity presented by the RRPs to drive transformation, are explained by existing national policy contexts and frameworks. Surprisingly, the role of R&I policy in the RRPs is less important than expected, despite its emphasised importance in literature and political rhetoric. The report further identifies implications for a transformative innovation policy as well as areas for further research.

The economic shock induced by the COVID-19 pandemic is accelerating structural changes and is posing new challenges. Austria faces wider growth opportunities and new adjustment challenges related notably to two major structural transformations: transition to carbonless growth and the generalisation of more advanced forms of digitalisation. These imply new entries and exits in the business sector, more capital and labour re-allocations and greater geographic mobility of labour. A better activation of the existing talent pool, in particular female, elderly and migrant workers is also needed to address the ageing of the society. In this context public policies should aim at further stimulating business dynamism by facilitating market entries; supporting firms’ capacity to invest by helping strengthen their balance sheets; better adapting skills to jobs for all categories of workers; and providing the right incentives to R&D to boost long-term innovation.

Using a micro-level model of investment, this paper finds that firm-debt and investment are negatively associated across firms in Austrian manufacturing industries. The finding is robust to various changes to the model specification. Moreover, in an extension of the basic model, different components of debt are examined, pointing out that debt owed to banks and long-term debt have a stronger negative effect than other forms of debt. Comparisons with investment models estimated for other European countries suggest that the impact of debt on investment is more negative in Austria than elsewhere. Results from interaction models of debt owed to banks with an index of credit easing show that firms in industries which are more bank-dependent invest relatively more than firms in industries that are less bank-dependent after an easing of credit conditions.

The COVID-19 crisis has had a profound impact on SME access to finance. In particular, the sudden drop in revenues created acute liquidity shortages, threatening the survival of many viable businesses. The report documents an increase in demand for bank lending in the first half of 2020, and a steady supply of credit thanks to government interventions. On the other hand, other sources of finance declined, in particular early-stage equity. This paper, a special edition of Financing SMEs and Entrepreneurs, focuses on the impacts of COVID-19 on SME access to finance, along with government policy responses. It reveals that the pre-crisis financing environment was broadly favourable for SMEs and entrepreneurs, who benefited from low interest rates, loose credit standards and an increasingly diverse offer of financing instruments. It documents the unprecedented scope and scale of the policy responses undertaken by governments world-wide, and details their key characteristics, and outlines the principal issues and policy challenges for the next phases of the pandemic, such as the over-indebtedness of SMEs and the need to continue to foster a diverse range of financing instruments for SMEs.

The design of intergovernmental fiscal relations can help to ensure that tax and spending powers are assigned in a way to promote sustainable and inclusive economic growth. Decentralisation can enable sub-central governments to provide better public services for households and firms, while it can also make intergovernmental frameworks more complex, harming equity. The challenges of fiscal federalism are multi-faceted and involve difficult trade-offs. This synthesis paper consolidates much of the OECD’s work on fiscal federalism over the past 15 years, with a particular focus on OECD Economic Surveys. The paper identifies a range of good practices on the design of country policies and institutions related strengthening fiscal capacity delineating responsibilities across evels of government and improving intergovernmental co-ordination.