Wolfgang Polt - Presentation at the Innovation Forum Skopje 09 11 2011

1,175 views

Published on

Presentation at the Innovation Forum in Skopje, Macedonia on \'Successful Innovation Policies - Options for Macedonia\'

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,175
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Wolfgang Polt - Presentation at the Innovation Forum Skopje 09 11 2011

  1. 1. INNOVATION FORUM:Developing an Innovation Strategy for 2012-2020 Successful innovation policies – strategic options for Macedonia Wolfgang Polt Joanneum Research POLICIES – Center for Economic and Innovation Research wolfgang.polt@joanneum.at Skopje, 9 November 2011
  2. 2. Structure of the Presentation General Trends in R&D and Innovation Main Trends and International Good Practice in Research and Innovation Policy (RIP) Portfolio and Mixes of Instruments of RIP Lessons for RIP in Macedonia
  3. 3. • General Trends in R&D and Innovation
  4. 4. Main Trends in R&D&I General increases in the knowledge intensity of production of goods and services Specialisation increases and specialisation patterns between countries differ … and will continue to do so (industrial history, public priority setting…) Share of business sector increases with level of development Share of service sector in R&D and in innovation increases New ‚mode of production of knowledge‘: INTERACTION and OPEN INNOVATION ! Increasing globalisation of value chains and economic activities (also of R&D) … through various channels (HR mobility, international cooperation, inward/outward FDI…)
  5. 5. R&D Intensity is increasing – even in crisis!
  6. 6. Increasing Specialisation of economic activities
  7. 7. Substantial Parts of R&D take place also in ‚low-tech‘sectors !
  8. 8. Collaborations between private enterprises and publicresearch institutions are increasing
  9. 9. • Main Trends and International Good Practice in RIP
  10. 10. Recent trends and international good practice in RIP  RIP has become a major policy area in many OECD countries  Increasingly to be seen: formulation of explicit RIP strategies  Setting quantitative/qualitative targets  Explicitly addressing ‚policy learning‘  Setting targets and identifying priorities  Thematic  Functional  Refining funding instruments  Increasingly ‚Competitive‘ / Programme funding - Increasing the leverage effects of direct funding of private R&D  Increases in ‚indirect‘ support to R&D via R&D tax credits (see OECD Innovation Strategy 2010)
  11. 11. Recent trends and good practice in RIP  Fostering Human Resources for R&D  Output of S&T graduates  Career path for young researchers  Attract talent  Increase participation of women  Coping with globalisation of R&D  Reforming funding and performing instiutions  Increased emphasis on monitoring and evaluation (‚strategic intelligence for RIP‘)  Improving the ‚governance‘ of RIP  Strengthening the NIS as a SYSTEM  …especially industry-science relations ! (see OECD Innovation Strategy 2010)
  12. 12. • Portfolios and Mixes of Instruments of RIP
  13. 13. (Regional) Innovation Policy Instruments- a taxonomy Knowledge generation Knowledge diffusion Knowledge exploitationTraditional instruments  Technology funds,  Science parks  Incubators  R&D  Technology transfer offices  Start-up support incentives/supports/grants and programmes  Innovation services  Support for scientific research  Technology brokers (business support and and technology centres  Mobility schemes, talent coaching)  Support for infrastructure attraction schemes  Training and raising development  Innovation awards awareness for innovation  Human capital for S&TEmerging instruments  Public-private partnerships for  Innovation vouchers  Industrial PhDs innovation  Certifications/accreditations  Support for creativity and  Research networks/poles design  Innovation benchmarking  Competitiveness poles  Competence centres  New generation of scientific and technological parks and clusters !  Venture and seed capital  Guarantee schemes for financing innovation ?Experimental instruments  Cross-border research centres  Open source-open science  Regional industrial policy markets for knowledge  Innovation-oriented public procurement Source: Nauwelaers, C. and A. Primi (forthcoming), Innovation Policy and Regions: Policy Spaces, Strategies and Challenges, Regional Development Working Papers, OECD, Paris
  14. 14. Innovation Strategies for Different Development Levels Main strategy Building on current Catching up: towards theType of region Supporting socioeconomic advantages (science push/ creation of knowledge- transformation technology-led or a mix) based capabilities Knowledge hubsKnowledge andtechnology hubs   Knowledge-intensivecity/capital districts    Industrial production zonesService and naturalresource regions inknowledge-intensive   countriesMedium-techmanufacturing and   service providersTraditionalmanufacturing regions   Non-S&T-driven regionsStructural inertia or de-industrialising regions   Primary-sector-intensiveregions   Notes: main priority  strategic choice;  low priority.Source: OECD (2011) Regions and Innovation Policy
