Date post: | 27-Mar-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | jake-mccall |
View: | 217 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Pôles de compétitivitéCompetitiveness Clusters
Political issues
• French industry (esp. SMEs) mainly middle- to low-tech industry
• Weak link between research & industry
• Tendency to scatter public support
Competitiveness clusters
• « Pôles de compétitivité » are– clusters, – gathering firms, higher education centres and research units, – working on joint projects (mainly R&D&I projects),– with a dedicated governance body (non-profit organization) defining a
common strategy.
Timeline
• 2004: call for projects
• 2005 (& 2006): 71 projects are granted the “pôle de compétitivité” label
• 2008: evaluation
Selection criteria
• Creation of high value-added products
• International visibility, “critical mass”
• Governance & partnership
• Consistent economic development strategy
A 4-step selection procedure
• Ranking at the regional level– local government & local representative of the central government
• National analysis by central ministries
• “Independent expert group”
• Political decision
Map of the “pôles”
Some examples
• MINALOGIC (Grenoble): nanotechnologies, embedded software
• AXELERA (Lyon): environmentally friendly chemistry
• PLASTIPOLIS (Oyonnax): plastics processing
« POLE »Governance body
Firms
Research centers
Education institutions
Governance & oversight bodies
Oversight bodies
Central Gov’t
Local gov’t (“regions”,main cities, etc.)
Ministries &agencies
Localrepresentativesof central gov’t
Evaluation results
• “A promising policy”
• Too early yet to measure effect on employment or innovation
• Government service delivery is OK
• Improved knowledge-sharing between firms & research centres
• Improved knowledge-sharing between firms
Key factors of success
• A long-term policy
• Involvement of firms– Local authorities should help and support, but not decide and meddle
• No « one size fits all »!
• All local innovation services must be cluster-oriented
What about territories?
• “Pôle de compétitivité” are not based on territories but on networks
• They have “blurred” boundaries
• They must reach a critical mass (even on a niche market)
What about cohesion?
• “Pôle de compétitivité” are not limited to assets-rich territories (nor to high-tech)
• The number of clusters on a territory is a major asset
• Positive spill-over help convergence
Conclusion
• No opposition between “pôle de compétitivité” policy and territorial cohesion.
• Cohesion policy should facilitate spill-over, not hinder leaders’ development.
• Higher expectancy policy (with evaluation and sanction) gives better results.
www.competitivite.gouv.fr