<<

information memo Higher Education & Research

Following strong growth from 2004 to 2009, local Local authority R&T funding authority expenditure on research and technology transfer (R&T) stabilised at during phase II of €1.2 billion per year up to 2014. decentralisation 28% of this funding forms part of Government‐Region (2004-2014) plan/projects contracts (CPER). Power‐sharing at local level, Phase II of decentralisation, 2004‐2014, 13 August, giving the Region the power to enshrined in the laws on was a key period in local authority coordinate economic development decentralisation – phase II – intervention to promote economic actions within its area. Over the ten years explains the predominance of development and research and that followed, the Regions were therefore the Regions, with two‐thirds of technology transfer (R&T1), inherent to allocated powers over R&T, although the annual R&T budget. this field. Within a relatively stable intervention by other local levels was also Municipal level, via the inter‐ legislative framework, local authorities permitted. Between 2004 and 2014, R&T encouraged municipal organisations that organised and implemented actions designed to develop and promote R&T a large number of local initiatives, as are springing up, saw its share (chart 1). evidenced by the explosion of Regional increase gradually. As part of a For over 50 years, the Region has been agencies for economic development and strategy to increase the appeal the local level legitimately associated with innovation. From 2007, in the framework and economic development of economic development, confirmed when of the European Operational Programmes a region, real estate operations it attained the status of a fully functioning 2007‐2013, each Region drew up a and transfer and aid for local authority in 1982. In 2004, a new Regional Innovation Strategy (RIS), based business innovation accounted phase began with the Law of on a detailed analysis of its ecosystem. for 60% of the R&T budget. The This approach will be complemented by a effort by local authorities in Smart Specialisation Strategy (S3), closely favour of R&T, €19 per 1. The R&T field includes the innovation process connected to the "Europe 2020" strategy. (See Sources et definitions). inhabitant from 2009, is distributed all over . Organisation between the CHART 1 – Trends in total expenditure and R&T expenditure by self‐funded local authorities – in France, 2004 to 2014 levels of local authority is however specific to each Region. 250 1,500

200 1,200

euros Billions 150 900

of

100 600

expenditure

Total 50 300 Millions expenditure R&T 0 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 *

Total expenditure R&T expenditure

* R&T semi-finalised and initial DGFIP results Sources: Funding of R&T MENESR‐SIES‐Research unit; Total expenditure DGCL/DGFIP. At the same time, actions to promote R&T a "local authority leader" in terms of during the three years that followed, the have been developed and organised at economic development in their territory. R&T budget stayed at a high level, close to sub‐regional levels, in the Départements Their financial investments, intended to €1.2bn. The actions put in place are and the "local block" (municipalities and develop their capacity for innovation, targeted and form part of the RIS. In 2014,

