DOCSLIB.ORG

OECD Case Study on Innovation: the Finnish Biotechnology Innovation System

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
OECD Case Study on Innovation: the Finnish Biotechnology Innovation System OECD Case Study on Innovation: The Finnish Biotechnology Innovation System Authors: Gabriela von Blankenfeld-Enkvist Malin Brännback Riitta Söderlund Marin Petrov INNOMARKET Turku School of Economics and Business Administration Business Research and Development Centre Rehtorinpellonkatu 3 FIN-20500 Turku Finland http://www.tukkk.fi/innomarket/ January 2004 Contents 1 Introduction _____________________________________________________4 1.1 Background _________________________________________________4 1.2 Goals of the research _________________________________________5 1.3 Approach ___________________________________________________7 1.4 Country characteristics _______________________________________8 1.4.1 General figures and indicators _______________________________8 1.4.2 Main industries__________________________________________11 1.4.3 Size and structure of the pharmaceutical industry _______________12 2 Overview of national R&D technology and innovation policies ___________15 2.1 Introduction________________________________________________15 2.2 Main Actors in Policy Making and Policy Programme Management _17 2.2.1 Policy making organisations________________________________18 2.2.2 Policy management organisations____________________________18 2.2.3 Actors contributing to policy implementation __________________20 2.3 Main policies _______________________________________________22 2.3.1 Policies for knowledge-based support ________________________22 2.3.2 Policies for commercialisation support________________________26 2.3.3 Policies with a socio-economic or ethical dimension_____________28 3 Structure and dynamics of the biopharma system ______________________29 3.1 National public R&D system __________________________________29 3.2 Business system _____________________________________________30 3.2.1 Biotechnology companies and characteristics __________________30 3.2.2 R&D co-operation________________________________________33 3.2.3 International dimension of the system ________________________35 3.3 Performance of the system ____________________________________37 3.3.1 Educational output_______________________________________37 3.3.2 Publication performance ___________________________________38 3.3.3 Patenting performance ____________________________________42 4 Innovation barriers and drivers_____________________________________44 4.1 Knowledge sources __________________________________________44 4.2 Human Resources ___________________________________________46 4.3 Financing __________________________________________________46 4.3.1 Public funds and framework conditions _______________________47 4.3.2 Public R&D funding ______________________________________49 4.3.3 Public R&D funding to biotechnology ________________________50 4.3.4 Taxation _______________________________________________54 4.3.5 Venture Capital financing__________________________________55 4.4 Entrepreneurship ___________________________________________59 4.5 Laws and regulations influencing the biopharmaceutical industry___62 4.5.1 Regulations touching on medical research _____________________62 4.5.2 Protection of Intellectual Property Rights______________________67 2 4.5.3 Ownership of Research Results _____________________________70 5 Markets________________________________________________________74 5.1 Background ________________________________________________74 5.2 Organisation of national health care system _____________________76 5.2.1 Health care system _______________________________________76 5.2.2 Health care expenditure ___________________________________78 5.2.3 Financing health care _____________________________________80 5.2.4 National Health Insurance__________________________________80 5.2.5 From marketing authorisation to sales of medicines _____________82 5.3 Role of users________________________________________________85 5.4 Lead market feature _________________________________________86 5.5 Role of demand _____________________________________________86 5.6 Socio-economic/ethical aspects (J38-39) _________________________87 6 Synthesis and conclusion on research questions _______________________91 3 1 Introduction 1.1 Background “When an inventor in Silicon Valley opens his garage door to show off his latest idea, he has 50% of the world market in front of him. When an in inventor in Finland opens his garage door, he faces three feet of snow.” J.O. Nieminen, CEO of Nokia Mobira, 1984 The process of translating a basic science invention into a commercially viable innovation is a complex process and getting even more so. Both markets and technologies are becoming increasingly complex. The rapid advance of the scientific frontier and the increasing breadth and depth of knowledge available across all scientific fields have contributed to this acceleration of technological complexity. Today, even large corporations are limited in their capability to bring together all the skills and resources required for in-house development and commercialisation of science-based technologies. Factors such as the shortening of product life cycles and the combination of several technologies within a single product or service mean that the company increasingly depends on external inputs, in the form of skills, advice, proprietary technologies, cooperation networks, for successful innovation. Measured in relation to GDP, Europe devotes more resources to academic research than either the United States or Japan, and research in Europe is highly diversified. However, Europe performs significantly worse in