Does public financial support stimulate innovation and productivity? An impact evaluation

This paper contributes to the empirical literature that evaluates the effects of public financial support to innovation on innovation expenditures, innovation itself and productivity in developing countries. Propensity score matching techniques and data from Innovation Surveys are used to analyse the impacts of public financial support to innovation on Uruguayan firms. The results indicate that there is no crowding-out effect of private innovation investment by public funds and that public financial support in Uruguay seems to increase private innovation expenditures. Financial support also appears to induce increased research and development expenditures and innovative sales, with these effects being greatest for service firms. Public funds do not, however, significantly stimulate private expenditures by firms that would have carried out innovation activities even in the absence of financial support.

The influence of ideological interest groups on congressional financial support of international family planning

The World Health Organization estimates there are about 585,000 maternal deaths each year, with 98% of the maternal deaths in developing countries. Access to family planning methods is one method to decrease maternal mortality and morbidity. ^ The U.S. was the leader in providing financial and technical assistance to developing countries to enable women to have this access. The election of Ronald Regan changed the course of U.S. support; abortion became a central factor in the political decision-making with regards to the financial support of international family planning. ^ One factor that may sway policy-makers' decisions is the influence of ideological interest groups, Political Action Committees funding of candidates in relation to votes on bills that impacted on financial support of international family planning and the amount spent by these groups on lobbyist was reviewed. Pro-choice funding of candidates was greater for the four of the fives votes supporting family planning. Pro-Choice lobbyist spending was $185,000 vs. $8,184,000 spent by Pro-Life ideological groups. ^

Guarantee of financial support for student James Savage, signed by William Tudor and John Cooper, 1799 July 25

This legal agreement, a guarantee of financial support for entering student James Savage (A.B. 1803), was signed on July 25, 1799 by his two guarantors, William Tudor and John Cooper. The document was also signed by two witnesses, William Tudor's sons John Henry Tudor and Frederic Tudor. The agreement specifies that, in the event of Savage's failure to settle all financial obligations to the President and Fellows of Harvard College during the course of his studies, the two guarantors would be responsible for a payment of two hundred ounces of silver. It seems that the Tudors and Cooper were relatives of Savage, thus explaining their desire to assure his entry to Harvard by entering into this financial obligation.