EPCI2), as the implementation of regional have rapidly increased, boosting the the regional smart specialisation strategies research and innovation strategies competitiveness of the Region. As part of (S3), drawn up as part of the European requires a division of roles between the its ERDF 2007‐2013 operational cohesion policy 2014‐2020, were added to different levels of local authority. programme, the European Commission the RIS and the R&T budget resumed its The Ministry responsible for research (EC) aims to place innovation at the heart 2009 level. annually surveys the self‐funding local of regional development programmes, Local R&T funding is mostly outside the authorities in metropolitan France and the and has asked each French Region to draw CPER framework. Between 2004 and 2014, Overseas departments on their up its own Regional Innovation Strategy it represented 72% of the annual R&T expenditure on research, technology (RIS). Work on this has been ongoing since budget on average, with a value of €450 transfer and innovation. This publication 2007, contributing to a greater efficiency million up to nearly €1bn. assesses the period that coincides with in local innovation policies. The industrial policy of competitiveness phase II of decentralisation, i.e. before the In addition, over the period 2004‐2008, clusters, launched by France in 2004, has most recent laws on the new regional the Regions received the majority of the received strong local support. The €150m organisation were introduced. financial compensation from the State for annual average paid by local authorities to the transfer of powers related to phase II support the clusters and their actions Rapid growth in local R&T of decentralisation (economic since 2007 is only part of their budgets after 2004… development, vocational training and commitment. A mark of excellence in a transport). The average regional budget in technological sector, the presence of a From 2004 to 2014, the trends in R&T metropolitan France increased by 11% per cluster in a local area is a national and funding by local authorities falls into two year over this period. international showcase used by local distinct periods (chart 2). Between 2004 authorities at all levels for purposes of and 2009, expenditure on R&T more than …and a stable level promotion and appeal. doubled, from €0.58 to €1.25 billion (at since 2009 The national Future Investments current euros). The expenditure increase Programme (FIP), introduced in 2010, is in volume was only slightly lower: 96%. By In 2009, the government launched the also supported by the local authorities, contrast, since 2009, this level has economic recovery plan to counter the 2008 due to the suitability of the scientific and remained stable, close to €1.2bn. economic and financial crisis. The local technology transfer excellence projects for authorities worked alongside the State to plan The pronounced growth in local R&T the local strategy. In 2014, the amount of certain operations, particularly those linked to funding, between 2004 and 2009, is co‐funding was estimated at €70m, i.e. 5% the CPER4. The fifth generation contract (2007‐ to 6% of R&T expenditure. mainly due to action by the Regions3. 2013) was rapidly accelerated. Under the Law of 13 August 2004, they The impact of the recovery plan led to a each became decrease in the R&T budget in 2010. However, 2. Public inter‐municipal cooperative institutions. 3. To a lesser extent, the municipalities and EPCI 4. CPER: Government‐Region plan/projects contracts

have contributed to this increase (see box 1). (see Sources and definitions). The Regions regularly

CHART 2 – Local authority expenditure on R&T and share of CPER in France from 2004 to 2014 contribute two‐thirds of local authority 1,400

R&T funding ) 1,200 €m (

1,000 The general trends in local R&T funding euros 800 of

follow the development of the 600 contribution by the Regions (chart 3). Over millions 400 the whole period 2004‐2014, the Regional in

200 councils regularly contributed two‐thirds of local funding, compared to one‐third Amount 0 from the "départements – municipalities 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014sf and inter‐municipalities". The leading role R&T Expenditure of the

Share of CPER Regions in R&T was also confirmed by the Source: MENESR‐SIES‐Research Unit. introduction of regional innovation strategies (RIS) in 2007,

information memo 16.07 • CHART 3 – Local R&T funding according to type of local authority – in France from 2004 to 2014 Their structural actions are complemented by direct support for 1,400 public and private laboratories.

1,200 From 2004 to 2014, local aid was focused primarily on real estate operations, and euros

1,000 of

secondly on actions to promote 800 technology transfer and innovation which,

millions 600 respectively, absorbed 32% and 28% of

in 400 R&T funding on average over the period. For real estate, nearly two‐thirds of the 200 Amount aid came from the CPER. Funding 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014sf was concentrated even more significantly on these

All Regions Départements two main categories of operation from Source: MENESR‐SIES‐Research Municipalities and 2009, following a period of increase in Unit. EPCI 2004‐2008 (chart 4). Real estate expenditure CHART 4 – Breakdown by main type of operation of local authority R&T funding – in France from 2004 to 2014 involves the construction, maintenance or

repair of university laboratories, public 2004‐2008* 2009‐2014* research institutions, business centres, co‐working spaces and incubators for 4% 4% 2% 3% innovative enterprises, plus centres for 28% researchers or science and technology. 34% 29% Expenditure on technology transfer 19% 26% specifically focuses on partnerships or 21% collaborative research, including funding

of CNRT (National technological research

11% centres)5, Carnot Institutes, SATT (Technology transfer acceleration companies) or projects

