Cooperation of Regions for Innovation CORINNA Benchmarking of cross-border innovation policy in the...

Cooperation of Regions for Innovation

CORINNA Benchmarking of cross-border innovation

policy in the core Alpe Adria Region - INTERREG project CORINNA

DAMJAN KAVAŠ,

www.corinna-net.info

Overview

Basic Information on CORINNA project.

Benchmarking of regional innovation policies:

Methodological issues. Lessons learned.


Overview

Basic Information on CORINNA project


CORINNA PartnersStuttgart Region

Economic Development Corp.

Stuttgart, D

Carinthian Economic Promotion Fund (KWF)

Klagenfurt, A

JoanneumResearch

Graz, A

Friuli Innovazione

Udine, I

Institute for Economic Research (IER)

Ljubljana, SI

Economy Service Burgenland (WIBAG)

Eisenstadt, A

West Hungarian Research Institute

Györ, H

Hungarian Science and Technology

Foundation Budapest, H

Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG)

Vienna, A


Starting Point - A Diagnosis

Intensity of interregional/cross-border cooperation of partner regions in technology & innovation lacks behind comparable European regions:

on administrative level,

on company level.


Cooperation barriers

Huge differences in governmental structures (e.g. federal vs. centralistic),

different regulations, policies, support programmes,

different levels of economic development,

low knowledge about competencies of neighbour regions.


Outputs & Results – Population

0

500.000

1.000.000

1.500.000

2.000.000

2.500.000

3.000.000

3.500.000

4.000.000

4.500.000

Stuttgart Friuli-VeneziaGiulia

Nyugat-Dunántúl

Burgenland Kärnten Steiermark Slovenia

Popula

tion

-0,20

-0,10

0,00

0,10

0,20

0,30

0,40

0,50

Annual g

row

th r

ate

1995 -

2005 (

in %

)

no. of population 2005 annual grow th rate 1995-2005 (in %)


Outputs & Results – GRP/hab. PPS

0,0

5000,0

10000,0

15000,0

20000,0

25000,0

30000,0

35000,0

EU-2

5

German

y

Stuttg

art

Italy

Friul

i-Ven

ezia

Giulia

Hunga

ry

Nyuga

t-Dun

ántú

l

Austri

a

Burge

nland

Kärnt

en

Steier

mark

Sloven

ia

GR

P/ha

b. P

PS, 2

003

(EU

R)

0,00

1,00

2,00

3,00

4,00

5,00

6,00

7,00

8,00

Ann

ual g

row

th r

ate

1995

-200

3 (in

%)

GRP/hab. PPS, 2003 (EUR) Annual grow th rate 1995-2003 (in %)


Output & Results – Regional R&D Capacities

0,00% 1,00% 2,00% 3,00% 4,00%

EU 25

Friuli-Venezia Giulia

West Transdanubia

Burgenland

Carinthia

Styria

Slovenia

2003

1998



CORINNA Innovation Policy Benchmarking

All countries and regions involved are looking to innovation and innovation policy as pivotal for tackling the structural challenges facing their economies, because innovation is key to competitiveness.


Overview

Benchmarking of regional innovation policies:

Methodological issues. Lessons learned.



Benchmarking is a powerful technique that provides practical learning through comparing measurements, policies or outcomes, across industries, sectors, policies, products or services.

The meaning of benchmarking is constant learning, improving and pursuing performance. Through breaking the traditional way of thinking the method encourages the openness and improves originality and adopting 3-A policies: Adopt, Adapt, Advance.



Motivations for policy benchmarking are: To understand where improvements have to be

made. Understand factors involving performance of

policies. Learning from “good practices” or “not so good

practices”. Setting standard and targets for performance. Taking part in the process is already helping to

learn: “naming and shaming”.



General socio-economicperformance

Innovation performance

Innovation policy instruments

Other factors

Synergy between innovation policy instruments

“Good” and “not so good” practice


CORINNA Innovation Policy Benchmarking - Approach

Short comparison of socio-economic performance of the regions involved.

Detailed description of innovation performance: list of indicators.

