POLE Programme Hungary - Belgrade presentation


Published on

Hungarian POLE programme funded by the European Union - Belgrade presentation (www.secep.rs)

Published in: Business
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

POLE Programme Hungary - Belgrade presentation

  1. 1. Pole Program and cluster development in Hungary Mariann Teleki, Zoltan Bendo Hungarian Pole Program Office Cluster Workshop Belgrade, 22 June 2010
  2. 2. Clusters and cluster programs before the Pole Program in Hungary Findings Cluster development in Clusters with perceived operations ▪ Identified problems Hungary before in Hungary before the Pole – General lack of trust and 2008 Program, 2007 (pcs) confidence among business actors – as a result ▪ First cluster inadequate number of established in business co-operations 2000 – Existing and successful – PANAC – business co-operations could automotive not count on stable policies cluster – Mixed experience and result – Top-down of cluster support programs approach – No consistent national policy – EUR 200 on clustering thousand support from the ▪ Issues to handle Ministry of – Form of clusters Economy – Efficient operation of clusters ▪ Cluster call in (professional cluster 2001-2002 from management) national sources – Financing of clusters and ▪ Cluster call in 48 cluster projects 2005-2006 from Total – Intellectual property Structural Funds problems Source: PPO, EPAP, survey based on primary research and on relevant literature available in the field 2
  3. 3. The national cluster policy had to be formed as a consistent part of economic development policies Main challenges of the Hungarian Adequate responses in development policies economy according to foreign practices ▪ Imbalance of the tradable and non- ▪ Development of macro and business tradable sectors (overweight of non- environment tradable sectors): – Stable business environment facilitating – Decreasing export and efficiency comptetitiveness ▪ Cluster development – Growth rate lags behind potential rate – Co-operations of SMEs with proven market – Low and stagnating level of successes can be visible and competitive in employment international markets, as well contrary to single SMEs ▪ Integration in the European economic - Cluster development policy shall help start a lot of area determines the development path of new co-operations among business actors the Hungarian economy in the next 10-15 - Cluster development policy shall help co- years operations realise joint projects ▪ Innovation policy – Innovation driven by market needs improves international competitiveness owing to higher added value Source: PPO, EPAP 3
  4. 4. When laying down the concept of the Pole Program outstanding attention has been given to challenges in R&D&I Challenges of economic development in the field of R&D&I Responses of the Pole Program ▪ Macroeconomic aspect: ▪ Reaching at least EU average – R&D expenses over GDP is well below EU average R&D spending over GDP – Overweight of state R&D both in research staff and in financing ▪ Increasing innovation of ▪ Propensity of enterprises for R&D: enterprises – Low propensity for risk and entrepreneurship ▪ Risk reduction – Lack of trust and co-operation ▪ Clusters, enhancing trust ▪ Education: ▪ Education system sensitive to – Moderate number of professionals in science and technology business needs ▪ Research: ▪ Tight co-operation of – Brain-drain education, research and – Gap between science and business, inadequate number of business patents – Universities oriented at basic research ▪ Financing: ▪ Increasing the number of – Enterprises face slow, expensive and bureaucratic procedures opportunities for external to get loans financing – Lack of risk capital and business angel network ▪ Risk reduction Source: PPO, EPAP 4
  5. 5. The Hungarian Pole Program as a coordination mechanism among OPs ROUNDED VALUES Business environment Enterprise and cluster development* development* Resource Support Resource Support available granted available granted (EUR million)** (EUR million) (EUR million)** (EUR million) Economic 158 80 Economic 421 188 Development OP Development OP Social 644 368 Regional 81 12 Infrastructure Development OPs OP Social Renewal 184 144 Social Renewal 11 20 OP OP Total 987 592 Total 513 220 Consistent Resources Coordination Communication execution * CHOP mirror calls are included in the respective convergence OPs ** 2007-2013, based on the list of the proposals calls as of August 2009, rounded values Source: PPO, EPAP 5
  6. 6. The financial volume of the program amounts to EUR 1,441-1,662 million Financial sources of the program (between 2007-2013, total) 250 HUF / EUR Dedicated sources* ‘Plus point’ sources* ‘Indirect’ sources* Total, + + = EUR million (EUR million) (EUR million) (EUR million) 341 146-205 5-6 492-552 175 6-9 2-7 183-191 72 0 0 72 33-57 119-141 24-80 176-278 366 140-168 12-35 518-568 Total 987-1,011 Total 412-523 Total 42-128 1,441-1,662 ▪ The financial volume of the Pole Program amounts to EUR 1,441-1,662 million ▪ The major part of the sources is dedicated reaching EUR 987-1,011 million *Dedicated sources: Tender calls, to which only Pole Program participants can apply ‘Plus point’ sources: Tender calls, where pole program participants are preferred with plus points in the evaluation process Indirect sources: Tender calls, the results of which can have a positive impact on the Pole Program participants Source: PPO, EPAP 6