translating research into innovation, also described as the “European paradox”: an impressive quantity and quality in R&D but a less impressive performance in terms of innovation. One important reason might be that innovation policies in Europe focus more on technological innovation and the generation of knew ideas and knowledge. It can be speculated, however, that limits to growth might not lie as much in the ability to generate new ideas, but in the ability to process an abundance of potentially new seed ideas into usable forms. In addition, other forms of innovation, as social, organizational or market innovation might be as important to support economic growth. Therefore, weaknesses in organisational, presentational, value added and business model innovation might be as relevant to the slow pace of progress towards the Lisbon goals as the lower level of business R&D spending. Although the systemic model of innovation is now clearly prevailing, many measures put into practice to promote innovation are still based on the linear view, implicitly assuming a causal and linear relationship between input and output. Nevertheless, the pharmaceutical sector has demonstrated over the last years that increases in R&D spending do not necessarily translate into increased performance and productivity. One further problem is that performance indicators for non-technological forms of innovation, and market factors, are at present less well captured by innovation statistics, and less subject to analysis, than those linked to research. This might lead to a further focus on input measures rather than outcome indicators. It can be speculated that the systemic model has yet to be fully reflected in the way that innovation policy is devised and implemented, monitored and evaluated. Innovation and innovation policies in biotechnology is therefore a very complex, multidimensional issue and many problems facing companies, policy makers, public and private investors cannot be fixed in an easy, straight-forward way due to the 4 complex, multidimensional “nature” of innovation, and no straight- forward policy recommendations can therefore be offered. However, we will try to describe the frame and the challenges the National innovation system has to face in Finland to realize the promises Biotechnology has the potential to fulfil: to improve health and quality of life, and to support a sustainable economic development. As more research is being performed,the view on innovation and innovation systems is constantly evolving. Since even terms as “invention” and “innovation” are often not used in a very consistent and sometimes even somewhat interchangeable form in the literature, we would like to introduce some basic definitions1. A technological innovation is the successful implementation of a technical idea, which is new to the institution creating it. The essence of technology-based innovation is the systematic and successful use of science to create new forms of economic activity. Technology-based innovation thus represents a subset of all innovation. The distinction between technology-based innovation and incremental product enhancement is based on the extent of novelty in the science or technology. A commercial innovation is the result of the application of technical, market, or business-model ingenuity to create a new or improved product, process, or service that is successfully introduced into the market. An invention is distinguished from an innovation by its character as pure knowledge. An invention becomes an innovation with the first commercial transaction. An innovation is thus a commercialised invention The direct products of a technological invention are not goods or services, but the recipes used to create them. This may result in patents, or more broadly in new firms or business units within existing firms. A patent refers more to an invention than an innovation. Inventions are the necessary seed for technological change, but it is innovation that generates
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Income Tax (Einkommensteuer) 1
    INVENTORY LEVIED IN THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION 16th edition — Supplement AUSTRIA FINLAND SWEDEN * »* • • • • • *** EUROPEAN COMMISSION EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL XXI CUSTOMS AND INDIRECTTAXATION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL XV INTERNAL MARKET AND FINANCIAL SERVICES Inventory of taxes levied in the Member States of the European Union by the State and the local authorities (Lander, départements, regions, districts, provinces, communes) 16TH EDITION — Supplement Austria Finland Sweden DOCUMENT A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu.int) Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1996 ISBN 92-827-6986-0 © ECSC-EC-EAEC, Brussels · Luxembourg, 1996 Printed in Luxembourg Introductory note In collaboration with the Member States, the European Commission publishes a survey of the duties and taxes in force in the Member States of the European Union. The present edition reflects the situation on 1 January 1995 in Austria, Finland and Sweden and Is a supplement to the 16th edition. This publication aims to provide all those interested in tax law — public servants, university staff, students, businessmen, tax advisers, etc.—with a general view of the tax systems of the Member States. Directorates-General XXI and XV will be pleased to receive any comments or suggestions with a view to the improvement of this work. Rue de la Loi 200 B-1040 Brussels Abbreviations M.b. — Moniteur belge B.S. = Belgisch Staatsblad BGBl. = Bundesgesetzblatt VO = Verordnung BayBS = Bayrische Bereinigte Sammlung GVBI = Gesetz- und Verordnungsblatt RGBl = Reichsgesetzblatt RAO and AO = (Reichs).