8% accredited by competitiveness clusters. It is also 11% 10% designed to support structures that interface 15% 13% with SMEs, including Research real estate operations Aid to researchers CRITT (Regional centres for innovation of which CPER research real estate Technology transfer & innovation VHS & ICT Public laboratory equipment Public Network for R&T Dissemination of scientific & and technology transfer), PFT research projects technical culture (Technological platforms) and university * Average annual per period technology transfer centres. It is also used Source: MENESR‐SIES‐Research Unit. to help create innovative enterprises, by bringing together the other local levels of municipalities, compared to 86% in funding business incubators and providing around the same regional policy. 2004. They therefore cover a wider scope, regional start‐up funds. Finally, it directly For the years in question, the which is more conducive to the success of funds enterprises that have innovative Départements had the option to fund R&T economic development projects. The projects. actions and did so regularly, but without municipalities and EPCI R&T budget Over the years 2004 to 2014, one‐third of increasing their contribution in the same increased significantly between 2004 and the R&T budget also went to public was as other local levels: the amount of 2009 (from €50m to €190m). It then laboratories to fund equipment and their annual contribution since 2004 is remained around this level before rising machinery (9%), research projects (14%, still close to its average value (€180m). again in 2013 (€250m). At this stage, very including operating assistance for public The increase in the overall R&T budget few municipalities continued to fund R&T, laboratories and university foundations). showed a fall in the departmental share: as this power had been transferred to the It also contributed significantly to aid for from 25% in 2004, it fell to 17% in 2008, inter‐municipal organisation. researchers (10%), including doctoral and then remained more or less constant at post‐doctoral allowances, actions to 16% between 2009 and 2014. Local authorities focus on promote the mobility and placement of Throughout phase II of decentralisation, research and technology French and foreign researchers, and the map of inter‐municipal organisations transfer real estate creating chairs of research excellence. developed significantly in France. There operations In comparison to other local levels, the were fewer EPCI with separate tax status diversified powers of the Regions in the in 2014 than in 2004, but they covered area of R&T result

nearly 100% R&T investment by local authorities is 5. The meaning of the acronyms is given at the end of the publication, see Sources and definitions. designed to boost the local economy and promote local appeal.

information memo 16.07 • CHART 5 – Breakdown by main type of operation of local authority R&T funding according to level of authority – in France from 2004 to 2014*

Regions Départements Municipalities and EPCI 4% 2% 1% 4% 8% 2% 27% 36% 28% 17% 24% 26% 36% 49%

29% 10%

5% 8% 14% 16% 3% 6% 12% 7%

Research real estate operations Public research projects VHS & ICT Network for R&T of which CPER research real estate Aid to researchers Dissemination of scientific & technical Public laboratory equipment Technology transfer & innovation * Annual average over the years 2004 to 2014 Source: MENESR‐SIES‐Research Unit.

in a more balanced breakdown between The Départements' R&T budget is requires very local, often logistical the different types of operations in their characterised by its concentration on real support, is proportionally better budget. Technology transfer and real estate operations (36%) and technology supported at municipal level (8%) than at estate operations still monopolise most of transfer (36%). Public laboratory projects other local levels. the R&T budget, at 28% and 27% also attract departmental funding (12%). respectively (chart 5). However, an Even more than other local authorities, The resources contributed by estimated share of 40% goes more municipalities and EPCI mainly focus on local stakeholders to R&T are directly to public research through project real estate operations, representing half spread over the whole of funding (16%), aid to researchers (14%) of their R&T aid. Dissemination of France and laboratory equipment (10%). scientific culture, which In metropolitan France, from 2004 to 2014, the geographical concentration of research and development activities CHART 6 – Weighting per area in local funding of R&T – metropolitan France from 2004 to 2014 was substantial. The R&D surveys show

