CENTRE FOR REGIONAL AND LOCAL ANALYSES

REGIONAL INVESTMENT ATTRACTIVENESS 2012

Greater Poland voivodship Dr hab. Hanna Godlewska-Majkowska, Ph. D. university professor at the Warsaw School of Economics Agnieszka Komor, Ph.D. Patrycjusz Zarębski, Ph.D. Magdalena Typa, M.A.

2012

1 Warsaw, October 2012 Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Introduction

This report has been prepared thanks to the application of results of scientific research conducted since 2002 by the Institute of Enterprise, Collegium of Business Administration of the Warsaw School of Economics, under the supervision of Prof. H. Godlewska-Majkowska, Ph.D. All Authors are core members of the team that develops the methodology of calculating regional investment attractiveness in order that important characteristics of regions are captured as closely as possible both in general terms and from a point of view of specificity of a given kind of business activity as well as a size of investment.

Potential investment attractiveness (PAI) indices measure the location-specific advantages of regions. In their simplified version they are calculated for territorial units of various levels of statistical division of the country (gminas/communes, poviats/counties, subregions, voivodships/regions). These are PAI1 indices, which refer to the whole regional/national economy (PAI1_GN) and selected sections: C – manufacturing industry, G – trade and repair, I – tourism and catering, M – professional, scientific and technical services.

Besides, some indices are only calculated for voidoships on the basis of much more characteristics available on the regional or macroregional level. This allows us to evaluate their investment attractiveness in a much broader context. These are PAI2 indices, which are calculated both from a general point of view and with reference to the above mentioned sections of the economy (PAI2_C, PAI2_G, PAI2_I, PAI2_M).

What is more, real investment attractiveness ranks are used in this report, which relates to the inflow of capital (in the form of investments) and the effects of investments considered from a point of view of productivity and returns on the outlays previously made.

The measurements in use are subject to annual review thanks to consulting them with foreign investor assistance institutions and direct contact to territorial self-government units as well as organisations of entrepreneurs. A description of methodological approach to measuring investment attractiveness of Polish regions, counties and communes can be found online on the Web site of the Institute of Enterprise : www.sgh.waw.pl/instytuty/ip, on the Web site of the Centre for Regional and Local Analyses, which cooperates with the Institute of Enterprise: www.caril.edu.pl, as well as in numerous scientific publications and expert opinions

2

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

1. The profile of regional economy of Greater Poland voivodship

Greater Poland voivodship is one of the economically best-developed voivodships of Poland. It is characterised by a high concentration of foreign capital invested in Poland and high investment outlays per capita.

The main advantages of the voivodship are:

- its balanced economic development with a high degree of industrialisation and a high level of technology,

- the high potential of human resources is shaped by the presence of the best universities in Poland (ranked in the category 1 by the Ministry of Science and Technology): the Poznań University of Technology, the Poznań University of Economics, Poznań Medical Univeristy, the Poznań University of Life Sciences,

- good transport connections among others through A2 highway, which connects Western Europe with Russia and Eastern countries, as well as good plane connections (a domestic and international airport) and water connections (the Oder waterway),

- Poznań is one of Poland's oldest and largest cities, it is a historical capital of the region of Greater Poland and a important centre of industry, trade, culture, higher education and research, it also belongs to the leading Polish cities in economic terms,

- the voivodship was ranked high in terms of potential investment attractiveness for almost every section of economy: industry, trade, tourism, financial intermediation, business services and education.

3

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Additional information

Chart 1. General characteristics of the economy of Greater Poland voivodship

Feature Greater Poland voivodship Poland Share [%]

Market Potential

GDP per capita (PLN/person) in 37,424 35,210 - 2009 Population (persons) on 31 3,455,477 38,538,447 9 December 2011

Human Resources Potential

Higher education institutions 46,232 492,646 9.4 graduates (persons) in 2011

Secondary schools graduates 40,426 421,724 9.6 (persons) in 2011

Number of employed persons on 31 1,350,237 13,911,203 9.7% December 2011 agriculture 13.8% agriculture 12.7% Structure of employed persons in industry 34% industry 30.6% 2011 services 52.2% services 56.7%