    [Show full text]
  • Statement on the Corporate Governance and Steering System 2016 Finnvera’S Financial Review 2016 2
    Statement on the Corporate Governance and Steering System 2016 FINNVERA’s FinanciaL REVIEW 2016 2 Statement on the Corporate Governance and Steering System Finnvera’s Financial Review 2016 Statement on the Corporate Governance and Steering System Contents Statement on the Corporate Governance and Steering System .............. 3 Acts and rules governing the operations ........................................... 3 The goals of good corporate governance ........................................... 3 Ownership and ownership policy ..................................................... 4 Administrative bodies of Finnvera ........................................ ........... 4 General Meeting of Shareholders ........................................ 4 Supervisory Board ............................................................ 4 Board of Directors ............................................................ 5 Inspection Committee of the Board of Directors ..................... 7 Remuneration Committee of the Board of Directors ................ 7 Chief Executive Officer, Management Group and Corporate Management Team ............................................. 8 Salaries and fees .......................................................................... 8 Operating principles for internal control ............................................ 9 Risk management ......................................................................... 9 Controlling the financial reporting process ........................................ 9 Compliance function .....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Regulator\ Reform in Finland
    5HJXODWRU\ 5HIRUP LQ )LQODQG 7KH 5ROH RI &RPSHWLWLRQ 3ROLF\ LQ 5HJXODWRU\ 5HIRUP ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came into force on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall promote policies designed: to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a rising standard of living in Member countries, while maintaining financial stability, and thus to contribute to the development of the world economy; to contribute to sound economic expansion in Member as well as non-member countries in the process of economic development; and to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatory basis in accordance with international obligations. The original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The following countries became Members subsequently through accession at the dates indicated hereafter: Japan (28th April 1964), Finland (28th January 1969), Australia (7th June 1971), New Zealand (29th May 1973), Mexico (18th May 1994), the Czech Republic (21st December 1995), Hungary (7th May 1996), Poland (22nd November 1996), Korea (12th December 1996) and the Slovak Republic (14th December 2000). The Commission of the European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD (Article 13 of the OECD Convention). Publié en français sous le titre : LE ROLE DE LA POLITIQUE DE LA CONCURRENCE DANS LA RÉFORME DE LA RÉGLEMENTATION © OECD 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report Annual 2011
    Annual Report 2011 www.altiacorporation.com 2 | 3 Altia annual report 2011 3 | 3 _Contents 04 32 Altia’s year Framework for sustainable 08 development CEO’s review 33 Framework and definition 10 of reporting Value in three 35 waves Financial 14 responsibility Never-ending passion 36 for brands Environmental WE THINK responsibility AHEAD 16 Brands are the core of 39 our growth IN Altia’s quality, safety GOOD and environmental COMPANY principles FAST TRACK 18 TO THE Selection of Altia’s MARKETS own brands 44 Social responsibility SHARING THE BEST 20 Fast track to the Nordic 49 MOMENTS and Baltic markets We follow responsible THIRST 22 business principles FOR Selection of Altia’s 51 GROWTH partner brands Comparing the report to the recommendation by Global 24 Reporting Initiative PASSION Industrial Services to customers 52 FOR Board of Directors BRANDS 26 Competitiveness through 54 BORN production, logistics and Executive Management sourcing Team RESPONSIBLE 30 56 Responsibility report Contact details 4 | 5 Altia annual report 2011 5 | 5 _ Leading in the Nordics and Baltics Altia is the leading wine and spirits company offering quality brands in the Nordic and Baltic countries. Altia produces, delivers, markets, sells, imports and exports alcoholic beverages in these markets. Altia’s own brands such as Blossa, Chill Out, Explorer, Renault, Grönstedts, Koskenkorva, Jaloviina, O.P. Anderson, Xanté and Key Ratios for Altia Group 2011 2010 2009 Skåne Akvavit have a strong market position and many of them a long heritage to cherish. Net sales, EUR million 524.8 487.9 407.3 Operating profit, EUR million 34.4 32.6 15.6 ( % of net sales ) 6.6 6.7 3.8 Altia’s partner brands represent both local and international Profit before taxes,EUR million 31.1 29.6 9.4 ( % of net sales) 5.9 6.1 2.3 brands from all over the world, such as Codorníu, Drostdy-Hof, Profit for the period, EUR million 21.3 25.7 5.3 Hardy’s, Jack Daniel’s, Bowmore, Nederburg, Ravenswood ( % of net sales) 4.1 5.3 1.3 Statement of financial position, and Robert Mondavi.