repeatedly that three regions (according Île‐de‐ 16.1 to the organisation in place during the France 13.3 Rhône‐Alpes period 2004‐2014), Île‐de‐France, Rhône‐ 9.8 Prov.‐Alpes‐Côte d'Azur Alpes and ‐Alpes‐Côte d’Azur, 8.4 % account for 60% of national R&D Aquitain performance expenditure6. e 6.7% By contrast, the geographical Brittany 4.4% concentration of local R&T funding, all Nord‐Pas‐de‐ 3.5% levels of local authority combined, is Lorrain 3.4% e 3.3% certainly significant but considerably Centre 3.2% below the level observed in research 3.1% performance. The top three local Midi‐ contributions in metropolitan France Pyrénées Languedoc‐ 2.8% Île‐de‐France 16.1 Roussillon 2.6% ‐Rhône‐ % (according to the organisation in place 2.2% Alpes ‐Lim.‐ 10.1% during the period 2004‐2014) only PCharentes Prov.‐ 9.8% Lower 2.1% Alpes‐Côte d'Azur 8.4% amount to 39% (Île‐de‐France, Rhône‐ 2.1% Pays de la 8.3% Alpes and Provence‐Alpes‐Côte d’Azur). In Loire Alsace‐ 7.6% 1.6% ChArdenne‐ 6.7% addition, three Regions each have a Champagne‐ 1.5% Nord‐PdCalais‐Picardy 6.4% Ardenne Franche‐ weighting of around 7% to 8% (Pays de la Brittany 4.8% Comté Poitou‐ 1.2% Languedoc‐R.‐Midi‐ 3.6% Loire, Aquitaine and Brittany) (chart 6). Pyr. 3.4% Charentes 1.0% Normand 0.3% Limousi 0.3% n Auvergn e

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 6. "R&D expenditure in French Regions in 2012", Higher Education and Research Information Memo Source: MENESR‐SIES‐Research Unit. No. 7, MENESR‐DGESIP/DGRI‐SIES, September 2015. information memo 16.07 • MAP 1A – Average R&T budget of all local MAP 2A – Average R&T budget of all local From 2004 to 2014, the Overseas authorities from 2004 to 2008 in euros per authorities from 2009 to 2014 in euros per territories regularly accounted for 3% of inhabitant inhabitant national R&T funding by local authorities,

although in terms of R&D activity their €20/inhab and €20/inhab and more €15‐ more €15‐ contribution was less than 1% of domestic 20/inhab 20/inhab research expenditure. The local effort in €10‐15/inhab €10‐15/inhab €5‐10/inhab €5‐10/inhab R&T shows significant contrasts. under €5/inhab under €5/inhab The emergence of the municipal level in metropolitan France, seen by area

Sources: R&T Budget MENESR‐SIES‐Research Unit; Insee Population The national breakdown of local R&T funding by level of local authority When compared to the population, R&T economic development, formed part of a shows the stability of the contribution by funding gives a measurement of local R&T policy to increase the appeal of local Regional councils, which remains at effort. From 2004 to 2014, therefore, local areas, affecting all the Regions. All local around two‐thirds. effort in R&T increased: from €13.3 per authorities combined, the local R&T effort By contrast, the weighting of the inhabitant on average in the first five was however higher in the Regions on the Départements has eroded, while on the years, it rose to €18.6 per inhabitant from Atlantic coast (Aquitaine, Brittany, Pays other hand, municipalities and EPCI are 2009 to 2014. This growth mainly took de la Loire) and South‐East France proportionally more committed to this place during 2004‐2008, reflecting the (Rhône‐Alpes and Provence‐Alpes‐Côte funding, as their share rose from 14% on increase in the absolute value of R&T d’Azur). The increase between 2004‐2008 average over the period 2004‐2008 to budgets. The resources contributed by and 2009‐2014 was evenly distributed 17% for the period 2009‐2014. At a more local authorities to research and over all geographical areas (maps 1A and detailed level, over time and according to technology transfer, and more generally 2A). Region, the place of the different levels of local authority has changed (chart 7A). It is notable that, from 2004 to 2008, in

CHART 7A – Regional R&T budgets broken down per level of local authority – in metropolitan France on average for the two periods from 2004 to 2014