Investment outlays and capital of companies with foreign capital participation in the voivodship

Investment outlays (PLN mln) in 2010 6,155.5 61,600.3 10

Capital of companies (PLN mln) in 15,524.2 18,8812.4 8,2 2010

Special economic zones (SEZs) in the voivodship - The Kostrzyn-Słubice SEZ, subzones: Buk, Chodzież, Krobia, Nowy Tomyśl, Przemęt, Stęszew, Swarzędz, Wronki, Poznań(city), - The Wałbrzych SEZ, subzones: Jarocin, Kościan, Krotoszyn, Rawicz, Śrem, Września, Kalisz (city), Leszno (city), - The Łódź SEZ, subzones: Nowe Skalmierzyce, Opatówek, Ostrzeszów, Przykona, Słupca, Koło (city), Turek (city), - The Kamienna Góra SEZ, subzone: Ostrów Wlkp.(city) - The Słupsk SEZ, subzone: Rogoźno, - The Pomeranian SEZ, subzone: Piła (city)

Investment attractiveness

National economy class C Capital-intensive industry class C Potential investment attractiveness (location-specific Labour-intensive industry class C advantages evaluation) Trade class B Tourism class C Education class C National economy class C Real investment attractiveness (economic effects Industry class C evaluation) Trade class B

4

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Tourism class C Professional science and technical activities class C Poviats and gminas distinguished according to the Potential Attractiveness Index for the national economy

Class A Poznań (city), Leszno (city), Konin (city), Kalisz (city), Poznań Poviats Class B Tarnowo Podgórne (2), Kościan (1), Leszno (1), Turek (1), Suchy Las (2), Czarnków (1), Poznań (1), Chodzież (1), Konin (1), Piła (1), Komorniki (2), Luboń (1), Ostrów Wielkopolski (1), Wągrowiec (1), Gniezno (1), Puszczykowo Class A (1), Kalisz (1), Dopiewo (2), Swarzędz (3), Słupca (1), Kórnik (3), Złotów (1), Koło (1), Czerwonak (2), Kleszczewo (2), Kępno (3), Śrem (3), Rokietnica (2), Gminas** Przykona (2), Kleczew (3), Buk (3), Środa Wielkopolska (3), Gostyń (3) Ostrzeszów (3), Nowy Tomyśl (3), Pobiedziska (3), Grodzisk Wielkopolski (3), Mosina (3), Jarocin (3), Międzychód (3), Murowana Goślina (3), Rawicz (3), Class B Margonin (3), Oborniki (3), Wolsztyn (3), Baranów (2), Łubowo (2), Krotoszyn (3), Stęszew (3), Kostrzyn (3), Szamotuły (3), Pniewy (3), Chodzież (2), Pakosław (2), Kościan (2)

In 2009 Greater Poland voivodship made a contribution of 9.5% to the GDP of Poland. . Calculated per capita, it amounted to PLN 37.424 with the average for Poland PLN 35,210. With this result the voivodship occupies the fourth place in the country. The GDP growth rate in the period 2003-2007 amounted to 164,1%, while the national average reached 168.5%.

In comparison with the whole country the structure of employment in the voivodship is characterised by a relatively low share of the service sector (52.2%) whereas a share of the agricultural and industrial sectors is respectively 13.8% and 34% (CSO, RDB 2012).

The number of inhabitants of the voivodship amounts to 3,455,477 (as of 2011), which makes up 9% of the population of Poland. The age structure of the voivodship in 2010 was as follows: 16.1% of the population at pre-reproductive age, 68.6% at reproductive age and 15.3% at post-reproductive age (for Poland, respectively, 15.1%, 68.1% and 16.8%). The registered unemployment rate in the voivodship in August 2012 was 9.1%, compared to 12.4% in Poland1. The average gross monthly remuneration in enterprises sector in the first six months of 2012 amounted to PLN 3,368.9, which is 91.4% of average remuneration in Poland.

