4.1.7.3 Innovation and Technology Transfer
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
4.1.7.3 Innovation and technology transfer The primary goal of these investments is to exploit public research activities in order to support firms with their innovation process. The budget allocation for ITT (Innovation and Technology Transfer) activities are quite substantial (estimated 367 MECU=14%). This does not include investments in CSF- funded TTI-infrastructure (Technology Transfer Centres, Technology Parks) to host and support new technology based firms (NTBF). Creation of co-operation and partnerships between the public and private sector through joint public-private research is a main mechanism for stimulation of innovation and technology transfer. A second type of ITT- measures is the provision of competent (public and private) support services to industry in the field of innovation and product and process development. Some good examples can be seen in the Netherlands and the New German Länder. In some of the countries support for innovation and technology transfer is well organised and seems to contribute to regional economic development. This regards specifically Finland, Ireland, UK and Sweden. In other countries the support is still developing (Spain), has gaps (Austria), is fragmented (Italy) or receives insufficient attention (Greece). In Austria, a technology centre (TCE) was funded, housing a number of small new technology based firms and providing support to them (incubator centre). In Belgium, several (5) measures are directed at innovation and technology transfer. The most successful measure to support innovation is a grant scheme (Rdplus). Two measures were directed at creating intermediate organisations to create joint public /private R&D projects. These projects seem to be successful, they resulted in more than 600 projects. Furthermore, a scientific adventure park is being established that might in the long run have an indirect effect on innovation. In Finland, innovation and technology transfer is an element of many of the measures. Specific initiatives in this area are the development of the design park project, directly aimed at co-operation between public research and industry, and the joint projects, carried out by the 6 polytechnical schools in the region. These measures are considered to be successful. In France, innovation and technology transfer are generally supported through support of existing organisations such as CRITT (research centres network). Technology transfer and innovation are supported through co-operation of these institutes with industry. In Greece, most regions don’t have significant innovation and technology transfer activities. This specifically pertains to Southern Aegean, Northern Aegean, Ionian Islands, Eastern Macedonia and Western Greece. In some of these regions however, technology transfer activities are taking place due to participation in the EPET programme. In Epirus and Crete, activities in the area of innovation and technology transfer are slowly emerging, with varying success. Particularly in Crete, activities seem to be rather ineffective. Attica, 96 due to the proximity of Athens, is well served by the support structures for innovation and technology transfer of Athens In Ireland, there are comprehensive schemes supporting innovation initiatives and they compare well with international best practice in respect of RTDI support. The Funds were particularly used to reinforce the technology centres and PAT’s. Furthermore, a pilot scheme was launched to encourage networking between SME’s. Support for product and process development and for provision of industry support services are strong. Collaborative research and company training schemes are in operation. In Italy, support for innovation and technology transfer under the multiregional programme is particularly given by the measure that funds RTDI projects of the technology parks. However, most of the technology parks are not yet operational and the measure is not yet bearing fruit. Some regional programmes also dedicate measures to innovation and technology transfer but their impact is not high, sometimes because the measures have not yet been implemented, sometimes because they particularly relate to large companies and not to SME’s, sometimes because the measure itself is not successful. In Abruzzo, laboratories for support of industries are built and an unsuccessful demonstration programme to demonstrate innovative projects was launched. In Calabria little support for innovation and technology transfer is given yet, however the regional administration understands the importance. In Campania, the regional programme supports joint public-private RTDI- projects. In Puglia specific measures are directed at innovation (7.4.1) and technology transfer (7.4.2, 7.4.3). However, these measures have not started. In Sardegna, technology transfer is increasingly strong between university and a small group of high tech companies. The support to SME’s in the area of innovation and technology transfer is still at a low level. In 1997 a meeting was organised where SME’s and organisations of the supply side could meet. In Sicily, technology transfer is particularly developed between universities and a limited number of large companies. Under the regional programme, several measures are directed at innovation and technology transfer, however, the measures have not been implemented sofar. In Portugal, innovation and technology are stimulated under the PEDIP and the PRAXIS programme. No support is given on a regional level. Approximately 74% of the funds of the RTD-oriented measures of PEDIP programme are destined for innovation and technology transfer. The relevant PEDIP measures fund demonstration projects (successful), joint public-private research projects, mobilising projects (consortium research projects between public research and industries) and a measure to support the creation of a market for public research institutes. The latter measure was a failure. In Spain, in general support for innovation and technology transfer is not very well developed. In most of the regions the OTRI’s (agencies for technology transfer, located near universities) are being strengthened and a programme of CICYT for promotion of RTDI enjoys a good participation and is a major driver of technology transfer. Nevertheless, generally university research is performed without a clear view of industry’s needs. In Andalusia, two technology parks with European innovation centres projects, stimulate technology transfer. Asturias Asturias, Canary Islands, Cantabria and Castilla 97 la Mancha regional activities on innovation support and technology transfer are very limited. In Extremadura, support for innovation and technology transfer is recognised as important and technology centres are investing in such services. In Galicia a technology transfer organisation at the University of Santiago de Compostella was created, and two centres of innovation and services (CIS) were established (one for wood, one for design and technology). These offer a range of services to industry. In Murcia, support for innovation and technology transfer is strengthened through the Institute for Regional Promotion (IFR) through an innovation relay centre and a series of technology centres. In Valencia, support for innovation and technology transfer is limited. OTRI’s in Valencia don’t seem to work very well. Recently a spin off programme was launched, universities have programmes to stimulate graduates to start their own business, In Sweden, innovation and technology transfer receive ample attention. Each of the RTDI-related projects needs a plan on how to transfer the results. Innovation and technology transfer are predominantly stimulated through public-private partnerships, mostly in the area of woodprocessing. There is only one innovation centre, with limited activities. There are no programmes for spin offs or start ups. In the UK, support services for innovation and technology transfer are well developed. In Northern Ireland, a wide range of instruments exists, supporting innovation and technology transfer. Particularly TCS (Teaching Companies Scheme, graduate placement in industry) is acknowledged to be a successful scheme, participation is not very high (less than 100). The programme ‘Manufacturing Technology Partnership’ is aimed at micro-enterprises but is a small programme. SME’s in Northern Ireland have stated that they find access to the support structures difficult. In Merseyside, most of the measures have an innovation support function or a technology transfer component. Specific initiatives: the university of Liverpool provides various services to industry such as Internet training and PIDC (Product Information and Design Centre, that offers integrated programmes of technology transfer and training in product design and development). Furthermore, a laser engineering project offers advice and facilities to help local SME’s to set up and / or develop laser processes. 4.1.7.4 Management and implementation processes For the relevant regions (with RTDI in their regional programme) management processes were assessed on five aspects: • is management in general considered satisfactory? • is the legal framework satisfactory? Is the legal mandate for the institutions and the programmes involved properly specified in laws and regulations? • Is the institutional framework satisfactory? Specific attention is given to whether there is an appropriate organisation, with sufficient expertise and adequately staffed, that is able to implement the measures in a competent