Official geographical code for the Regions (before 2016)

11 Ile-de-France 25 43 Franche‐Comté 73 Midi-Pyrénées Provence- 93 21 Champagne-Ardenne 26 Burgundy 52 Pays de la Loire 74 Alpes-Côte d’A 22 Picardy 31 Nord-Pas-de-Calais 53 Brittany 82 Rhône-Alpes 94 Corsica 23 Upper Normandy 41 Lorraine 54 Poitou-Charentes 83 Auvergne 24 Centre-Val de Loire 42 Alsace 72 Aquitaine 91 Languedoc-Roussillon

2004‐2008 Period 2009‐2014 Period

100% 94 100% 94 26 22 90% 74 73 10% 90% 72 10% 74 83 912 7 91 26 80% 25 20% 80% 20% 43 83 42 23 43 52 24 70% 41 52 11 30% 70% 41 25 11 30% RC: 67% 31 23 CR: 68% METRO. FRANCE 54METRO. FRANCE 60% 53 54 40% 60% 73 42 40% 21 24 21 31 53 50% 50% 50% 93 50% 82 82 93 40% 60% 40% 60%

30% 70% 30% 70%

20% 80% 20% 80%

10% 90% 10% 90%

100% 100% 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Share of MUNICIPALITIES & EPCI Share of MUNICIPALITIES & EPCI

Pays de la Loire region (52) in dots Source: MENESR‐SIES‐Research Unit.

information memo 16.07 • 12 of the 22 metropolitan Regions, the the breakdown of the R&T budget were the most balanced over the two share of municipalities and EPCI in the according to types of local authority has periods (2004‐2008 and 2009‐2014) and regional R&T budget was below 10%, been observed, similar to the breakdown the respective shares of Regional councils whereas from 2009 to 2014, only five of Regional Council: 72%, Departmental were, for the whole period, very close to Regions recorded such a low share. Council: 12% and Municipality: 16%. 50%. Other than Corsica, where R&T funding at In the Provence‐Alpes‐Côte d’Azur and regional level is more or less 100% every Rhône‐Alpes regions, the breakdown in Claudette‐Vincent Nisslé and year,the Pays de la Loire is the region R&T budgets between the different levels Laurent Perrain, where, over time, the greatest stability in of local authority MENESR DGESIP/DGRI‐SIES

Box 1: Increase in the R&T budget in metropolitan France

The increase in local R&T funding, recorded in the national plan for 2004 to 2009, comes from all the Regions. The Île‐de‐France and Rhône‐Alpes regions, which account for 40% of GDP in metropolitan France and 30% of its R&T budget, are an example of this development. However, the effort by all the other Regions is proportionally more significant, as their cumulative weighting has increased

by 3%.

CHART 8 – Development of R&T budgets per Region, annual average for all local authorities from 2004 to 2008 and 2009 to 2014 ‐ in metropolitan France

200

180

160 140 120 100 80

60

40 20

2004‐ 2009‐ Source: MENESR‐SIES‐Research

Box 2: Development in the structure of municipal R&T funding by type of EPCI

From 2004 to 2014, the structure of municipal R&T funding by type CHART 9 – Breakdown of R&T funding at municipal level of EPCI kept pace with (municipalities and EPCI with separate tax status) – in France from the rate at which the municipalities joined an inter‐municipal organisation* and R&T powers were transferred from the 30 municipalities to the inter‐municipal organisation, but above all 0 with the EPCI's capacity to successfully implement policies and of

8% actions to promote economic development, in particular research 1% 25 and innovation. 12% 0 1% funding

