ENHANCING INDUSTRY-SCIENCE RELATIONSHIPS THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENTS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – ENHANCING INDUSTRY-SCIENCE RELATIONSHIPS THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENTS PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 7b2047-ODMyM



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

ENHANCING INDUSTRY-SCIENCE RELATIONSHIPS THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENTS

Description:

ENHANCING INDUSTRY-SCIENCE RELATIONSHIPS THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENTS Jean Guinet Science and Technology Policy Division DSTI, OECD Seminar on Growth strategies ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:71
Avg rating:3.0/5.0

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: ENHANCING INDUSTRY-SCIENCE RELATIONSHIPS THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENTS


1
ENHANCING INDUSTRY-SCIENCE RELATIONSHIPS THE
ROLE OF GOVERNMENTS
Jean Guinet Science and Technology Policy
Division DSTI, OECD
Seminar on Growth strategies Czech ambition
and OECD experience (Paris, 11 January 2006)
2
Outline
  • Preamble
  • Innovation and economic performance the growing
    importance of industry-science relationships
    (ISRs)
  • Enhancing ISRs a role for government
  • Public promotion of ISRs the need for an overall
    strategy
  • Public-Private Partnership (PP/Ps) as a key tool
  • Good practices in PP/Ps lessons from case
    studies

3
Welfare
Economic growth
Productivity growth
Employment growth
Innovation
Quality of labour
Capital deepening
RD
FDI RD international RD spillovers
Domestic RD
Science Base
4
Successful countries have characteristics in
common
  • Good fundamentals, including international
    openess
  • Above average improvement in innovation
    performance due to
  • High rate of investment in education, ICTs and
    RD
  • High share of business in financing RD
  • An increasingly diversified base of innovators,
    with a greater role for SMEs, thanks inter alia
    to a supportive financial system
  • Solid regional pillars of national development,
    i.e. vibrant innovative clusters
  • High level of networking among innovators,
    especially improved linkages between science and
    industry

5
  • Industry-Science Relationships (ISRs) are
    becoming increasingly important for the following
    main reasons
  • Increasing scientific content of innovation
  • Overlaping waves of science-based technologies
    (Electronics, new materials, biotechnology,
    nanotechnology, advanced analytical and
    measurement methods).
  • ICTs enhance the role of codified knowledge
    (e.g. the rise of computer-aided design and
    computer-aided manufacture (CADCAM) has resulted
    in a move away from craft-based technology to
    technology based on more formal bodies of
    knowledge in many traditional engineering
    sectors.
  • Changing business RD strategies Open
    Innovation Model
  • Focus on core business and short to medium term
    research agenda.
  • Individual products and processes incorporate an
    increasing range of technologies.

6
Science contributes increasingly and more
directly to innovation
Links between science and innovation measured
by the average number of scientific articles
quoted in patents
7
Open Innovation in Biotechnology
Patenting in Biotechnology -- Changes in the role
of actors (between1995 and 2003)
Source OECD case study on biotech innovation
systems.
8
  • Despite obvious potential mutual benefits ISRs
    face a number of obstacles that only governments
    can lower

SCIENCE
INDUSTRY
Non-conducive framework conditions (e.g. barriers
to entrepreneurship) Ineffective
intermediaries Deficient legal and regulatory
framework
Speed-up the acquisition of new
knowledge Increase the innovation capacity of
firms Upgrade innovative networks and clusters
Secure and diversify the funding base Provide
guidance for research priorities Improve
research tools and capabilities
Inappropriate researchers incentives Regulatory
obstacles to researchers mobility and
entrepreneurship Over-specialisation in
non-business relevant research fields
Low propensity to innovate and lack of absorptive
capacity Lack of qualified ST personnel Short
time horizon of investment in innovation
9
Connecting Science to Innovation the need for
an overall strategy
10
Priority channels of ISRs to be promoted
  • The HRST route (mobility of researchers, social
    networks)
  • The entrepreneurial route (new technology-based
    firms, including spin-offs)
  • The patenting route (licensing IPR that results
    from publicly-funded research)
  • The co-operative route (joint projects
    involving scientists and innovators)
  • At cross-roads Public-Private partnerships for
    Research and Innovation (PP/Ps)