  7. 7. Advantages of cooperation Actor Activity Possible advantages ▪ Municipalities, ▪ Defining clear Chambers of commerce development targets and civil organizations SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC ▪ Coordination of ADVANTAGES economic development ▪ Universities and R&D ▪ Running educational and institutes research infrastructure CREATION OF ▪ Building strategic KNOWLEDGE relations ▪ Companies ▪ Sustainable development ▪ Achieving business and development goals ECONOMIC GROWTH Source: PPO, EPAP 7
  8. 8. Accredited clusters and development projects in the Pole cities MISKOLC GYŐR BUDAPEST SZÉKESF.- DEBRECEN VESZPRÉM SZEGED Investment promotion Food industry Healthcare PÉCS Environmental industry ICT Construction / Energy Packaging Innovation and technology parks Infrastructural and IT development of a higher education institution Agora Pole project in progress Source: PPO, EPAP 8
  9. 9. Results of the main calls of the horizontal economic development pillar Supported projects ROUNDED VALUES Miskolc Debrecen Szeged Pécs Veszprém- Győr Budapest Support Székes- granted* fehérvár (EUR million) EDOP 1.2.2. NANOPOLIS Pharmapolis Genomic Helthcare Did not apply Did not apply Medical Bio- 50 Support of Innovation Pharmaceu- Innovation Innovation technology innovation and Park tical Science Center Center in Pécs Innovation technology Park Center 1st and parks 2nd wave SIOP 1.3.3. 2nd round of 2nd round of 2nd round of Not eligible 2nd round of 2nd round of Not eligible Evaluation in Agóra Pole project project project project project progress selection selection selection selection selection SIOP 1.3.1. Complex Infrastructura Infrastructural ‘Science, Infrastructura Infrastructural 16 supported 185 Educational, renewal of the l development Please!’ l development higher research and IT University of development of the ‘Science development of the Szent educational infrastructure Miskolc of the University of Building at of the István institutions development in University of Szeged the University Pannon University the higher Debrecen of Pécs University education SROP 4.2.1. University of University of University of University of Did not apply Széchenyi BME 12 Development of Miskolc Debrecen Szeged Pécs István SOTE knowledge University transfer SROP 4.2.2. Did not apply University of University of University of Pannon Széchenyi BME 28 Support of Debrecen Szeged Pécs University István SOTE innovative University research teams Total 275 The Pole Program’s main horizontal development calls in the Pole cities have resulted in a total support amount of EUR 275 million up until now *SIOP = Social Infrastructure Operational Program, SROP = Social Renewal Operational Program, Source: EMIR, PPO, EPAP EDOP = Economic Development Operational Program 9
  10. 10. The manual includes the main definitions of the cooperation based on the relevant literature - but it does not consider any of them compulsory Cluster manual – cluster definitions in the international literature Introduction of  Porter (1998): „ Clusters are geographic the Pole Program concentrations of interconnected companies, specialised suppliers, service providers, firms in ● The Pole Program related industries, and associated organisations does not define a Institutional (such as universities, standard agencies, trade cluster definition system associations) in a particular field linked by ● The clusters which commonalities and complementarities. There is fulfil the Program’s goals will be Cluster competition as well as cooperation. accredited methodology (accredited  UNIDO: „A cluster can be defined as a sectoral and innovation cluster) geographical concentration of enterprises, especially Small & Medium enterprises (SMEs), which have ● The Program does common opportunities and face similar threats” not aim at the Practical monopolisation of information the cluster term – the  European Commission DG Enterprise: „a group of non-accredited independent companies and related institutions, clusters may also which compete and co-operate at the same time; count for Enclosures which have a geopgraphical concentration in one or considerable more regions; which specialise in a particular field development linked by common technologies and or skills; cluster resources can be science based or developing in traditional sectors” Source: Porter, UNIDO, DG Enterprise and Innovation, PPO, EPAP 10
  11. 11. Global economy is based on clusters instead of individual companies according to the common sense on global competition Positioning of the clusters Cooperation  The cooperation is successful if it has advantage for all participants Company1 Members of the  They do not give up their Munici- Company 2 University pality cluster individual goals  They act together Company 3 Cluster  They take local advantages: Company 6 manager – Cost reduction Company 5 – Fostering innovation Company 7 Company 4 – Getting know best practices Company 9 – Minimising transaction cost Company 8 Support  The target-oriented and tailor Company n made support of the clusters is a focal point in the Pole Program ● Support alone is not enough for the success of clusters ● Only self-organized cooperations which are based on mutual advantages can give a real answer to the challenge of the global competition Source: PPO, EPAP 11