During the initial years of this period, from 2004 to 2008, 21% of millions

42% in

R&T funding came from the municipalities (see chart). During the

R&T 20 second part of the period, from 2009 to 2014, this share decreased

of 56%

0 to 12%. The difference benefited the groupings of conurbations 4% average

21% (including the new conurbation syndicates, SAN) whose share rose 2% 15 respectively from 47% to 56%. The contribution by urban Amount 0 44%

municipality groupings up to 2014, 31% of the municipal R&T annual 47% budget, remains constant if we add the metropolitan area level, 29% created in 2010. 10 31% 2% The 2015 forecasts show the role of the metropolitan areas, the 0 2004‐ 2009‐ 2015 most integrated form of inter‐municipal organisations. Due to the forecasts Municipalities Grouping of Grouping of conurbations * In 2004, around 86% of municipalities were already attached to an EPCI with separate tax status; N.B. The SAN contribute less than 1% at municipal level and are this figure was virtually 100% in 2014. Over the period, however, included with the the size of the EPCI also increased, enabling them to establish an groupings of conurbations.

information memo 16.07 •

Box 3: CPER and real estate Of local authority R&T funding, from 2004 to 2014, an average of 28% came from CPER operations (see table). Furthermore, although, for all BOX 3 – R&T Real estate operations in the CPER per level of local authority (%) local authorities, real estate operations represent around three‐ on average – in France from 2004 to 2014

quarters of R&T funding from the CPER, this proportion varies Real estate significantly between the Region and the other local levels. R&T BUDGET Share of CPER share in CPER In the R&T budgets for the Départements, municipalities and EPCI, real Regions 27% 64% estate operations represent nine‐tenths of the CPER, compared to 64% Départements 27% 90% for the Regions. From 2004 to 2014, therefore, the sub‐regional levels Municipalities and 32% 89% matched the R&T funding from the CPER, mainly for real estate operations. All 28% 73% Source: MENESR‐SIES‐Research Unit.

Box 4: Configuration with the new regional organisation of metropolitan France of maps 1A and 2A and chart 7A

The data in this publication relates to the MAP 1B AND 2B – Average R&T budget for all local authorities in euros per inhabitant years 2004 to 2014 and corresponds to the (€/inhab) former organisation of the Regions. However, this box shows the results €20/inhab and €20/inhab and more more of the Regions together, in order to reflect €15‐20/inhab €15‐20/inhab the regional re‐organisation of 2016, on the €10‐15 /inhab €10‐15 /inhab €5‐10/inhab understanding that the data relating to new €5‐10/inhab under €5/inhab regional areas does not directly result from under €5/inhab decisions taken by their executive councils.

Sources: R&T Budget MENESR‐SIES‐Research Unit; INSEE Population

CHART 7B – R&T budgets for the Regions broken down by level of local authority

Official geographical code for the Regions

11 Île-de-France 53 Brittany 24 Centre-Val de Loire 75 Aquitaine-Limousin-Poitou-Charentes (Nouvelle‐Aquitaine) 27 Burgundy – Franche-Comté 76 Languedoc-Roussillon-Midi-Pyrénées () 28 Normandy 84 Auvergne – Rhône‐Alpes 32 Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardy (Hauts‐de‐France) 93 Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur 44 Alsace-Champagne-Ardenne-Lorraine () 94 Corsica 52 Pays de la Loire

2004‐2008 Period 2009‐2014 Period 100% 100% 94 94 90% 10% 90% 75 10% 7 27 80% 75 20% 80% 27 20% 32 28 28 24 70% 52 11 70% 76 52 30% 44 30% 11 RC: 67% METRO. FRANCE CR: 68% 32 53 4 METRO. FRANCE 40% 60% 40% 60% 53 24 84 50% 50% 50% 93 50% 84 40% 93 60% 40% 60%

30% 70% 30% 70%

20% 80% 20% 80%

10% 90% 10% 90%

100% 100 100% 90% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 100% 90% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 80% 80% MUNICIPALITIES & EPCI MUNICIPALITIES & EPCI Share Share

Source: MENESR‐SIES‐Research Unit. information memo 16.07 • Sources and definitions