    [Show full text]
  • Yhtiöittämisen Periaatteet Valtiolla
    Valtiovarainministeriö Yhtiöittämisen periaatteet valtiolla Esiselvitys 30.1.2018 Valtionhallinnon kehittämisosasto 30.1.2018 SISÄLLYS JOHDANTO .............................................................................................................................................. 2 1 Valtion yhtiöt ja omistajapolitiikan periaatteet ................................................................................ 3 1.1 Valtion omistamisen perusta ......................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Omistajaohjaus .............................................................................................................................. 4 1.3 Valtion yhtiöt .................................................................................................................................. 6 2 Valtion liikelaitokset ..................................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Euroopan yhteisön päätös Tieliikelaitosta koskien ...................................................................... 10 2.2 Valtion liikelaitoksia koskeva lainsäädäntö .................................................................................. 12 3 Rahastot ...................................................................................................................................... 14 3.1 Valtion talousarvion ulkopuoliset rahastot ................................................................................... 14 3.2 Itsenäiset
    [Show full text]
  • This Document Has Been Downloaded from Tampub – the Institutional Repository of University of Tampere
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Trepo - Institutional Repository of Tampere University This document has been downloaded from TamPub – The Institutional Repository of University of Tampere Post-print The permanent address of the publication is http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:uta-201405281513 Author(s): Kankaanpää, Jari; Oulasvirta, Lasse; Wacker, Jani Title: Steering and Monitoring Model of State-Owned Enterprises Year: 2014 Journal Title: International Journal of Public Administration Vol and number: 37 : 7 Pages: 409-423 ISSN: 0190-0692 Discipline: Business and management; Political science School /Other Unit: School of Management Item Type: Journal Article Language: en DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2013.858355 URN: URN:NBN:fi:uta-201405281513 All material supplied via TamPub is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights, and duplication or sale of all part of any of the repository collections is not permitted, except that material may be duplicated by you for your research use or educational purposes in electronic or print form. You must obtain permission for any other use. Electronic or print copies may not be offered, whether for sale or otherwise to anyone who is not an authorized user. Steering and Monitoring Model of State-Owned Enterprises Introduction Privatisation of stated-owned enterprises (SOEs) gained considerable momentum in developing and developed countries in the 1980s and 1990s (The World Bank, 2006, p. 3). Despite wide-ranging privatisation programmes, SOEs are still and will be an important part of many economies, especially in developing economies (La Porta, Lopez-de-Silanes, & Shleifer, 1999; Ezzamel, Wilmott, & Worthington, 2008; Vagliasindi, 2008; Ennser-Jedenastik, 2013).
    [Show full text]
  • Regulatory Reform in Finland
    Regulatory Reform in Finland MARKETISATION OF GOVERNMENT SERVICES – STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISES ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came into force on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall promote policies designed: − to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a rising standard of living in Member countries, while maintaining financial stability, and thus to contribute to the development of the world economy; − to contribute to sound economic expansion in Member as well as non-member countries in the process of economic development; and − to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatory basis in accordance with international obligations. The original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The following countries became Members subsequently through accession at the dates indicated hereafter: Japan (28th April 1964), Finland (28th January 1969), Australia (7th June 1971), New Zealand (29th May 1973), Mexico (18th May 1994), the Czech Republic (21st December 1995), Hungary (7th May 1996), Poland (22nd November 1996), Korea (12th December 1996) and the Slovak Republic (14th December 2000). The Commission of the European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD (Article 13 of the OECD Convention). © OECD 2003. Permission to reproduce a portion of this work for non-commercial purposes or classroom use should be obtained through the Centre français d’exploitation du droit de copie (CFC), 20, rue des Grands-Augustins, 75006 Paris, France, tel.