  15. 15. Strategies and Policy Mixes forCatching-UpIn the following, different levels ofdevelopment of innovation systems arerelated to potentially most suited strategicorientations for RIP and main instrumentsassociated with the respective strategicorientation are depicted. Macedonia will haveto pick among those strategies and formulateist own ‚strategy/policy mix‘.
  16. 16. Policy Mixes for Different Development Levels (1)Type of OECD region Degree of regional STI policy competencesby economic profile High Medium LowMedium-tech Strategy: modernising productive activities towards value-addedmanufacturing andservice providers niches: “innovation ecosystem strategy”Industrial production  Supporting science-industry  Technology platforms  Concentration ofregions with relatively linkages (personnel (linking technical schools regional action on non-high knowledge exchange and placement and SMEs) traded sectorsabsorptive capacities schemes; technology advisory services;  Technology transfer  Supporting innovation in technology diffusion) centres in relevant service or cultural sectors, co-funded by industries  Regional agencies for national government innovation promotion,  Small-scale cluster combining technology  Regional advisory support with an transfer with other network; networks orientation towards services fostering synergies and connection to global complementarity networks  Promoting innovation start- between national ups (business angel agencies in the region  Innovation vouchers, networks, mentoring and regional agencies targeting “innovation schemes, regional seed and beginners” venture capital funds)  Innovation vouchers for SMEs  Densification and internationalisation of  Support for young regional production clusters graduate recruitment in firms  Regional public procurement oriented towards innovation Source: OECD (2011) Regions and Innovation Policy
  17. 17. Policy Mixes for Different Development Levels (2) Type of OECD region Degree of regional STI policy competences by economic profile High Medium Low Structural inertia or Strategy: stimulating knowledge absorption and entrepreneurial de-industrialising dynamism regions Non-S&T-driven  Local knowledge  Supply-chain  Developing latent regions with persistent centres ,branches of management initiatives demand for innovation development traps national knowledge to reduce (innovation vouchers, hubs (focus on fragmentation placement of students diffusion) in SMEs)  Innovation-oriented  Education and training public procurement  Orienting polytechnics activities in firms to new qualifications  Redefinition of  Supporting connection programmes for  Training for low skilled to international regional technical and unemployed production networks schools  Support to clusters  Regional fora to  Innovation awareness with innovation identify growth raising, potential prospects in niches entrepreneurship  Supporting inclusion of with value-added promotion events region in international  Innovation and production networks entrepreneurship culture promotionSource: OECD (2011) Regions and Innovation Policy
  18. 18. Policy Mixes for Different Development Levels (3)Type of OECD region by Degree of regional STI policy competenceseconomic profile High Medium and LowPrimary-sector-intensive Strategy: upgrading and retaining human capital, creating criticalregions mass and increasing quality of connectivityGenerally rural areas in  Regional agencies for business development  Innovation support programmeslesser developed OECD Training and lifelong learning courses (public (innovation intermediary), businesscountries, specialised in offer, incentives for firms) development support (branch ofprimary sector activities national agencies), connection with  Student exchange programmes and talent trade and export agencies attraction schemes  Attracting national investments in  Regional incentives for skills upgrading vocational and tertiary education programmes in companies Incentives for hiring qualified personnel in companies  Promoting national training, lifelong learning schemes for  Creation of knowledge centres in traditional companies and individuals fields (agriculture, tourism…), branches of national research organisations  Engaging regional stakeholders in external production networks  Innovation support programmes for incremental innovations (innovation  Securing national infrastructure intermediary, business development support) investments to enhance connectivity  Linkages of business support organisations (chambers of commerce, etc.) to wider networks  Financing experimental innovative projects in traditional sectors  Connection of regional actors in national and international production networks Source: OECD (2011) Regions and Innovation Policy
