KNEU Logo Публікації КНЕУ імені Вадима Гетьмана Publications of KNEU named after Vadym Hetman
Switch to Ukrainian Switch to English
Economy and Entrepreneurship

Economy and Entrepreneurship

ISSN 2522-459X
Коваль Сергій Борисович  
Serhii Koval  

Методологія оцінки ефективності інноваційної політики у кризовій фазі економічного циклу

Methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of innovation policy in the crisis phase of the economic cycle

DOI:

10.33111/EE.2026.56.KovalS

Анотація: Інноваційна діяльність як складова економічного розвитку є чутливою до криз, що стримують інвестиції та впровадження нововведень. У таких умовах державна політика підтримки інновацій стає ключовим інструментом реагування, однак її ефективність потребує комплексного оцінювання. Метою статті є розробка методологічного підходу до оцінки результативності державної інноваційної політики у кризовій фазі економічного циклу. Використано системний аналіз досліджень і порівняння міжнародного досвіду. Обґрунтовано необхідність поєднання кількісних і якісних індикаторів та врахування взаємодії інструментів політики.
Запропонована методика інтегрує короткострокові результати інноваційних заходів із довгостроковими ефектами для післякризового відновлення, що дозволяє комплексно оцінювати їхню ефективність і формувати дієву антициклічну підтримку інновацій.
Abstract: Innovation activity, as a component of the economic development process, is sensitive to various crisis phenomena that may constrain investment and slow the implementation of innovations.
During periods of economic recession, state policy aimed at stimulating and supporting innovation gains particular importance as a tool for responding to negative dynamics; however, assessing its effectiveness requires a comprehensive functional methodology. The purpose of the article is to develop a specialized methodological approach to evaluating the effectiveness of state innovation policy in the crisis phase of the economic cycle, combining different theoretical foundations and applied instruments. The study employs a systemic analysis of academic research and a comparison of international experience, taking into account the specific features of crises. Key criteria are identified and effectiveness indicators of innovation policy are formalized, adapted to downturn conditions. The results systematize existing approaches and reveal the need to expand the evaluation methodology. In particular, it is established that classical quantitative indicators may not fully reflect policy effectiveness under specific crisis conditions; therefore, qualitative effects and the interaction of policy instruments must also be considered. A new comprehensive evaluation methodology is proposed, integrating quantitative and qualitative indicators: short-term results of innovation measures (e.g., the number of developments during a crisis) are complemented by long-term indicators of their impact on post-crisis economic recovery. The approach also accounts for the specific features of different types of crises and structures the methodology according to the characteristics of particular crisis phenomena. This enables simultaneous assessment of both the immediate effect and the long-term return of innovation policy. The need for flexible evaluation depending on the type of crisis is emphasized. The findings and proposals have practical value for improving state innovation policy under crisis conditions and for shaping effective countercyclical support for innovation.
Ключові слова: інноваційна політика, економічна криза, оцінка ефективності, індикатори політики, антициклічна політика, методологія оцінки
Key words: innovation policy, economic crisis, performance evaluation, policy indicators, countercyclical policy, evaluation methodology
УДК: 330.341.1:338.124.4
UDC: 330.341.1:338.124.4

JEL: E32 O31 O32 O38

To cite paper
In APA style
Koval, S. (2026). Methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of innovation policy in the crisis phase of the economic cycle. Economy and Entrepreneurship, 56, 5-26. http://doi.org/10.33111/EE.2026.56.KovalS
In MON style
Коваль С.Б. Методологія оцінки ефективності інноваційної політики у кризовій фазі економічного циклу. Економіка та підприємництво. 2026. № 56. С. 5-26. http://doi.org/10.33111/EE.2026.56.KovalS (дата звернення: 01.06.2026).
With transliteration
Koval, S. (2026) Metodolohiia otsinky efektyvnosti innovatsiinoi polityky u kryzovii fazi ekonomichnoho tsyklu [Methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of innovation policy in the crisis phase of the economic cycle]. Economy and Entrepreneurship, no. 56. pp. 5-26. http://doi.org/10.33111/EE.2026.56.KovalS [in Ukrainian] (accessed 01 Jun 2026).
# 56 / 2026 # 56 / 2026
Download Paper
11
Views
1
Downloads
0
Cited by

