Reliable evaluation methodology is not tied to individual topics. Whether a programme supports companies, trains the unemployed or assists schools: the question of which effect can actually be attributed to the measure is always the same, and the tools to answer it are transferable. We use this transferability to grow into new fields.
A current example is aerospace. Public space programmes are innovation funding on a large scale: they co-finance technologies, cushion research and development risks, and are meant to trigger private investment that would not have taken place without support. That is a classic evaluation question. Whether funding generates innovation, creates jobs and has effects beyond the companies it supports is something we have examined for years in start-up promotion. The methods are the same, only the sector is different.
We are currently working with know.space, a consultancy specialising in space economics, on two projects. For the UK Space Agency’s National Space Innovation Programme (NSIP), we contribute our econometric expertise to the impact and economic evaluation, together with RAND Europe among others. The second project is the monitoring and evaluation study of the UK Space Agency’s ESA portfolio, which uses staggered difference-in-differences estimators and value-for-money analysis to examine the benefits of the UK’s investments in the European Space Agency.