  12. 12. The role of the cluster management (CM) organization and the practices of the governance of clusters should be analyzed Cluster handbook – Cluster operational model Cluster member CM organization Area to be Freely shaped structure Cluster • Acts in the interest of the influenced ● The cluster organizes members freely and can choose any form (association, • Its services are business atypical contract, oriented CM Governance foundation) Services and • Controllable ● Its government and its Compensation decision making • Evaluable processes are defined by the members • Transparency in its operations for the Cluster members and for the ● The cluster controls institutional system directly or via a contract the CM organization The result is a cluster development system model that can be interpreted in the same way by all stakeholders Source: PPO, EPAP 12
  13. 13. The cluster manager provides services for the cluster members based on their needs Possible tasks of the cluster management organization Possible tasks of the cluster manager  Joint pressed or electronic informational  The primary goal of the cluster Joint materials manager organization is to appearence  Common webpage provide services for the members  Representation of the cluster on events of the cluster  Organization of meetings and events Improvement of the  The rules of the cooperation may cooperation  Databases be included in a service contract  Market analysis  Patents, licenses,  Partner database  Competences The cluster manager organization  Project management is not the main decision body of the cluster – way of decision  Strategy elaboration and audit making is defined by the  Benchmarking club members  Trainings, educational programs Services  Advisory  It is advisable that the  R+D operational form of the cluster manager meets the requirements  Legal and IP rights of transparency and verifiability –  Tender in governance and finance as  Translation well  Marketing  International study trips Source: PPO, EPAP 13
  14. 14. Parameters of call for proposals for clusters in the four development phases Development Subsidy/project Supported Source of level (EUR million) activities funding Pole 6-17 ▪ Services ▪ Economic 4th Innovation ▪ Investments Development Clusters ▪ Joint R&D OP* projects Stage 4 Accreditation 3rd Accredited ▪ Joint R&D ▪ Economic clusters 1-6 projects Development OP Stage 3 Accreditation 2nd Developing ▪ Cluster ▪ Regional 0.15-0.6 management OPs clusters ▪ Joint services and investments ▪ Regional 1st Start-up ▪ Cluster OPs 0.02-0.15 initiatives management ▪ Joint services * Operational Program Source: PPO, EPAP 14
  15. 15. Cluster development – Results ROUNDED VALUES Number of clusters Successful Support Development and co-operations* applications granted level (pcs) Calls for proposals (pcs) (EUR million) Pole ▪ Under elaboration - - - Innovation Clusters Accredited ▪ Two dedicated calls for 18 proposals in EDOP clusters Altogether 63 projects in 12 accredited clusters have been 63** 49 supported up until now Developing ▪ Developing calls for 21 5.3 21+ co-operations proposals in the Regional OPs Start-up co- ▪ Start-up calls for proposals in 79 8.0 opeation 79+ the Regional OPs initiatives ▪ Total 163 62.3 EDOP = Economic Development Operational Program ROPs = Regional Operational Programs * No of supported clusters and co-operations in the calls of the Regional Operational Programs and the accredited clusters ** Applications received and evaluated till 31.12.2009 Source: SMIS, PPO, EPAP 15
  16. 16. Supported clusters in the ROP* start-up cluster tenders In the ROP start-up cluster tenders 79 applications have been approved, with a total support amount of EUR 8 million * Regional Operational Programs Source: PPO, EPAP 16
  17. 17. Supported clusters in the ROP* developing cluster tenders In the ROP developing cluster tenders 21 applications have been approved, with a total support amount of EUR 5.3 million * Regional Operational Programs Source: PPO, EPAP 17
  18. 18. Sectors of the granted start-up and developing co-operations Sectors of the granted start-up and developing co-operations (pcs) ▪ There are 100 co- operations for which support has been granted ▪ Energy, machinery / automotive, ICT and environmental industry are the most popular sectors among the supported applications Source: PPO, EPAP 18
  19. 19. Accredited clusters in Hungary (Stage 3) Accredited clusters Industry Number Healthcare 8 ICT 6 Environmen- 6 tal industry Packaging 2 Construction / 1 Energy Food Industry 1 Investment 1 promotion Total 25 ▪ 25 clusters have been accredited up until now ▪ Most of the clusters operate in the South Great Plain and Central Hungarian region ▪ Most of the clusters operate in the healthcare, environmental and ICT industry Source: PPO 19
