Regional Contexts: Southeast Asia• Impressive economic growth and poverty reduction over the last 2-3 decades; but rising income and non- income inequalities (Gini coefficients: 0.34-0.44);• Notions like social justice, equality and human rights are not deeply embedded in the social and political structures (cf. Latin America). Development = economic growth and social goals are secondary objectives of government policy. This has implications for inclusive development;• Some progression towards pluralism and democracy – esp. Indonesia– but regression in Malaysia, Thailand and Cambodia. Leadership models remain February 2012 largely paternalistic;
Regional Contexts: Southeast Asia• Significant innovations and innovation capabilities are becoming more evident in Asia (esp. Asian Driver economies: China and India), but also in Southeast Asia (Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand).• Innovation and innovation policy are geared towards industrial development and economic development, and less towards with social and inclusive development. February 2012
Innovation and Development• The innovation trajectory which has engendered rapid growth in SEA (most evident in Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand) has tended to exclude the informal economy on which the poor depend for their livelihoods (e.g. agriculture and other primary sector activities), and the social challenges that they face; a situation that has exacerbated inequality and poverty.• SEA countries need to shift to a different innovation trajectory where communities that are spatially, socially and economically disadvantaged become equal partners, contributing their knowledge about opportunities and constraints.
A NEW PERSPECTIVE:Innovation for Inclusive Development (IID)IID is understood as “innovation that reduces povertyand enables as many groups of people, especially thepoor and vulnerable, to participate in decision-making,create and actualize opportunities, and share thebenefits of development.”
Intermediaries in IID• Research supported by iBoP Asia showed that key to IID is the role of intermediaries that enable poor communities through knowledge and skills and connect them to formal institutions and markets to gain access to technologies, products and services that address their specific needs.
TYPES OF IID INTERMEDIARIES DIRECT INTERMEDIARIES are those that can directly promote, drive and produce FORMAL innovations for and with the INFORMALECONOMY informal economy. ECONOMY National and local government units, private firms/ enterprises, NGOs SUPPORT INTERMEDIARIES are those that can catalyze existing and new knowledge and support new capacity- and competency-building in innovation among direct intermediaries in the formal and informal economy. International development agencies, research and policy bodies, universities, think tanks GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE NETWORKS (e.g. GLOBELICS, scholarly publications, academic exchanges)
Strengths of the Universities as a Support Intermediaries• Huge and diversified pool of scholars and experts;• Professional and competency development and accreditation;• Knowledge creation and sharing (research studies, dissertations and theses, conference papers, etc.);• Modeling and mirroring of reality (descriptive, explanatory, and prescriptive);• Convening power – bringing development actors and target beneficiaries in habitual conversation on development issues;• Policy advice to governments, private enterprises, NGOs and CBOs, and foreign and local grant orgs.
Strengths of Research Councils as Support Intermediaries• Designed to give policy advice to government;• Mandated to develop and promote a national and sectoral research agenda;• Equipped with substantive funds for research grants in support of research agendas and capacity building;• Access to knowledge and academic resources of their specific countries;• Access to their counterpart councils abroad and to international networks (e.g. ASEAN);• Access to adequate organic staff and expert resources;• Prestige and influence over government, non-governmental and international development sectors.
Universities and Research Councils as Support Intermediaries• Universities (with their 3 core missions of teaching, research and extension) and Councils (with their research and policy agenda-setting, advisory and research funding roles) are important innovation system actors;• Research and innovation in universities in the region are still largely oriented towards industrial and economic development and inadequately focused on social and inclusive development;• Councils do not adequately formulate policies, give policy advice, set research agenda and fund research towards innovation for IID.
Universities for IID: Inward Challenges and Response Strategies Challenges Potential Response Strategies1. Not designed to be innovative, Create integrative mechanisms for:inclusive, nor development-oriented • Outcome-oriented engagements with real groups and communities in the informal2. Geared towards individual capabilities, economynot collective development • Multi-disciplinary, field-engaged coursework3. Highly fragmented organizations (into • Multi-disciplinary IID program and project-functions, disciplines, and ranks) oriented institutes (Innovation Centres, Think tanks)4. Short-term activity cycles (classes,semesters, courses) Define and create multidisciplinary fields (e.g., IID) to engage in:5. Few long-term programmatic • Forward integration (knowledge assets intoengagements informal economy)6. Incentive system (e.g., publish or • Backward integration (lessons fromperish schemes) promotes attentiveness informal economy into the classroom)to foreign theories, models, and research • Theory-building (shared understanding ofproblems the whole IID process)
Universities for IID: Outward Challenges and Response Strategies Challenges Potential Response Strategies1. Academic autonomy translates • Enhance interoperability with primaryinto isolation from governments, intermediaries for IID throughenterprises, NGOs and POs, and partnership-building and functional,grant-giving institutions program, and project partnerships • Embed outcome mapping and2. Limited working relationships with performance management to link inputsprimary intermediaries to outcomes and rewards to work in enhancing its own IID-capabilities and that of the primary intermediaries3. No framework for systematic • Create, network, and enlarge pool of IIDinter-university, inter-country capable universities within countriesknowledge management, resource and then the regionpooling and sharing, and networking i. Tap existing networksfor IID ii. Build early linkages with UNIID-SA, Africa, and LAC to fast-track learning)
UNIID-SEA Goals Motivate and capacitate pivot universities in participating countries to lead in rethinking and redesigning university core missions and operations in teaching, research and extension to render them IID-capable; Motivate and capacitate pivot Councils in participating countries to lead in re- thinking and re-designing network core missions and operations in research agenda setting, granting, and policy advice to render them IID-capable; Facilitate the complementation of Universities and Councils in knowledge creation, sharing, and translation into IID-oriented policy; Create opportunities for IID–oriented collaboration and partnerships among intermediaries towards more effective IID engagements with the informal economy; Build an UNIID-SEA Network of Universities and Councils with linkages to other UNIID networks (South Africa, Latin America and South Asia).
Key Year 1 Project Activities 2012 Major Project Activities Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4Conduct a baseline study of councils anduniversities in SEAEstablish information and knowledgesharing platformsProject Launch and Planning Workshopwith partnersDevelop IID course moduleImplement competitive research grantsprogram in universitiesHold capacity building workshop forcouncilsSubmit report to IDRC
Key Activities of UNIID-SEA• Conduct baseline study for assessing project outcomes;• Build an integrative IEC platform for sharing and collaboration• Undertake IID-oriented capacity-building activities for universities and councils;• Develop and pilot an IID Course Module in participating universities;• Promote collaborative research projects on informal economy innovations (e.g. competitive grants);• Create formal and informal linkages among Universities and Councils and between them and other innovation and development actors;• Link with other UNIID networks.
National Innovation Systems (NIS) in Southeast AsiaGroup 1 (“Structured”): Well established and advanced NIS. Singapore and China;Group 2 (“Fractional”): Weak innovation systems. Some missing links and/orweaknesses within NIS but remedial mechanisms and programs being implemented.Economies are continuously developing their S&T infrastructures. Specialisedinstitutional units established to monitor advancement of R&D, linkages amongsectors and technology commercialisation. Brunei, Malaysia, Thailand and thePhilippines;Group 3 (“Entry”): Just beginning to develop NIS. S&T infrastructuresunderdeveloped. Innovation in enterprises still basic but some remedial mechanismsin place. Indonesia, Lao PDR, Vietnam and Cambodia;Group 4 (“Unstructured”): No established NIS. Innovation management newconcept and factors such as institutional arrangements, competencies of manpower,and investment in S&T infrastructure are still being designed. Myanmar and Timor-Leste. Source: SEA Megacities project February 2012