Drivers – Hydro Nation agenda, WFD, climate change, resource efficiency, population growth, demographic changes, ageing infrastructure, etcScotland lagging – see figureStakeholder support – lots of evidence from SMEs in particular (delays getting technologies to market, AMP cycles, risk aversion, skills shortages, etc)There is undoubtedly a lot going on around innovation, but not coordinated – result is that SMEs and others are confused and stymied
1 – improve coordination and build on existing facilities. Low cost but gaps remain?2 - We haven’t provided a recommendation on who or where hub should be. Could be a university, a Scottish Water site or another industrial or commercial site. The exact location and nature of the site could be decided by the Scottish Government, by a wider stakeholder group, or by competitive tender3 – start from scratch, perhaps using PPP? A useful showcase, but higher cost, we estimate £20-30 million – not justified by projected revenue, hence rec 2
Herriot watt uni
Aim:“Assess the demand for an Innovation Park and consider if there are anybarriers to fully realising the economic opportunities of the water sector forScotland that could be addressed by a virtual and/or physical facility”.Why involve a university in this?
• Targeted stakeholder questionnaire – Sent to all identified contacts – Follow up with key contacts Consensus that this is a good idea.• 2 stakeholder workshops – SMEs/Policy – Academia• Desk-based literature & evidence review – Key sites around world – Demand/revenue/business model
• Lots of drivers for innovation – policy, regulatory, climatic, growth, etc• Unanimous stakeholder support – Delays getting to market – Risk aversion – Skills shortages – Complex & confused picture of organisations and support currently
Recommendation 3: A water and wastewater innovation steering groupshould be created.Recommendation 4: Consideration should be given to this steeringgroup being independently chaired from within the commercial sector.• CREW +• Led by enterprise organisation?
Recommendation 5: Consideration should be given to an appropriate “brand” name for the facility, such as the acronym “WInS” (Water Innovation Scotland). Recommendation 6: A campaign to communicate the objectives of the activity together with the creation of promotional material including leaflets and a web site should be undertaken.• Create „brand‟• Develop promotional material
• Often geographically distributed - hub-and-spoke• Specific or variety of testing facilities• Grants for research or innovation prizes• Broad expertise base and networking opportunities - often aimed at linking academic, industrial and SMEs• Very few conduct international standards accreditation work• Funding comes from variety of different sources, but public sector frequently provides majority of funding• Some involved in linking innovation to teaching and learning• Some involved in piloting or demonstration• Some have anchor tenant(s) with cluster around Co-ordination + physical facility.
Scottish Innovation Park should1. Include appropriate features of examples outlined2. Take account of the activities provided by existing facilities, and collaborate where appropriate3. Promote the specific issues relevant to Scotland (i.e. in line with the Hydro Nation agenda).
Option 1: Limited expansion of existing activitiesOption 2: Fully coordinated ‘hub and spoke’ facility building on existing assetsOption 3: Create a new dedicated facility Recommendation 2: More work is needed to identify the best option and a detailed business plan is prepared by steering group.
Steering function Creation of brand name Stakeholder Coordination Communication and promotionScottish GovernmentScottish EnterpriseHighlands and Islands EnterpriseScottish Development InternationalSEPAScotland EuropaJames Hutton InstituteScottish Environment Technology NetworkUniversitiesScottish WaterTier 1 OrganisationsSMEs