  20. 20. Project companies founded by cluster members can be beneficiary in one of the dedicated calls to clusters Main parameters of tender call EDOP 1.2.1 Description Amount of  EUR 1-6 million subsidy  Each project has to reach a value of at least EUR 2 million Intensity  R&D: SME 50%; large enterprise 40%  Cost linked to patents and intellectual property rights: SME 50%  Regional investment subsidy according to the regional aid intensity map, but max. 50% ▪ The tender has been No. of tenders  Only accredited cluster may apply called in January per applicant  One cluster in one tender call may apply for 2009 altogether EUR 6 million with more projects Applicant  Project company established by cluster members who own the majority of its shares Type of  R&D subsidy  De minimis  Investment Source: PPO 20
  21. 21. Co-operation between companies is awarded by extra support ratio in the other call dedicated to clusters Main parameters of EDOP 1.3.1./B (Support of enterprise innovation) Description Amount of  EUR 0.06-1.4 million subsidy Intensity  R&D: small enterprise 45%; medium enterprise 35%; large enterprise 25%  If the project is realized in cooperation of independent companies the intensity can be increased by 15 percentage points ▪ The tender has been No. of tenders  Without limitation called in January per applicant 2009 Applicant  Only accredited cluster member companies Type of  Innovation (mandatory content) subsidy  Marketing (de minimis) Source: PPO 21
  22. 22. First results of the calls dedicated for accredited clusters (Stage 3) EDOP-1.2.1 and EDOP-1.3.1/B Number of Number of the Average Total amount Average projects applying number of of support amount of (pcs) accredited received claimed support clusters (pcs) applications (EUR million) claimed (EUR (pcs / cluster) million / cluster) No. of appli- cations 101 15 6.7 82.8 5.5 Number of Number of the Average Total amount Average projects supported number of of support amount of (pcs) accredited successful granted support clusters (pcs) projects (pcs / (EUR million) granted (EUR cluster) million / cluster) Supported projects 63 12 5.3 45 3.8 ▪ 15 of the 25 accredited clusters applied for support for innovation projects and 12 have been granted support ▪ Successful clusters have handed in more than 5 winning projects on average and a support amount of EUR 3.8 million has been granted for each of them on average up until now ▪ ICT and biotechnology clusters have the most number of successful projects ▪ Accredited clusters from 6 regions have been supported up until now Source: PPO 22
  23. 23. Final goal and success scenario of the cluster development by 2013-2015 By 2013-2015: ▪ 5-10 successful pole Parameters of a successful pole innovation cluster innovation clusters will ▪ It consists of 30-35 SMEs and has multinational members operate in Hungary ▪ It exports to several countries of the world ▪ It contributes to the employment growth primarily by the ▪ All of them will reach a creation of highly qualified jobs significant market share in ▪ It operates in one of the most profitable segments of the their respective markets in industrial value chain Europe ▪ It has strong and live international relations with foreign ▪ All of the successful pole business and academia innovation clusters will be an organic part of the global industrial value chain Strategic steps between 2009-2013: • Elaboration and introduction of the pole innovation clusters in the cluster development model • Strong support for the internationalization of the Hungarian accredited and pole innovation clusters • Gaining synergies from the tight connection of the cluster development pillar and the horizontal economic development pillar of the Pole Program Due to the successful clusters the focus of the Hungarian economy shifts to activities with higher added value than presently Source: PPO, EPAP 23
  24. 24. General introduction of the Stage 3 cluster accreditation Overview Aim ▪ Select and classify the clusters that: • The accreditation of ▪ Are able to reach significant international and clusters is a rigorous domestic performance expert evaluation ▪ Have further potential remarkable opportunities system with the aim of ▪ Are not rent-seekers selecting the most Duration ▪ The accreditation license is valid for 2 years promising initiatives ▪ After 2 years the license has to be renewed • The Accreditation Committee comprises Frequency of the ▪ Continuous application of governmental accreditation ▪ Cluster accreditation quarterly decision makers and reputable economists The ▪ Sole right for applying for dedicated pole program from the private sector accreditation sources entitles for ▪ Advantages and preferential treatment in many calls for • Due to the proposals (extra points in the selection process) considerable EU ▪ New members of the cluster (joining the cluster after the development sources accreditation) can benefit also from the above the accredited clusters advantages can play an important ▪ The clusters successfully going through the role in Hungary’s Accreditation sustainable Certificate accreditation process receive a certificate development Source: PPO, EPAP 24
  25. 25. Structure of the Stage 3 accreditation model # of criterion Goal of the criterion group ▪ Evaluation of the forms and content of the ▪ The accreditation I. Cooperations in ▪ 10* the cluster cooperations in the cluster model is based on quantitative and qualitative criteria that have been II. Members of the ▪ 2 ▪ Analysis of the sort and number of cluster determined by cluster members experts and have been tested on ▪ Examination of market-proven success with operating clusters III. Business ▪ 5 performance of the emphasis on the export activities and high added value ▪ The model is a SME members 35 coherent evaluation system ▪ Analysis of R&D activities in the cluster grouped to five IV. R&D ▪ 4 subcategories performance ▪ The model aims to ▪ 14 ▪ Analysis of the cluster’s vision and strategy select V. Strategic and cooperations operational plan ▪ Filtering the cooperations without relevant content which reached market-proven success Source: PPO, EPAP 25
  26. 26. We were testing and scaling the Stage 3 accreditation model on a basis as wide as possible No. of clusters in the survey Breakdown of clusters (relevance Final number of clusters (pcs) in the Pole Program) (pcs) involved in the scaling (pcs) 56 Good potential to acquire the 8 5 accreditation Not relevant 34 title Developing 8 3 Relevant 22 Start-up 6 2 10 ▪ Close and iterative co-operation during the testing between the PPO and the clusters ▪ Data provision on voluntary basis from clusters Source: PPO, EPAP 26
  27. 27. Top stage of the cluster development model (Stage 4) – Pole Innovation Clusters ▪ The Government expects the followings from the Pole Program: Development No. of clusters and co- – Enterprises increase in size through networks and clusters and level operations* (pcs) co-operation with academia so that they become competitive on a European scale Pole innovation – Clusters increase substantially the competitiveness of the clusters 5-10 Hungarian economy through high value-added and export- oriented activities ▪ Expected results: – 5-10 successful Pole Innovation Clusters will operate in Hungary by 2013-2015 Accredited 18 – All of them will reach a significant market share in their respective clusters markets in Europe – All of the successful pole innovation clusters will be an organic part of the global industrial value chain – SMEs get stronger (international competitiveness, development potential, potential to become reliable, long term supplier) Developing co- – The structure of employment improves operations 21+ – The role of the regions increases through the strengthened Pole cities ▪ Supported activities: joint R&D projects, services, investments ▪ Subsidy for supported cluster or project: Start-up co- EUR 6-17 million operations 79+ ▪ Support available till 2013: EUR 80-160 million ▪ Aim: Complex background infrastructure for the most successful clusters and joint R&D projects * No. of clusters and co-operations supported in the ROP co-operation (cluster) calls; the accredited clusters; the expected number of Pole Innovation clusters Source: PPO, EPAP 27
  28. 28. Top stage of the cluster development model (Stage 4) – Pole Innovation Clusters Entry ▪ Potential clusters must have a track record of 3 years and a 1-year- criterion long accredited operation before the application Validity ▪ For 3 years from getting the certificate The Stage 4 Focus on the ▪ The Pole Innovation Cluster stage requires active participation of accreditation examination large companies therefore the examination of economic performance call should of economic shifts from SMEs to the total performance of the cluster including large apply similar performance companies ▪ The economic performance and the potential competences of the cluster content and have to prove the ability to fit in the final goals of the Pole Program structural criteria as the Evaluation ▪ Realistic expectations should be defined based on the present Stage 3 criteria to performance and the future potential of the accredited clusters accreditation use ▪ New criteria will be applied to measure the economic performance of cluster member companies and the R&D&I performance of the cluster call but it ▪ Some of the criteria from the Stage 3 accreditation will be used with should set modifications, while some will be deleted based on experience higher requirements Strategy and ▪ The strategy and action plan has to be a key factor of the evaluation and it should action plan ▪ Project descriptions form part of the strategy plan ▪ Professional external experts to be assigned for evaluation be stricter ▪ Pole innovation clusters shall present the strategy of the cluster for the Progress Accreditation Committee when judging on the pole innovation cluster report title. Further, the cluster shall present annually on the progress for the Accreditation Committee Source: PPO, EPAP 28
  29. 29. Updated cluster manual The updated cluster manual is available from September 2009 Source: PPO, EPAP 29
  30. 30. 27-28 January 2010: International cluster conference in Budapest Source: PPO, EPAP 30
  31. 31. www.polusprogram.eu Source: PPO, EPAP 31
  32. 32. Thank you for your attention! polus@polusiroda.hu www.polusprogram.eu