    [Show full text]
  • Finnvera Annual Review 2016
    Annual Review 2016 Annual Report YEAR 2016 2 Finnvera in brief Finnvera is a specialised financing company owned by the State of Finland. Finnvera has official Export Credit Agency (ECA) status. We supplement the financial services offered by banks and other providers of financing. We help Finnish enterprises to succeed and boost their competitiveness. By granting financing, we can participate in projects seen as having the potential for success. We provide financing 376 for the start, growth and internationalisation of enterprises experts and for protection against export risks. No good project or investment should fail for lack of financing. Finnvera’s operations are steered by the relevant legislation, international agreements, and the industrial and ownership policy goals determined by the State of Finland. The funds needed for granting credits are obtained from the international financial market. Personnel 376 experts work in Finnvera. Women account for 63 per 15 cent of the personnel, while men account for 37 per cent. 58 places per cent have a Master’s degree. Employment relationships are fairly long, on average 17 years. The competence and well-being of the personnel are of primary importance to Finnvera’s success. The company’s values – trust, partnership and a focus on solutions – are rooted in practices and guide the day-to-day work of Finnvera employees. Awareness of the company’s values and goals, and opportunities for participation and launching initiatives, support Finnvera employees’ dedication to the company. 27,700 Finnvera’s team succeeds when all clients Finnvera employees have the opportunity to be motivated and develop in their work.
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate Governance and Remuneration Statement
    2017 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND REMUNERATION STATEMENT 2017 Year 2017 The brochure contains an overview of Finavia’s business operations in 2017, sets Contents out the company’s goals and achievements, YEAR 2017 and presents the CEO’s review. Vuosi 2017 1 2017 Responsibility report The report covers the priorities of Finavia’s responsibility work, its aims RESPONSIBILITY REPORT and the results already achieved. 3 Vastuullisuusraportti 2017 1 Report on governance and management system Finavia Corporation 4 Observing the Governance Code 5 Corporate structure 6 Administrative and operative bodies 7 2017 Corporate governance Internal control, risk management and internal audit 15 and remuneration statement Audit 17 CORPORATE The publication contains a description of GOVERNANCE AND Finavia’s governance and steering system, as Related party transactions 18 REMUNERATION STATEMENT well as the salary and compensation report. Salary and compensation report 2017 Principles 20 Financial statements Remuneration of the Board of Directors 21 The financial statements contain the Board Remuneration of the CEO and other management 22 FINANCIAL of Directors’ report and the main details of STATEMENTS Finavia’s finances. 19 Bonuses payable to other members of staff 24 Tilinpäätös 2017 1 Corporate governance and remuneration statement 2017 2 3 Finavia Corporation 4 Observing the Governance Code 5 Corporate structure 6 Administrative and operative bodies 7 Internal control, risk management and internal audit 15 Audit 17 Related party transactions 18 REPORT ON GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Corporate governance and remuneration statement 2017 3 Finavia Corporation Finavia Corporation (hereafter “Finavia” or the “Company”) is Decision-making and governance in Finavia is in accordance a fully state-owned public limited company.