Short description of R&D policy and detailed description of innovation policy instruments: regional level, national level, interregional level according to the template (standardization)

Assessment of synergy between innovation policy instruments (synergy matrix).

Comparing performance of the regions (socio-economic, innovation) and its innovation policy mix based on evaluation studies and expert opinion.

Identification of examples and description of “good” and “not so good” practice (instruments, policy mix) in innovation policy in each region, because policy success and failures often contain many valuable lessons for others regions.


Detailed description of innovation performance: list of indicators

A. Indicators concerning the System of Production

B. Human Resources Indicators

C. Indicators concerning Knowledge Creation and Awareness

D. Indicators concerning Development of Innovation

Indicators chosen should be: available, acceptable

and comparable.



The effectiveness of innovation policy depends not only on the design and implementation of individual policy instruments for innovation (e.g. tax incentives, public/private partnership programmes), but also on the way instruments are combined into policy mixes that offer complementary and mutually reinforcing support for regional/national innovation systems.



1. Country

2. Geographical coverage: National or Regional (state region):

3. Name of measure:

4. Classification number according to objective:

5. Official documents proposing the measure (legal acts, strategies, programmes):

6. Overview (description):

7. Objectives:

8. Rationality underlying the measure (justification):

9. Name of responsible organisation:

10. Beneficiaries:

11. Annual budget (€):

12. Start date:

13. End date:

14. Status during reported period (ongoing/modified/new):

15. Does the measure receive central funding or regional funding or both:

16. Information Source/Reference (web site):

17. Evaluated:

18. To what extent has the measure been coordinated with other measures (synergy):

19. Other Comments:



I. Improve innovation governance and strategic intelligence for policy-making I.1. Development of a strategic medium-to-long term vision of innovation challenges and innovation potential I.2. Increase understanding of the nature of drivers and barriers of innovation activity in enterprises with a view to informing the policy-making process I.3. Improve the effectiveness of the policy-cycle in order to increase the impact of public intervention activity and outputs in enterprises I.4. Encourage mutual policy learning and networking between policy-making at regional, national and EU levels II. Foster an innovation friendly environment II.1. Enhancing the role of public procurement and standardisation as drivers of new innovative products services by enterprises II.2. Reducing the administrative and transaction costs for enterprises in fulfilling their legal, administrative, fiscal, etc. obligations II.3. Maximising the positive influence of new legislation or regulations on innovation activity in enterprises II.4. Increase rates of expenditure on research and technological innovation in enterprises II.5. Encourage the uptake of strategic technologies, notably ICT III. Encourage technology and knowledge transfer to enterprises and development of innovation poles and clusters III.1. Facilitate access of enterprises to skilled personnel III.2. Facilitate the acquisition and transfer of knowledge ad technologies to enterprises, encouraging in particular cross-border initiatives III.3. Increase the availability, range and quality of specialised services to enterprises in order to increase the effectiveness of their in-house innovation activities III.4. Increase the availability of innovative infrastructures to facilitate knowledge exchange and product/service development by enterprises III.5. Ensuring that the future skills base in the region/sector/country will correspond to the innovation needs of enterprises III.6. Facilitate the development of collaboration between enterprises and other actors with a view to joint innovation activities and knowledge exchange IV. Promote and sustain the creation and growth of innovative enterprises IV.1. Increase the number of new innovation intensive enterprises created and their survival IV.2. Provide adequate infrastructure to new technology based firms to facilitate their survival and growth IV.3. Favouring the entry of innovative enterprises and business models to sectoral, regional or national markets IV.4. Increase the availability of private sector innovation financing to enterprises IV.5. Optimising the legal/regulatory framework for the development of private innovation financing IV.6. Promote adequate support to enterprises aimed at new and developing markets V. Strengthen entrepreneurial innovation including the protection and commercialisation of intellectual property V.1. Upgrading innovation related skills and diffusing new technologies in enterprises V.2. Increase rates of non-technological innovation in enterprises V.3. Favouring the protection and optimising the exploitation of intellectual property as a driver for innovation V.4. Increase the rate of commercialisation/marketing of the results of innovation activity in enterprises



OBJECTIVE I.1. Development of a strategic medium-to-long term vision of innovation challenges and innovation potential