The R&T survey questions local authorities every year on their R&T the State and the Regional Council on a dozen or so expenditure. Self‐funded EPCI are included, even though they are not topics. Other local partners (general councils, municipalities and strictly speaking local authorities. groupings of municipalities) may join them. The schedule for the The Regions and Départements are comprehensively surveyed. The list of municipalities and groupings of municipalities questioned is fifth generation contract, 2007‐2013, is in line with that historically drawn up from the local knowledge provided by the of the European programmes (2007‐2013). Regional research and technology delegates (DRRT). For information, during the 2015 survey, around 150 units declared funding for R&T. The General Directorate of Local Authorities (DGCL) comes under the In the description of the results, local authorities with a particular authority of the Minister for Land Use Planning, Rural Affairs and Local status were classified according to the powers assigned to them. The Authorities, the Minister of the Interior and the Secretary of State to local authority of Corsica, the governments of French Polynesia and the Minister for Land Use Planning, Rural Affairs and Local Authorities, New Caledonia, and the Département of are all classed as responsible for local authorities. Its mission within the Government is Regional councils and similar, as they are the only local authority in to serve as the main contact for local authorities. their area and so have the powers assigned to Regional councils. The governments of the provinces of New Caledonia are classed as As part of the European operational programmes 2007‐2013, all the Departmental councils and similar. French Regions have Regional Innovation Strategies (RSI), which have The R&T survey for year "n" covers three financial years, "n‐2" and been earmarked as a priority. The RIS sets out the operational "n‐1" (R&T budgets completed) and "n" (provisional R&T budget). The programmes determining the criteria for projects eligible for ERDF 2015 survey therefore provided finalised data for the financial year funding. 2013, semi‐finalised for 2014 and provisional for 2015. Smart specialisation strategy (S3), aims to create the conditions for smart, sustainable, inclusive growth. Intended by the European Note: the cost of the human resources used by the local authorities to Commission to be a crucial lever in the Europe 2020 strategy cohesion manage, lead and implement actions promoting R&T are not included policy, it sets out the priority areas, topics or organisations that could in the measurements. receive European funds.

Government-Region plan/projects contracts (CPER) coordinate regional Acronyms: CNRT (National centre for technological research), CRITT development projects negotiated for a seven‐year period between (Regional centre for innovation and technology transfer), FUI (Single inter‐ministerial fund), PFT (Technological platform), SATT (Technology transfer acceleration company). For more information

The R.E.P.È.R.E.S. website of the Ministry responsible for research, www.enseignementsup‐recherche.gouv.fr/reperes/default.htm, gives the main results (Excel spreadsheet) of the survey on R&T funding by local authorities, and the latest publications produced using the data from the survey: ‐ "Funding of research and technology transfer – Survey carried out in 2015", Survey summary document, MENESR‐DGESIP/ DGRI‐SIES, March 2016; ‐ "R&T funding by local authorities in 2014", Higher Education and Research Flash Memo No. 2, MENESR‐DGESIP/ DGRI‐SIES February 2016; ‐ "Local authorities in Research and Technology Funding", Higher Education and Research Information Memo No. 2, MENESR‐DGESIP/ DGRI‐ SIES, May 2012;

Other publications: ‐ "R&D expenditure in French Regions in 2012", Higher Education and Research Information Memo No. 7, MENESR‐DGESIP/DGRI‐SIES, September 2015; ‐ "Fifteen years of innovation policies in France", National Commission for assessing innovation policies (CNEPI), France stratégie, January 2016; ‐ "Summary of regional innovation strategies in the light of smart specialisation in French Regions", General Commission for Regional Equality (CGET), March 2015. ‐ "Theoretical foundations and conditions for effective regional policy in science and technology; An evaluation approach used in the Aquitaine Region", Thesis by Alexis Vanderstocken, University of Bordeaux‐GREThA, July 2015.

MENESR‐SIES MENESR‐SIES Editorial secretary: Christophe Jaggers Director of Publications: 1 rue Descartes – 75005 Paris Agency: Opixido Isabelle Kabla-Langlois [email protected]

information memo 16.07 •