The main potential for human capital creation in the voivodship is constituted by 40 higher education institutions in which 159.7 thousand students study, which makes up 9.2% of all students Poland-wide. Moreover 9.5 % of pupils of secondary schools attend technikum schools and 11.7% vocational schools.

The regional development strategy of Greater Poland voivodship till 2020 does not mention strategic sectors but suggests creating favourable conditions for the functioning of companies (branches, sectors) or instruments of support. The strategy does not describe market behaviours of business subjects nor it formulates goals whose accomplishment requires macroeconomic solutions, legislative or fiscal changes, nor mentions goals and tasks in the fields which cannot be subject to successful public intervention. It refers particularly to industrial sectors and branches.

1 The unemployment rate in voivodships, subregions and poviats in August 2012 is based on the data of Central Statistical Office. 5

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Preferential conditions of conducting business activities are offered in this voivodship i.a. by the following 5 special economic zones (in Polish: Specjalne Strefy Ekonomiczne, hence abbreviation SSE):

- Kostrzyńsko-Słubicka SSE (Kostrzyn-Słubice special economic zone), subzones: Buk, Chodzież, Krobia, Nowy Tomyśl, Przemęt, Stęszew, Swarzędz, Wronki, the city of Poznań,

- Wałbrzyska SSE (Wałbrzych special economic zone), subzones: Jarocin, Kościan, Krotoszyn, Rawicz, Śrem, Września, the city of Kalisz, the city of Leszno,

- Łódzka SSE (Łódź special economic zone), subzones: Nowe Skalmierzyce, Opatówek, Ostrzeszów, Przykona, Słupca, the city of Koło, the city of Turek,

- Kamiennogórska SSE (Kamienna Góra special economic zone), subzone: the city of Ostrów Wlkp,

- Słupska SSE (Słupsk special economic zone), subzone: Rogoźno,

- Pomorska SSE (Pomeranian special economic zone), subzone: the city of Piła.

6

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

2. Region’s rank in terms of investment attractiveness in Poland

Greater Poland voivodship is characterised by a very high level of universal investment attractiveness, which demonstrates itself in its rank (Class B) according to the main potential investment attractiveness index for the whole national economy PAI 2_GN. The region also ranked very high in terms of potential investment attractiveness for sections: capital-intensive industry (Class C), labour-intensive industry (Class C), trade and repairs (Class B), tourism (Class C), professional, scientific and technical activities (Class C).

Investment attractiveness can also be determined on the basis of indices of real investment attractiveness (RAI), based on such microclimates as: returns on tangible assets, labour productivity, self-financing of self-government territorial units and investment outlays. The region ranked above the average in terms of RAI indices for the national economy (Class B), industry (Class B), trade and repairs (Class B), tourism (Class B) and professional, scientific and technical activities (Class B).

Potential and real investment attractiveness in reflected in the decisions of investors on the flows of capital. This is shown in Exhibit 1.

Exhibit 1. Regional structure of investment outlays in the companies in 2010 in comparison with the share in the population (percentage of country’s population)

40%

35% Population according to the domicile (persons) 30% Investment outlays in the companies in total Investment outlays in the industrial and construction companies 25% Investment outlays in the companies in the service sector

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

Note: these are the most up-to-date data. Source: Authors on the basis of the Local Data Bank (downloaded 23.10.2012)

7

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

The Greater Poland region took the fourth place when it comes to the investment outlays in companies (8.3% of its total value in all voivodships), while its share in Poland's population was 9%. Relatively underinvested companies are more frequent in services sector (the share of Greater Poland voivodship in the value of investment outlays of service companies in 2010 was 7.2%).

On the other hand, the investment level in Greater Poland's agricultural companies is definitely above average (analogically 18.5%), which is related to the high level of agriculture technology. A high demographic potential, in comparison with other voivodships, hasn't found any reflection in the inflow of direct foreign investments - see Exhibit 2.

