“Coasean” institutions are an alternative institutional form that provides a solution to some market and coordination failures. As such they can weaken considerably the case for public subsidies in a vast range of context. They are “market-based” and an inexpensive way to address the public good issues of R&D. They are, however, a largely overlooked institutional option. Early theoretical notions emphasize the advantages of such an institutional setting, however, broader empirical evidence about their effectiveness is lacking. We apply two different empirical approaches to assess the relationship between “Coasean” institutions and the innovation performance of SMEs. In a case study, we investigate Inspire AG, a successful bottom-up, institutional invention in the spirit of a “Coasean” institution. To assess the general validity of this model, we use representative firm-level data to econometrically investigate the relationship between “Coasean” institutions and the sales share of innovative products. “Coasean” institutions are positively related with innovative sales only if the company has a sufficiently large absorptive capacity for external knowledge. This positive moderating effect of “Coasean” institutions for the innovation performance is larger for SMEs. Our empirical findings provide a strong case for policies aimed at encouraging the operation of this type of institution.

“ Coasean”机构是一种替代性的机构形式，可以为某些市场和协调失灵提供解决方案。因此，它们可以在很大范围内大大削弱公共补贴的理由。它们是“基于市场”的，并且是解决研发公共利益问题的廉价方法。但是，它们是一个很大程度上被忽视的制度选择。早期的理论观念强调了这种制度设置的优势，但是，缺乏关于其有效性的更广泛的经验证据。我们采用两种不同的经验方法来评估“ Coasean”机构与中小企业创新绩效之间的关系。在案例研究中，我们调查了Inspire AG，本着“ Coasean”机构的精神，这是一项成功的自下而上的机构发明。为了评估该模型的一般有效性，我们使用代表性的公司级数据对“ Coasean”机构与创新产品的销售份额之间的关系进行计量计量。仅当公司具有足够大的外部知识吸收能力时，“ Coasean”机构才能与创新销售产生积极关系。“ Coasean”机构对创新绩效的积极调节作用对中小企业更大。我们的经验发现为旨在鼓励此类机构运作的政策提供了有力的依据。