evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Innovation Vouchers — Serbia's Co-Financed SME–Research Institution Matchmaking Scheme

Serbia · Belgrade · See the Serbia profile · See the Belgrade profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 60% 67/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Serbia's Innovation Fund co-finances SME contracts with accredited public research organisations up to RSD 800,000 per voucher (60% of cost); the Vouchers strand alone has drawn 614 applications and approved 514 projects worth €2.68m.

614
Applications received, Vouchers strand
514
Projects approved, Vouchers strand
2.68 EUR million
Total funding disbursed, Vouchers strand
~84 %
Approval rate, Vouchers strand
769 projects, EUR 30.12 million
Total supported projects, whole Fund since 2011
Innovation Vouchers — Serbia's Co-Financed SME–Research Institution Matchmaking Scheme

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
Innovation Fund of the Republic of Serbia
Period
Ongoing (Innovation Fund established 2011)
Region (NUTS)
RS
Keywords
Knowledge transfer, R&D services, SME innovation

Context

The Innovation Fund of the Republic of Serbia has operated since 2011 to help Serbian SMEs access and absorb technology and know-how. A recognised gap for many SMEs is limited ability to contract public research organisations for one-off technical problem-solving or technology absorption.

Objectives

The Innovation Vouchers strand lets SMEs contract public-sector or ministry-accredited research organisations to solve a specific technical problem or absorb a technology that is new to the company.

Activities

The Fund co-finances 60% of the eligible service cost (excluding VAT), up to RSD 800,000 per voucher and up to RSD 2,400,000 in total per applicant, with the enterprise sourcing the remaining 40% independently of the Fund.

Results

Across the Fund's full programme history, the Vouchers strand drew 614 applications and approved 514 projects, worth a combined EUR 2.68 million (roughly an 84% approval rate) — the largest strand by number of supported projects among the Fund's seven support programmes, within an overall Fund portfolio of 769 supported projects worth EUR 30.12 million since 2011.

Conclusions

Because the Fund's published aggregate outcome metrics (revenue growth, jobs created, export growth, patents filed) are reported at portfolio level across all seven programmes rather than broken out for Vouchers alone, only the Vouchers-specific application, approval and funding figures are cited here, not the Fund's overall growth outcomes.

Implementation
Indicative cost
Low (< €50k) — Up to RSD 800,000 (roughly EUR 6,800) per voucher, 60% co-financed, capped at RSD 2,400,000 per applicant; cumulative Vouchers strand funding EUR 2.68m across 514 approved projects since 2011.
Time to results
Long (> 3 years) — Recurring rolling call; Innovation Fund operating since 2011; Vouchers-specific cumulative figures as reported in 2026.
Staffing & skills
Innovation Fund of the Republic of Serbia administers applications, evaluation and disbursement, Accredited public or ministry-accredited research organisations deliver the co-financed technical services

Conditions for success

  • Mandatory 40% counterpart contribution from the SME ensures buy-in
  • Eligibility restricted to accredited public/ministry research organisations helps ensure service quality
  • Per-applicant voucher cap (RSD 2,400,000) spreads funding across more SMEs

Common failure modes

  • Aggregate outcome metrics (revenue, jobs, exports, patents) are reported only at whole-Fund level, not broken out per instrument, limiting instrument-specific accountability

Where it fits

Governance type
national innovation agency (semi-autonomous public fund)
Scale
national, SME-targeted
Income level
upper-middle-income country / EU candidate country

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful