Evidence from the Innobarometer studies on the intensity of innovation procurement across EU countries

Evidence from the Innobarometer studies
on the intensity of innovation procurement
across EU countries
Hugo Hollanders
MERIT (Maastricht University)
OECD WORKSHOP ON MEASURING THE LINK
BETWEEN PUBLIC PROCUREMENT, R&D AND INNOVATION
5-6 December, Paris

Measuring the link between public procurement, R&D and innovation
2
What is the Innobarometer?
•The Innobarometer is an annual opinion poll of businesses or general public on attitudes and activities related to innovation policy.
•The Innobarometer is conducted as part of the Eurobarometer series. It provides policy relevant information direct from business or the general public which is not available from other sources.

3
Evidence of the role of public procurement (PP)
•Empirical evidence from various Innobarometer surveys on the link between PP and innovation:
–2009 IB surveying companies
–2010 IB surveying public administration
–2011 IB surveying companies
–(forthcoming 2014 IB surveying companies)
•IB covers EU Member States and other European countries

4
PP & innovation: a company perspective
IB 2009: Flash EB 267 “Strategic trends on innovation”
•Telephone survey by Gallup on behalf of DG Enterprise
•Objective: study European enterprises’ innovation strategies in response to changing constraints and opportunities
•Interviews conducted between April 1–9 2009
•Total sample size 5,234
IB2011: Flash EB 343 “Impact and perception of public sector innovation among companies”
•Questionnaire designed by MERIT & Technopolis
•Telephone survey by TNS on behalf of DG Enterprise
•Objective: gain insight into the way in which on-going public sector innovations are perceived by private firms
•Interviews conducted between Feb 16 – March 7 2012

5
PP & innovation: a government perspective
IB2010: Flash Eurobarometer 305:“Innobarometer among public administration organisations”
•Questionnaire designed by MERIT
•Telephone survey by Gallup on behalf of DG Enterprise
•Objective: study the innovation strategies of the European public administration sector in response to changing constraints and opportunities
•Interviews conducted between 9-17 October 2010
•Target: public administration organisations (NACE 84.11 and 84.12) employing 10 or more persons

Measuring the link between public procurement, R&D and innovation 6
The term 'public procurement' describes the purchases of
goods, services and public works by governments and
public bodies. Has your company...
54
4
7
35
57
8
10
25
0 20 40 60
None of the above
Investigated opportunities to sell to
governments
Submitted at least one tender for a
public procurement without success
Won at least one public procurement
contract
IB 2009 IB 2011
Companies less successful in winning tenders

Similar decline for innovators and non-innovators
IB 2011
29
10 9
52
22
11
7
61
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Won at least
one public
procurement
contract
Submitted at
least one
tender for a
public
procurement
without
success
Investigated
opportunities
to sell to
governments
None of the
above
Innovator Non-innovator
IB 2009
36
7 4
53
30
7
2
60
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Won at least
one public
procurement
contract
Submitted at
least one
tender for a
public
procurement
without
success
Investigated
opportunities
to sell to
governments
None of the
above
Innovator Non-innovator

Companies’ interest in public procurement
28 29 30 33 33 34 35 36 36 37 37 38 39 40 40 40 43 45 45 45 46 47 47 49 49 51 52 52 54 54 56 57 59
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
PL IE CY MKHU EE PT LT ES LU LV CZ DK UK FR BE MT IT DE FI SK AT NO NL IS RO SE HR TR SI CH EL BG
IB2011
-22 -21
-19
-15 -14 -13 -12
-10 -10 -10
-1 0
1 2 2
7 7 7 8 8 8 9
13
16 17
19
21
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
LT LU IE LV CY PL EE CZ DK FI SI MT PT FR RO UK BE ES DE SK HU AT SE EL NL IT BG
Change IB2011 (2009-2011) vs IB 2009 (2006-2008)

Did the public procurement activities
of your company include the
possibility to sell one of your
innovations to the government?
29
24
67
73
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
IB 2009
IB 2011
Yes No DK/NA
Declining possibilities to
sell innovations
Won at least one public
procurement contract
27
30
67
67
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
IB 2009
IB 2011
Submitted at least one tender
for a public procurement, but
none was successful
20
18
77
80
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
IB 2009
IB 2011
Investigated opportunities to
sell to governments, but not
submitted any tender
31
14
64
84
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
IB 2009
IB 2011

10
Did the public procurement activities of your company include the possibility to sell one of your innovations to the government?
Significant differences between countries
Source: IB 2011
611111114161717181920202123232425252526272729293131323636404045480102030405060708090100HUBGROHRLVSKSIPLLTBELUNOCZFRFIIEMKDEELISUKEEPTNLTRATESITSECHMTCYDKYesNoDK/NA

Low prices are more important than innovation to
win a tender, but preferences have become stronger
In your experience, what is more important to win a public
tender?
25
36
9
30
18
11
22
50
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0
DK/NA
Price and innovation have equal importance
Innovation is more important than price
Price is more important than innovation
IB 2009 IB 2011

12
In all but one country price is seen to be more than innovation to win a public tender
Source: IB 2011
345225534144516940535861396057506146525344563942434062455156474641478810101012141414171819202222232324242425292929293031323240470102030405060708090100EENOMKISSEHUDKPLMTSISKCZITLTLVDEIEBEUKELATESNLCYBGCHFIPTHRFRROLUTRInnovation is more important than pricePrice is more important than innovationPrice and innovation have equal importanceDK/NA

13
IB 2010: Procurement activities
Since January 2008, did your organisation put out tenders to private businesses to provide any of the following goods and services? 1932364142517663585353440%20%40%60%80%100% R&D for new technologies and servicesConsulting to recommend, design or pilot testnew or improved servicesOther types of technologyTechnologies or services to improveenvironmental or energy performanceProvide one or more services to your usersICT equipment or systemsYesNoDK/NA

14
Differences in procurement activities by country
3855596060616465676969707172737475757578808182848888880102030405060708090100BGPTLTSKHUFRDKSICYATDEBEITROCZELLUMTPLLVUKFIEEIESEESNLSince January 2008, did your organisation put out tenders to private businesses to provide goods or services?

15
IB 2010: Procurement consultation
Prior to publishing tenders does your organisation usually consult with? 47535357423535310%20%40%60%80%100% The users of your servicesPotential suppliers/ contractorsOther organisations providingspecialist adviceOther organisations conductingsimilar procurementsYesNoDK/NA

IB 2010: Low prices are more important than
innovation to win a tender
For an applicant to be successful in a tender
from your organisation do you consider that ...
6
11
20
63
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0
DK/NA
innovation is more important than
low cost for winning a tender
low cost is more important than
innovation for winning a tender
cost and innovation have equal
importance for winning a tender

IB 2010: Innovations in the public sector result from
procurement activities
Did any of your tenders since January 2008 obtain the
following results?
38
44
55
42
37
25
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Significantly reduce the environmental
impacts of your services
Significantly reduce the costs of providing
existing services
Introduce a new or significantly improved
service provided by or for your organisation
Yes No DK/NA

18
Differences in perceptions about importance of innovation for winning a tender between the public and private sector
BEBGCZDKDEEEGRESFRIEITCYLVLTLUHUMTNLATPLPTROSISKFISEUKNOCH-80-70-60-50-40-30-20-100-50-40-30-20-10010203040Private firms (Innobarometer 2011) Public administration (Innobarometer 2010) Importance of innovation vs. low costs for winning a public tnder

19
New results to be expected from the next Innobarometer on The role of public government support in the commercialization of innovations
•Questionnaire designed by MERIT
•Telephone survey by TNS on behalf of DG Enterprise
•Interviews to be conducted Jan – Feb 2014
•Total sample size > 10,000

20
Innobarometer 2013
•Since January 2011 has your company…
–… won at least one public procurement contract
–… submitted at least one tender for a public procurement without success
–… investigated opportunities to bid on a public procurement contract, but did not submit a tender
–None of the above (SPONTANEOUS)
–DK/NA (SPONTANEOUS)
•Was your company able to sell an innovative good or service as part of the public procurement contract that you won?
– Yes / No / DK/NA (SPONTANEOUS)

21
Innobarometer 2013 - Public Procurement of Innovative Solutions
•Has your company been involved in a public tender that included one of the practices listed below since January 2011?
–Innovation requirements in tenders
–Early interaction with procuring organisations
–Outcome based specifications
–Emphasis on sustainability criteria
–Full life cycle costing considerations
–Competitive dialogue
–Incentives such as profit sharing arrangements
–Negotiated tender
–DK/NA (SPONTANEOUS)

22
For questions or comments, please contact:
Hugo Hollanders
MERIT, Maastricht University
h.hollanders@maastrichtuniversity.nl

Evidence from the Innobarometer studies on the intensity of innovation procurement across EU countries

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (17)

Similar to Evidence from the Innobarometer studies on the intensity of innovation procurement across EU countries

Similar to Evidence from the Innobarometer studies on the intensity of innovation procurement across EU countries (20)

More from STIEAS

More from STIEAS (14)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Evidence from the Innobarometer studies on the intensity of innovation procurement across EU countries