Open Access

A Policy Analysis Framework for Assessing the “Little Giant” Enterprise Initiative: Mechanisms of SME Upgradation, Innovation Performance, and Industrial Growth Dynamics

4 Faculty of Social Sciences, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Japan
4 Department of Humanities and Social Research, Kyoto Institute of Advanced Studies, Japan

Abstract

The “Little Giant” enterprise initiative represents a targeted industrial policy intervention designed to accelerate the development of specialized, innovation-driven small and medium enterprises (SMEs) within strategic sectors. This paper develops a comprehensive policy analysis framework to evaluate how such initiatives influence SME upgradation, innovation performance, and broader industrial growth dynamics. Building on theories of industrial policy and competition (Aghion et al., 2015), infant industry protection (Grubel, 1966), and structural transformation in emerging economies (Naughton, 2007), the study synthesizes multiple analytical dimensions including innovation incentives, financial support mechanisms, supply chain repositioning, and technological upgrading pathways.

Using a structured qualitative synthesis of existing literature, the paper conceptualizes the “Little Giant” policy as a hybrid industrial governance mechanism that combines state-guided financial allocation, competitive discipline, and innovation targeting. The framework integrates empirical insights on SME constraints (Grube et al., 2017), innovation responses to policy signals (Shao, 2024), government fund effectiveness in technological breakthroughs (Wu & Yan, 2023), and firm-level positioning within supply chains (Zhang, 2025).

Findings suggest that the initiative operates through four primary channels: (i) capability upgrading via targeted subsidies and certification effects, (ii) innovation stimulation through competition-enhancing industrial policy (Aghion et al., 2015), (iii) structural repositioning in industrial value chains, and (iv) reinforcement of technological ecosystems. However, the effectiveness of the policy is contingent upon institutional quality, firm absorptive capacity, and sectoral heterogeneity. The paper concludes with a structured evaluation model and policy recommendations for optimizing SME-oriented industrial upgrading strategies.

Keywords

References

Aghion, P., Cai, J., Dewatripont, M., Du, L., Harrison, A., & Legros, P. (2015). Industrial policy and competition. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 7(4), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1257/mac.20120103
Grube Hansen, D., Malik, A. A., & Bilberg, A. (2017). Generic challenges and automation solutions in manufacturing SMEs. In B. Katalinic (Ed.), Proceedings of the 28th DAAAM International Symposium (pp. 1161–1169). DAAAM International. https://doi.org/10.2507/28th.daaam.proceedings.161
Grube Hansen, D., Bilberg, A., & Madsen, E. S. (2017). Flexible automated manufacturing for SMEs. In P. Tomaž, C. Zlatan, & J. Kudláček (Eds.), IN-TECH 2017: Proceedings of International Conference on Innovative Technologies (pp. 225–228). University of Rijeka.
Grubel, H. G. (1966). The anatomy of classical and modern infant industry arguments. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 97, 50–64.
Naughton, B. (2007). The Chinese economy: Transitions and growth. MIT Press. ISBN 9780262140959.
Shao, Y. (2024). Research on the impact of the specialized, refined, unique, and innovative “Little Giant” policy on the small and medium enterprises’ innovation. Journal of Innovation and Development, 6(1), 12–19. https://doi.org/10.54097/8463cd79
Wu, C., & Yan, Z. (2023). Government fund guidance and enterprise core technology breakthrough: Mechanisms and effects. Economic Research Journal, 58(6), 137–154.
Zhang, Y. (2025). Can the “Little Giant” label enhance firms’ supply chain positions? Economics Letters, 246, 112064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2024.112064

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.