Exhibit 2. Regional structure of capital in the companies with foreign capital participation in comparison with a share in population (% national population) 60%

50% Population according to the domicile (persons) Share capital (equity) in the companies with foreign capital participation 40% National capital in the companies with foreign capital participation 30% Foreign capital in the companies with foreign capital participation

20%

10%

0%

Note: these are the most up-to-date data.

Source: Authors on the basis of the Local Data Bank (downloaded 23.10.2012)

8

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Greater Poland voivodship has 8.3% of the total value of accumulated share capital in the companies with foreign capital participation, out of which most is foreign capital. This is little, compared to 9% share of Poland's population. This phenomenon is particularly visible when it comes to national capital (3.9%). In the years 2003-2009 the voivodship improved its competitive position on the direct foreign investments market, because in those years the share of Greater Poland in the value of basic capital of companies with foreign capital participation rose from 8.2% to 8.2% - see Exhibit 3.

Exhibit 3. Regional competitive rank in terms of investments with foreign capital participation according to the value of share capital of the companies with foreign capital participation in 2003 and 2010 (percentage of national representation) 60,00% 2003 2010 50,00%

40,00%

30,00%

20,00%

10,00%

0,00%

Source: Authors on the basis of the Local Data Bank (downloaded 23.10.2012)

Competitive rank, measured as a region’s share in a number of employees of entities with foreign capital participation increased in the years 2003-2010 from 11.9% to 13.45%. This shows the voivodship is making use of its competitive advantages related to the factor of labour.

An opportunity for Warmian-Masurian voivodship lies in neatly prepared investment offers. Self-government units of Warmian-Masurian voivodship should seek opportunities in careful preparation of offers of investment areas in accordance with their location-specific advantages.

9

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

3. Internal diversification of regional investment attractiveness

Poviats (counties)

The following poviats are considered most attractive in Greater Poland voivodship: the city of Kalisz, the city of Konin, the city of Leszno, poznański, the city of Poznań - see Chart 2.

Chart 2. Potential investment attractiveness of poviats of Greater Poland voivodship for the national economy and selected sections

Poviat PAI1_GN PAI1_GN PAI1_C PAI1_G PAI1_I PAI1_M The city of Poznań 0,383 A A A A A The city of Leszno 0,370 A A A A A The city of Konin 0,353 A A A A A The city of Kalisz 0,321 A A A C A poznański 0,319 A A A A A turecki 0,279 C C D D C pilski 0,275 C C C C C chodzieski 0,266 C C D D C śremski 0,265 C C C C C Source: Authors’ own materials.

The following poviats should be distinguished: the cities of Poznań and Konin as these units attained Class A in their potential investment attractiveness for all sections of the national economy under scrutiny in this research.

In reference to the sections mentioned below the following poviats should be additionally distinguished:

- Turecki, chodzieski, pilski, śremski (Class C) for section C,

- Pilski, śremski (Class C) for section G,

- The city of Kalisz, nowotyski, pilski, szamotulski, śremski (Class C) for section I,

- Turecki, chodzieski, pilski, średzki, śremski (Class C) for section M.

Synthetic evaluation of potential investment attractiveness of poviats of Greater Poland voivodship is presented in Exhibit 4.

10

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Exhibit 4. Spatial diversification of potential investment attractiveness of poviats of Greater Poland voivodship with consideration of the most attractive sections

Source: Authors’ own materials.

Gminas (communes)

Like poviats, gminas are also very much diversified in terms of investment attractiveness. The highest ranked gminas are: Tarnowo Podgórne (2), Kościan (1), Leszno (1), Turek (1), Suchy Las (2), Czarnków (1), Poznań (1), Chodzież (1), Konin (1), Piła (1), Komorniki (2), Luboń (1), Ostrów Wielkopolski (1), Wągrowiec (1), Gniezno (1), Puszczykowo (1), Kalisz (1), Dopiewo (2), Swarzędz (3), Słupca (1), Kórnik (3), Złotów (1), Koło (1), Czerwonak (2), Kleszczewo (2), Kępno (3), Śrem (3), Rokietnica (2), Przykona (2), Kleczew (3), Buk (3), Środa Wielkopolska (3), Gostyń (3). It is also reflected in their high ranks (Class A or B) for all analysed sections – see Chart 3.