Framework conditions (regulations, clusters)
Policies to foster interactions within
innovation systems
Policies to promote patenting by PROs
Policies to support NTBFs, including spin-offs
Public-private partnerships
11
PP/Ps for innovation Definition
  • Any formal relationship or arrangement over a
    fixed-term/indefinite period of time, between
    public and private actors, where both sides
    interact in the decision-making process, and
    co-invest scarce resources such as money,
    personnel, facility, and information in order to
    achieve specific objectives in the area of the
    area of science, technology, and innovation
  • A public-private partnership -- as opposed to
    more casual, arms length or hierarchical
    relationships is characterised by the
    following
  • Institutionalisation
  • Government as a partner.
  • Shared objectives and a clearly defined public
    interest
  • Active involvement and co-investment of resources

12
  • PP/Ps play an increasing role within the
    innovation policy tool-kit of most OECD countries
  • Pioneering programmes in the late 1980s (e.g.
    United States, Australia) Many new intiatives at
    the end of the 1990s
  • Fostering Industry-Science Relationships has
    become their main target because
  • They provide effective springboards for
    frontier-end pre-competitive RD in areas of
    strategic importance where innovation is deeply
    rooted in science
  • P/PP is the best approach to build innovative
    networks in new multidisciplinary research fields
    (e.g. nanotechnology, genomics)
  • But also because they can contribute to other
    objectives and yield broader benefits
  • Input and output additionality
  • Behavioural additionality
  • Improved RD procurement
  • New avenues for commercial spill-over from public
    research
  • Linking SMEs with scientific research
  • Improved inter-ministerial coordination on
    innovation issues
  • Increased synergies between regional innovation
    systems

13
PP/Ps for research and innovation in the United
States
Federal programmes
GOALI
SBIR
ATP
MEP
UCRC
Clean coal, Clean car, Nanotechnology, Biotechnolo
gy, Networking technologies, Fuel cell etc.
PFI
STC
STTR
Policies to enhance innovation competencies
of firms
Policies to support investment in science and
RD
Policies to strengthen linkages within
innovation systems
Targeted support
NTBFs financing
SME networks
A myriad of P/PP initiatives
Regional (states and municipalities) programmes
14
Efficient design and management of PP/PsMain
lessons from case studies
PP/P programme
Australia Co-operative Research Centres Program (CRCs)
Austria Kplus and Kind/Knet
France Research and Technological Innovation Networks (RRITs)
Netherlands Leading Technology Institutes (LTIs)
Spain Technological Centres (TCs) and Concerted Research Projects
15
KEY FACTORS OF SUCCESS
  • Long-term commitment from both Government and
    Industry, based on a shared vision
  • Achieve critical mass but also deep reach within
    the National Innovation System (e.g. complement
    large PP/Ps with support to smaller PP research
    teams e.g. the CDL programme in Austria, or the
    ARC Linkage Grants and Fellowships programme in
    Australia)
  • Build on existing networks but do not neglect
    areas where potential actors are still dispersed
    (e.g. multidisciplary research) and/or
    inexperienced in accessing government support
  • Implement efficient selection and steering
    mechanisms that ensure a sustainable balance
    between public and private interests