  19. 19. • Lessons for RIP in Macedonia
  20. 20. Adopting a broad definition of ‚innovation policy‘ Don‘t confine your innovation policy to science/research and technology policy. Include all measures to improve innovation capabilities of enterprises on a broad front Especially, don’t fall for a ‘high-tech myopia’ !
  21. 21. Taking a portfolio view of innovation policy instruments  Innovation Policy instruments have become a multi-facetted and differentiated ‘tool-box’  They can inter/counter/act in their impacts…  …and hence have to be designed and evaluated not in isolation but as a portfolio!  For this purpose, formulating an Innovation Strategy should be a ‘whole-of-government’ effort (findings from The ‘Policy Mix’ Project, 2009 and OECD Innovation Strategy 2010)
  22. 22. Tailoring the portfolio of policyinstruments to the specificities of your innovation system The appropriate policy mix is highly context dependent (level of development, path dependency) ‘Superstitious learning’ (i.e. simply copying perceived ‘best practice’ from more advanced countries) is to be avoided!(again: findings from The ‘Policy Mix’ Project, 2009 and OECDInnovation Strategy 2010)
  23. 23. Some (tentative) suggestions for Macedonias Innovation Strategy (1) The Innovation Strategy for Macedonia must be based on a careful assessment of both the state of development, the needs of the respective actors and their capabilities. As there is no ready-made off-the-shelf solution available, the formulation of such a strategy must involve and address these stakeholders. In a policy mix suited for Macedonia, the stimulation of innovation capabilities in enterprises (especially in SMEs) and the improvement of Human Capital must be among the first priorities.
  24. 24. Some (tentative) suggestions for Macedonias Innovation Strategy (2) The main thrust of policy should be  to incentivize enterprises to adopt innovations (tangible or intangible)  to engage in more systematic manner in product and process innovation and  to overcome barriers to interact with others (suppliers, customers, public research institutes, universities) in the process of innovation. Hence, investment subsidies for the purchase of up-to date equipment“, training and development of skills in innovation, management and organizational improvements are likely to be effective policy measures in this vein.
  25. 25. Some (tentative) suggestions for Macedonias Innovation Strategy (3) Apart from this main thrust of policy, there could be parts of the policy mix also addressing ‘nuclei’ or ‘islands’ of advanced technological or scientific competences (if these can be detected). Thus could be achieved by  Fostering collaboration in innovation on bilateral basis among firms and between frims and research institutions (or to the extent possible of networks of firms)  In some cases, addressing existing clusters, even if they are not ‘high-tech’ is a viable policy option. Existing efforts must be checked in this vein
  26. 26. Some (tentative) suggestions for Macedonias Innovation Strategy (4) At the lower but often much more appropriate end of the policy spectrum are general measures to foster innovation capabilities of enterprises.  the build up of support institutions has proved to be of longer- lasting positive effect, like business associations, Joint support infrastructures etc.  in more advanced stages, firms or firm associations have colluded to create their own (research and innovation) infrastructures like ACR in Austria or Steinbeiß Foundation in Germany. A measure which has become very popular in recent years are innovation vouchers.  Pros: very flexible instrument, can be tailored to very different circumstances.  Potential pitfalls: lack of support infrastructure and high quality business services
  27. 27. Some (tentative) suggestions for Macedonias Innovation Strategy (5) ..and there is of course the question of policy implementation…  Innovation Strategy needs a ‘whole-of-government’ approach to be coherent  Needs target setting against which success can be measured – and these targets have to be realistic….  …needs the development of capabilities for ‘strategic policy intelligence’ (foresight, monitoring, evaluation, policy implementation)  …needs to find the right balance between international, national and regional policy layers  And above all: needs to have qualified people in well structured and sufficiently endowed and functioning institutions to be implemented….
  28. 28. Thank you for your attention !

×