11

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Chart 3. Potential investment attractiveness of gminas of Greater Poland voivodship for the national economy and selected sections

PAI1_G Gmina PAI1_GN PAI1_C PAI1_G PAI1_I PAI1_M N Tarnowo Podgórne (2) 0,292 A A A A A Kościan (1) 0,286 A A A C A Leszno (1) 0,281 A A A A A Turek (1) 0,281 A A A B A Suchy Las (2) 0,278 A A A A A Czarnków (1) 0,277 A A A A A Poznań (1) 0,277 A A A A A Chodzież (1) 0,274 A A A B A Konin (1) 0,270 A A A A A Piła (1) 0,269 A A A A A Komorniki (2) 0,266 A A A A A Luboń (1) 0,261 A A A A A Ostrów Wielkopolski (1) 0,260 A A A B A Wągrowiec (1) 0,255 A A A B A Gniezno (1) 0,251 A A A B A Puszczykowo (1) 0,247 A A A A A Kalisz (1) 0,246 A A A B A Dopiewo (2) 0,246 A A A B A Swarzędz (3) 0,244 A A A A A Słupca (1) 0,242 A A A C A Kórnik (3) 0,240 A A A A A Złotów (1) 0,237 A A A B A Koło (1) 0,237 A A A B A Czerwonak (2) 0,235 A A A A A Kleszczewo (2) 0,232 A A A A A Kępno (3) 0,232 A A A B A Śrem (3) 0,231 A A A A A Rokietnica (2) 0,228 A A A C A Przykona (2) 0,228 A A A B C Kleczew (3) 0,226 A A A B B Buk (3) 0,226 A A C B A Środa Wielkopolska (3) 0,224 A A B B A Gostyń (3) 0,223 A A A A A (1) – urban commune, (2) – rural commune, (3) – rural-urban commune Source: Authors’ own material.

Attractive are also such gminas which belong to Class B according to the PAI1_GN index as: Ostrzeszów (3), Nowy Tomyśl (3), Pobiedziska (3), Grodzisk Wielkopolski (3), Mosina (3), Jarocin (3), Międzychód (3), Murowana Goślina (3), Rawicz (3), Margonin (3), Oborniki (3), Wolsztyn (3), Baranów (2), Łubowo (2), Krotoszyn (3), Stęszew (3), Kostrzyn (3), Szamotuły (3), Pniewy (3), Chodzież (2), Pakosław (2), Kościan (2). The location-specific advantages are also universal in these gminas, which makes them attractiveness for all kinds of business activity in question.

12

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

In reference to the sections mentioned below the following gminas of Class C should be distinguished:

- Perzów (2), Sulmierzyce (1), Koźmin Wielkopolski (3), Zduny (3), Nowe Skalmierzyce (3), Odolanów (3), Raszków (3), Doruchów (2), Grabów nad Prosną (3), Pleszew (3), Czerniejewo (3), Gniezno (2), Kiszkowo (2), Witkowo (3), Kłodawa (3), Kazimierz Biskupi (2), Stare Miasto (2), Ślesin (3), Ostrowite (2), Powidz (2), Słupca (2), Władysławów (2), Miłosław (3), Nekla (3) *, Września (3), Krobia (3), Poniec (3), Granowo (2), Lipno (2), Rydzyna (3), Włoszakowice (2), Sieraków (3), Opalenica (3), Zbąszyń (3), Jutrosin (3), Pakosław (2), Przemęt (2), Siedlec (2), Budzyń (2), Połajewo (2), Trzcianka (3), Kaczory (2), Ujście (3), Skoki (3), Rogoźno (3), Obrzycko (1), Duszniki (2), Kaźmierz (2), Wronki (3), Krzykosy (2), Zaniemyśl (2) – for section C,