  1. Alvarez S., Douthwaite B., Thiele G., Mackay R., Córdoba D., Tehelen K. Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis: A practical method for project planning and evaluation // Development in Practice. 2010. Vol. 20, No. 8. P. 946–958. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2010.513723
  2. Archibugi D., Filippetti A., Frenz M. The impact of the economic crisis on innovation: Evidence from Europe // Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2013. Vol. 80, No. 7. P. 1247–1260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.05.005
  3. Bloom N., Bond S., Van Reenen J. Uncertainty and investment dynamics // Review of Economic Studies. 2007. Vol. 74, No. 2. P. 391–415. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-937X.2007.00426.x
  4. Bronzini R., Iachini E. Are incentives for R&D effective? Evidence from a regression discontinuity approach // American Economic Journal: Economic Policy. 2014. Vol. 6, No. 4. P. 100–134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.6.4.100
  5. Czarnitzki D., Aquaro M., Crivellaro E., Di Novi C., Granato S., Sasso A., Vidoni D. Guidebook for conducting counterfactual impact evaluations of State aid schemes for research, development and innovation. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2760/814181
  6. Einhoff J., Paunov C. Innovation policy transformed? Unveiling a new paradigm through natural language processing // OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers. 2025. No. 21. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/5ee60cb5-en
  7. European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development. Qualitative approaches: Outcome mapping. Brussels: EU CAP Network, 2023.
  8. European Commission, Directorate-General for Regional Policy. Evaluation of innovation activities: Guidance on methods and practices. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2012.
  9. Friz K., Günther J. Innovation and economic crisis in transition economies // Eurasian Business Review. 2021. Vol. 11, No. 3. P. 537–563. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40821-021-00192-y
  10. Georghiou L. Impact and effectiveness of innovation policy. Manchester: University of Manchester, PREST, 2002.
  11. Gross D. P., Sampat B. N. The economics of crisis innovation policy: A historical perspective // American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings. 2022. Vol. 112. P. 1–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/pandp. 20211085
  12. Hud M., Hussinger K. The impact of R&D subsidies during the crisis // Research Policy. 2015. Vol. 44. P. 1844–1855. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.respol.2015.06.003
  13. Landon T., Hochreiter H. Randomised controlled trials and other experimental approaches in the Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG): Experience, learnings and outlook // fteval Journal for Research and Technology Policy Evaluation. 2022. No. 53. P. 160–168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22163/fteval.2022.554
  14. Magro E., Wilson J. R. Complex innovation policy systems: Towards an evaluation mix // Research Policy. 2013. Vol. 42, No. 9. P. 1647–1656. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.06.005
  15. Marques Santos A., Coad A. Suggestions for Monitoring and Evaluation of Transformative Innovation Policy. Seville: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2023. (JRC Working Papers on Territorial Modelling and Analysis; No. 03/2023).
  16. OECD. Framework for the Evaluation of SME and Entrepreneurship Policies and Programmes 2023. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/a4c818d1-en
  17. Schuetz T., Douthwaite B., Alvarez S. Participatory impact pathways analysis (PIPA). Colombo: International Water Management Institute; CIAT, 2008.
  18. Sharma G. D., Kraus S., Srivastava M., Chopra R., Kallmuenzer A. The changing role of innovation for crisis management in times of COVID19: An integrative literature review // Journal of Innovation & Knowledge. 2022. Vol. 7. Article 100281. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100281
  19. Taş E., Erdil E. Effectiveness of R&D tax incentives in Turkey // Journal of the Knowledge Economy. 2024. Vol. 15, No. 2. P. 6226–6272.
  20. Zúniga P. The impact and effectiveness of innovation policy: Evidence from middle-income countries. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2024.