    [Show full text]
  • Finavia Corporate Governance and Remuneration Statement 2019
    2019 Corporate Governance and Remuneration Statement Finavia in brief Finavia is an airport company which operates and develops 21 airports around Finland. We serve Finnish and international passengers and airlines. Our key mission is to ensure smooth travel from Finland to different parts of the world and back. By developing airports and smooth connections, we create jobs and support Finland’s international competitiveness. We bear our responsibility for the impact of our activities on people, the environment and society at large. Safety, security, sustainable development and connectivity are at the core of our responsibility. At Finavia, responsibility is made of details, and every single detail counts. Contents CORPORATE GOVERNANCE STATEMENT .............4 Finavia Corporation ..............................................................................4 Observing the finnish corporate governance code ..................4 Corporate structure .............................................................................4 Administrative and operative bodies .............................................4 General Meeting ................................................................................5 Board of Directors ............................................................................5 Members of the Board of Directors on 31 December 2019 ....6 Committees of the Board of Directors ....................................8 Chief Executive Officer ..................................................................8 Executive Group ...............................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • A New Alcohol Environment
    Research THOMAS KARLSSON & PIA MÄKELÄ & ESA ÖSTERBERG & CHRISTOFFER TIGERSTEDT report A new alcohol ABSTRACT T. Karlsson & P. Mäkelä & E. Österberg environment & C. Tigerstedt: A new alcohol environment. Trends in alcohol Trends in alcohol consumption, harms and policy: consumption, harms and policy: Finland Finland 1990 – 2010 1990 – 2010 ■ AIMS This article reports developments in Introduction the Finnish alcohol field from 1990 to In the past two decades, several societal 2010, focusing on changes and trends changes have influenced the Finnish alcohol in alcohol consumption, drinking habits field. Among these changes, three in particu- and alcohol-related harm. We pay lar have affected the trends of alcohol con- special attention to changes in alcohol sumption, each in different directions. First, availability and alcohol policy and look followed by a robust economic upswing in the at the factors behind changes in alcohol second half of the 1980s, Finland experienced policies. The article will also discuss a severe economic recession in the first half of the current status and future prospects the 1990s. Secondly, in January 1995 Finland of alcohol policy and alcohol control as joined the European Union (EU), which pre- well as differences between Finland supposed a new Alcohol Act. This Act ended and the situation in the neighbouring an era of six decades of a comprehensive al- countries with a similar alcohol cohol monopoly system, but the Finnish State monopoly. alcohol monopoly Alko was still left with the ■ METHODS sole right of off-premise retail sale of alcoholic Routinely collected statistical data on beverages. And thirdly, in 2004, travellers’ al- alcohol consumption and related harm cohol import quotas from other EU member as well as repeated cross-sectional states were abandoned in January, alcohol representative population surveys will excise duties were decreased by an average be reviewed, as will changes in alcohol of one-third in March, and Estonia became a policy and availability.
    [Show full text]
  • Valtion Yhtiöomistus 2003
    Valtion yhtiöomistus 2003 Ministerin katsaus 2 Valtionyhtiöt ja valtion osakkuusyhtiöt 3 Valtion omistajapolitiikan ja omistajaohjauksen linjaukset 4 Valtioenemmistöiset pörssiyhtiöt Finnair Oyj 10 Fortum Oyj 12 Kemira Oyj 14 Muut valtionyhtiöt Alko Oy 18 Altia Oyj 19 Kemijoki Oy 20 Patria Industries Oyj 21 Posti-konserni 22 Vapo Oy 23 VR-Yhtymä Oy 24 Osakkuusyhtiöt Metso Oyj 26 Outokumpu Oyj 27 Rautaruukki Oyj 28 Sampo Oyj 29 Sponda Oyj 30 Stora Enso Oyj 31 TeliaSonera AB 32 Liite Julkaisija Kauppa- ja teollisuusministeriö, Helsinki 2004 Ulkoasu Neo-Geo Graphic Design Oy Kirjapaino Kirjapaino Markprint Oy Tunnuslukujen laskentaperiaatteet ilmenevät kunkin yhtiön vuosikertomuksesta. Emme vastaa julkaisussa olevien yhtiökohtaisten tietojen virheettömyydestä. Yhteystietomme julkaisun tilaamista varten ovat sivulla 36. Ministerin katsaus Suomessa taloudellinen kasvu jäi vuonna tiikkansa mukaisesti hallitus on valmis jatka- johtoryhmä, joka koostuisi kolmen keskeisen 2003 edellisvuotista hitaammaksi ja koko- maan valtion omistuksen vähentämistä niissä ministeriön omistajaohjauksesta vastaavista naistuotannon määrä lisääntyi ennakkotie- yhtiöissä, joissa se perustuu lähinnä sijoitta- virkamiehistä. tojen mukaan 1,9 prosenttia. Kasvu perustui jaintressiin. Omistusjärjestelyt harkitaan aina Omistajaohjaustyöryhmän raportista pääosin kotimaiseen kysyntään. Viennin arvo yhtiökohtaisesti. annetuissa lausunnoissa asetuttiin pääsään- supistui lähes 2 prosenttia, kun kansainvälisen Periaatepäätökseen liittyen talouspoliit- töisesti kannattamaan ryhmän
    [Show full text]