- Baranów (2), Łęka Opatowska (2), Sulmierzyce (1), Zduny (3), Odolanów (3), Raszków (3), Doruchów (2), Ostrzeszów (3), Kłodawa (3), Kazimierz Biskupi (2), Stare Miasto (2), Ślesin (3), Brudzew (2), Nekla (3), Września (3), Granowo (2), Kościan (2), Międzychód (3), Sieraków (3), Kuślin (2), Opalenica (3), Zbąszyń (3), Pakosław (2), Rawicz (3), Siedlec (2), Wolsztyn (3), Budzyń (2), Chodzież (2), Margonin (3), Połajewo (2), Trzcianka (3), Wieleń (3), Kaczory (2), Łobżenica (3), Ujście (3), Skoki (3), Złotów (2), Oborniki (3), Rogoźno (3), Buk (3), Kostrzyn (3), Stęszew (3), Obrzycko (1), Kaźmierz (2), Pniewy (3), Wronki (3), Krzykosy (2), Zaniemyśl (2) - for section G,

- Jarocin (3), Baranów (2), Bralin (2), Łęka Opatowska (2), Krotoszyn (3), Nowe Skalmierzyce (3), Ostrzeszów (3), Grzegorzew (2), Rzgów (2), Stare Miasto (2), Słupca (1), Władysławów (2), Września (3), Kościan (1), Lipno (2), Rydzyna (3), Święciechowa (2), Międzychód (3), Kuślin (2), Opalenica (3), Rawicz (3), Wolsztyn (3), Wieleń (3), Szydłowo (2), Złotów (2), Kostrzyn (3), Pobiedziska (3), Rokietnica (2), Stęszew (3), Krzykosy (2), Dolsk (3) - dla sekcji I,

- Kotlin (2), Żerków (3), Opatówek (2), Baranów (2), Perzów (2), Sulmierzyce (1), Koźmin Wielkopolski (3), Nowe Skalmierzyce (3), Odolanów (3), Ostrów Wielkopolski (2), Przygodzice (2), Doruchów (2), Grabów nad Prosną (3), Kobyla Góra (2), Mikstat (3), Gołuchów (2), Pleszew (3), Trzemeszno (3), Witkowo (3), Ślesin (3), Powidz (2), Słupca (2), Przykona (2), Nekla (3), Borek Wielkopolski (3), Krobia (3), Pępowo (2), Piaski (2), Poniec (3), Kamieniec (2), Rakoniewice (3), Czempiń (3), Śmigiel (3), Krzemieniewo (2), Lipno (2), Rydzyna (3), Kwilcz (2), Sieraków (3), Zbąszyń (3), Bojanowo (3), Miejska Górka (3), Pakosław (2), Przemęt (2), Siedlec (2), Budzyń (2), Chodzież (2), Szamocin (3), Krzyż Wielkopolski (3), Szydłowo (2), Ujście (3), Wysoka (3), Skoki (3), Krajenka (3), Rogoźno (3), Obrzycko (1), Duszniki (2), Kaźmierz (2), Wronki (3), Nowe Miasto nad Wartą (2), Brodnica (2) – for section M.

Synthetic evaluation of potential investment attractiveness of gminas of Greater Poland voivodship is presented in Exhibit 5.

13

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Exhibit 5. Potential investment attractiveness of gminas of Greater Poland voivodship

Source: Authors’ own materials.