16
Avoiding drifts in the research agenda of PP/Ps
Quality
Low
Scientific relevance
Market relevance
High
Low
Low
Low
Strategic importance for the economy society
17
Efficient steering of PP/Ps Four key mechanisms
Selection of projects and participants
Financing
Management and organisation
Evaluation
18
Selection of PP/P projects and participants
  • A stringent selection process where proposals
    have to compete, based on the quality of their
    scientific content, their industrial relevance
    and the soundness of their business plan. There
    are two options
  • A pure bottom-up approach for the choice of
    technological areas (e.g. Austria and
    Netherlands)
  • A mixed approach where top-down criteria are used
    to pre-determine areas where PP/P are promoted
    (France and, to a lesser extent, Australia)
  • Each have both advantages and drawbacks, much
    depend on specific national conditions
  • International openness. Not only PP/Ps should be
    opened up to foreign firms, but also to foreign
    universities and public labs when these hold
    critical complementary competencies.
  • Participation of small firms. SMEs are key actors
    in some research areas (e.g. biotech, multimedia,
    etc.). In others their participation should be
    facilitated but not at the expense of the overall
    efficiency of PP/Ps (e.g. consortium of SMEs,
    separate diffusion centers).

19
Priority policy action
Types of SMEs
Financing
Other
Build basic capacities and provide incentives to
innovate
Non-innovative SMEs

Project-based financial support Loan guarantee
Develop innovation networks
Innovative SMEs
Incubators, science parks
Equity financing (venture capital, business
angels) Seed capital Tax neutrality
P/PPs
NTBFs
Science-Based Spin-offs
Conducive regulations in public research
organisations
20
Financing
  • Leverage. The cost-sharing arrangements should
    ensure high reciprocal leverage. This is the key
    in ensuring sustained commitment from both public
    and private partners.
  • Long-term commitment. Support from government
    should be guaranteed for a sufficient long period
    (e.g. at least 4-5 years, up to 7 years)
  • A ceiling to government subsidy. Its share should
    not exceed 50, and that of industry should be
    set at a minimum (e.g. at least 20). The
    contribution of public research organisations are
    often mainly in-kind.
  • Flexibility in financial arrangements. The
    arrangements might be different from the start
    according to the technological field, and evolve
    over time as PP/Ps mature.
  • Financial self-sustainability, whereby a PP/P
    would continue after its initial term without
    subsidisation, could be a long-term objective but
    not in all cases.

21
Organisation and management
  • Autonomy and strong industry involvement. A large
    degree of autonomy should be left to partners in
    defining the detailed research projects portfolio
    of individual PP/Ps. Industry should generally be
    given the majority votes in governing boards.
  • Customization. Different organisational
    arrangements (e.g. network versus co-operative
    research institute, or mixed form) may be
    warranted, depending on technological areas and
    preferences of partners.
  • Leadership. PP/Ps should include all leading
    enterprises and public research centres in the
    relevant technological fields, and their managers
    should be well-known/respected figures that have
    a broad experience and good links with both
    academia and industry.
  • Visibility. The institutional form of PP/Ps
    should help them acquire visibility at both
    nationally and internationally. This helps them
    position themselves within international
    networks, and creates continuous peer pressure
    for improvement from competing forms of
    public-private relations.
  • Firm agreement on IPRs. Government should not
    impose more than broad principles. Detailed
    contractual provisions should be left to
    partners. But the existence of a clear agreement
    among would-be partners should be made a
    necessary condition for government support.

22
Evaluation
  • Ex-ante, interim and ex-post evaluation are all
    necessary.
  • Assessing behavioural additionality. One
    objective of PP/Ps is to promote long-lasting
    changes in the attitudes of both the public and
    private research communities. This raises
    difficult methodological challenges.
  • Multidimensional, thorough and objective. The
    involvement of foreign scientific, technological
    and business experts is usually required, given
    the limited pool of national expertise, possible
    conflict of interests, and the global nature of
    markets for end-uses of research outcomes.
  • Systemic. The portfolio, and not only individual
    PP/Ps need to be evaluated. The interaction with
    other policy instruments ought to be taken into
    account.
  • Closely linked to all decision processes.
    Evaluation shall not only inform policy makers
    about the economic impact of such use of budget
    resources, but also be inspiring for the managers
    of PP/Ps.

23
Thank you for your attention
Contact
jean.guinet_at_oecd.org
Web Resource
www.oecd.org/sti/innovation
About PowerShow.com