I.2. Increase understanding of the nature of drivers and barriers of innovation activity in enterprises with a view to informing the policy-making process

I.3. Improve the effectiveness of the policy-cycle in order to increase the impact of public intervention activity and outputs in enterprises

I.4. Encourage mutual policy learning and networking between policy-making at regional, national and EU levels

Carinthia Innovation Assistant; Knowledge Management for SMEs

Burgenland Grants for sustainable, innovative or technology-oriented business areas

Clusters and Networks in the region of Burgenland

Styria Promotion of Start-ups; Qualification and Training in Networks

FVG Regional Law no. 5/2006; Regional Developing Plan 2006-2008; Regional Law no. 4/2005; Regional Law no. 26/2005; Regional Law no. 11/2003; Regional Law no. 3/2002; Regional strategic plan 2005-2008; Law 46/82 »Rotative Special Fund for Technologic Innovation«

Regional Law no. 11/2003; Regional Law no. 3/2002; Regional strategic plan 2005-2008

Slovenia Incentives to joint development & investment projects 2006-2007; Technology equipment subsidies for SMEs; Voucher system for consultancy and training services

Support to research & development projects in enterprises 2006/07; Development of innovation infrastructure

Technology equipment subsidies for SMEs; Voucher system for consultancy and training services

West Transdanubia



OBJECTIVE I.1

I.2 I.3 I.4 II.1 II.2 II.3 II.4 II.5 III.1 III.2 III.3 III.4 III.5 III.6 IV.1 IV.2 IV.3 IV.4 IV.5 IV.6 V.1 V.2 V.3 V.4

Carinthia 2 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 5 1 1 2 1 1 4 2 2 Burgenland 1 1 3 3 3 3 2 1 3 3 2 3 3 1 1 Styria 2 2 1 1 2 FVG 8 3 2 5 4 7 4 5 1 4 3 3 6 8 6 3 4 1 3 1 Slovenia 3 2 2 1 1 5 5 2 3 1 1 1 1 6 4 3 3 2 6 2 1 West Transdanubia

1 1 2 1 3 1 2 2 2 2 3 3


Some lessons learned


Detailed description of innovation performance: list of indicators - lessons learned

Due to unavailability of data on regional level indicators concerning development of innovation (e.g. share of innovative enterprises, innovation expenditures, sales of product innovations from manufacturing enterprises, new enterprises per sector) had to be excluded from the benchmarking exercise.


Innovation Policy Benchmarking - lessons learned

Comparability of data is limited due to many differences: Objectives of instruments differ even within “similar

instruments” – subjective classification. Time frames of instrument. Financial investments. Implementation models. Governance levels: national innovation policy instruments

are still dominant at the regional level. “Zero base” levels are not similar. Influence of socio-economic context (economic structure,

history, …).

IT IS DIFFICULT TO DEFINE “REGIONAL” INNOVATION POLICY MIX!



Innovation policy instruments operate in a specific national/federal or regional institutional setting and governance structure.

The effectiveness of policies depends on their role in a regional/national innovation system. Therefore innovation policy instruments part of a “policy mix”: their effectiveness and relevance depend on other policy measures.

There are different approaches at the regional level as on national or international level. It becomes apparent that regional, national and European policy actors and organisations can shape the development and dynamics of regional innovation systems (multi level governance).

Transferability/diffusion of policies is limited: Policy conclusions which are drawn from the analysis of “success stories” are only of limited use for less favoured regions, as their innovation capabilities deviate in many respects from these role models.

There is no evaluation culture at the regional level.



Interregional regional innovation policy benchmarking is beneficial in order to learn from success factors and pitfalls in other countries and adapt to own situation.

There is a need for extensive discussion on results of the benchmarking process – expert groups.

Policy makers should play an active role during the process in order to support the process and to be aware of methodological pitfalls.



Thank you for your kind attention!

Damjan Kavaš Contact: [email protected]

Date post:	27-Mar-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	jocelyn-strickland
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times

Cooperation of Regions for Innovation CORINNA Benchmarking of cross-border innovation policy in the...

Documents