14

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

4. Voivodship’s institutional support for investors and entrepreneurs

The development of business surrounding in a region is a vital component of its investment attractiveness. The institutions that support entrepreneurship, pro-investment solutions, research commercialization and innovativeness are of special importance. Among the voivodeship’s business-supporting institutions one should mention: Poznań Technology and Research Park, Innovation, Development and Technology Transfer Centre of Poznań University of Technology, Polska Izba Gospodarcza Importerów, Eksporterów i Kooperacji in Poznań, Wielkopolska Izba Przemysłowo – Handlowa in Poznań, Wielkopolska Izba Budownictwa in Poznań, Izba Przemysłowo-Handlowa Południowej Wielkopolski w Ostrowie Wielkopolskim, Fundacja Kaliski Inkubator Przedsiębiorczości, Wielkopolska Agencja Rozwoju Przedsiębiorczości Sp. z o.o. in Poznań, Agencja Rozwoju Regionalnego w Koninie, Wielkopolski Klub Techniki i Racjonalizacji in Poznań, Polska Izba Przemysłu Targowego in Poznań, Stowarzyszenie „Ostrzeszowskie Centrum Przedsiębiorczości”, Inkubator Przedsiębiorczości, Centrum Edukacji i Zarządzania Korporacja „Romaniszyn” in Piła, Wielkopolska Okręgowa Izba Inżynierów Budownictwa in Poznań, Izba Gospodarcza Północnej Wielkopolski in Piła, Wielkopolska Okręgowa Izba Architektów in Poznań, Wielkopolskie Centrum Zaawansowanych Technologii, Innovation and Technology Transfer Centre of Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznański Akademicki Inkubator Przedsiębiorczości, Akademicki Inkubator Przedsiębiorczości Politechniki Poznańskiej, Poznański Park Technologiczno – Przemysłowy, Eureka Technology Park Dopiewo k/Poznania, Klaster ITelligence Technology Poznań, Klaster Kotlarski w Pleszewie, Klaster Poligraficzno- Reklamowy in Leszno, Wielkopolski Klaster Chemiczny, Wielkopolski Klaster Teleinformatyczny Poznań, Zachodni Klaster Tworzyw Sztucznych PLASTOPOLIS, Klaster Spożywczy Południowej Wielkopolski – Stowarzyszenie in Kalisz, Poznański Klaster Edukacyjny, Klaster Turystyczny Północnej Wielkopolski „Dolina Noteci”.

Poznański Park Naukowo – Technologiczny (Poznań Technology and Research Park) offers office, training, conference and laboratory spaces, services of a Virtual office, organisation of conferences, seminars, meetings and other events. It provides a range of research services (in the fields of chemistry, archaeology, IT, physics, geology and economic sciences) as well as consulting and training services. The consulting covers international cooperation (operating in EU, promoting a firm’s profile in the EEN database, seeking partners and clients, technological auditing, market analysis, organisation of international cooperation meetings), technology transfer (establishing trade/technological partnerships, review of available technologies), commercialisation, legal advice on drafting agreements, intellectual property management, creating innovativeness rules, research and innovativeness financing (as part of the Regional Contact Spot for EU Programmes run by the Park). The Park houses a complex of Hi-Tech Incubators, which include an office-laboratory complex for innovating businesses as well as a range of research and other services that support their development. There is also a kindergarten in the Park.

15

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

(www.ppnt.poznan.pl/, 05.10.2012.).

Centrum Innowacji, Rozwoju i Transferu Technologii Politechniki Poznańskiej (Innovation, Development and Technology Transfer Centre of Poznań University of Technology). The Centre offers advice and consulting on acquiring EU funding and external domestic funding (search for partners, application preparation, project management), intellectual property and patents (preparing documentation, intellectual property protection), research results implementation (analysis of technology demands of a given firm, technology transfer, intellectual property pricing). The Centre offers a possibility of organising trainings, trade missions, conferences, meetings etc. Its website contains a database of Poznań Institute of Technology resources, which includes a database on Staff and on the range of currently conducted research. (www.ciritt.put.poznan.pl/, 05.10.2012.).

Polska Izba Gospodarcza Importerów, Eksporterów i Kooperacji in Poznań (Polish Chamber of Importers, Exporters and Cooperation in Poznań) supports the development of S&M enterprises by offering IT, training and consulting services, which include seeking business partners (external markets analysis, potential clients analysis), technological auditing, technology transfer (preparing offers or demands, review of potential clients/partners, establishing of contacts, drafting of agreements, monitoring of technology implementation), cluster initiatives financing advice, strategic planning, establishing contacts between the research and business sectors (cooperation possibility analysis, organisation of meetings), export auditing. The Chamber offers IT services related to establishing or closing a business and acquiring public funding, as well as consulting services related to acquiring external funding, export promotion (preparation of an exporting plan, advice on entering external markets, financing of exports) and business operations (choice of legal status, business plan preparation). (http://www.pcc.org.pl/, 05.10.2012.).

16

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Special economic zones in Wielkopolskie voivodeship - effects

There are six special economic zones (SSE) in Lubelskie voivodeship: Kamiennogórska, Kostrzyńsko-Słubicka, Łódzka, Pomorska, Słupska and Wałbrzyska. At the end of 2011 the areas of SSE were part of 7 cities and 20 gminas (counties). (Exhibit 6).

Exhibit 6. The location of SSE in Greater Poland voivodeship

Source: Authors’ own calculations. First SSE were established only in 2005. The enterprises operating in the zones have until 2011 invested 2,1 billion PLN which constitutes 3% of all economic zone capital expenditures in Poland. In the same period the enterprises have created 4,9 thousand jobs, which constitutes 3% of all new jobs created in economic zones - cf. table 4.

17

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Table 4. Effects of special economic zone functioning at the end of 2011.

Leading industries (capital Cumulated New expenditure larger than capital SSE/ Gmina jobs 20% of overall capital expenditure created expenditure in the subzone) in million PLN Kostrzyńsko-Słubicka SSE, Buk (3) Chemicals 122 111,4 Kostrzyńsko-Słubicka SSE, Chodzież (2) Furniture 0 19,1 Wałbrzyska SSE, Jarocin (3) Data unavailable

Wałbrzyska SSE, Kalisz (1) Electric circuits 115 2,9 Łódzka SSE, Koło (1) Sanitary 225 81,7 Wałbrzyska SSE, Kościan (2) Non-metallic mineral resources 13 88,3 Kostrzyńsko-Słubicka SSE, Krobia (3) Food processing 28 21,1 Wałbrzyska SSE, Krotoszyn (3) Metal products 711 371,9 Wałbrzyska SSE, Leszno (1) Data unavailable

Łódzka SSE, Nowe Skalmierzyce (3) Furniture 517 402,1 Kostrzyńsko-Słubicka SSE, Nowy Tomyśl (3) Electric and optical equipment 690 117,2 Łódzka SSE, Opatówek (2) Food processing 250 80,0 Metal products, transport Kamiennogórska SSE, Ostrów Wielkopolski (1) 89 12,8 equipment Łódzka SSE, Ostrzeszów (3) Construction 157 29,5 Pomorska SSE, Piła (1)

Kostrzyńsko-Słubicka SSE, Poznań (1) Automotive 1 335 229,3 Kostrzyńsko-Słubicka SSE, Przemęt (2) Data unavailable

Łódzka SSE, Przykona (2) Data unavailable

Wałbrzyska SSE, Rawicz (3) Data unavailable

Słupska SSE, Rogoźno (3) Data unavailable

Łódzka SSE, Słupca (2) Data unavailable

Kostrzyńsko-Słubicka SSE, Stęszew (3) Chemicals 3 38,0 Kostrzyńsko-Słubicka SSE, Swarzędz (3) Food processing 286 158,3 Wałbrzyska SSE, Śrem (3) Chemical 219 203,2 Łódzka SSE, Turek (1) Data unavailable

Kostrzyńsko-Słubicka SSE, Wronki (3) Data unavailable

Wałbrzyska SSE, Września (3) Synthetic materials 156 161,9 Source: Authors’ own calculations based on PAIiIZ data. The largest investments have been made in Nowe Skalmierzyce and Krotoszyn. In Nowe Skalmierzyc: CORRECT, K.Błaszczyk i wspólnicy S, ka Komandytowa (Poland, furniture, synthetic mattresses), L.Correct Sp. z o.o. (Poland, furniture), in Krotoszyn: „MAHLE Polska” Sp. z o.o. (Germany, diesel engine parts), DINO KROTOSZYN Sp. z o.o. (Poland, logistics, baking).

According to the SSE development plans the voivodeship wishes to attract investors:

 From machinery hi-tech industries, cooperating with research institutions, from food- processing and construction industries and investors interested in technology transfer – in Kamiennogórska SSE,  Representing hi-tech industries and cooperating with research institutions, operating in data processing and logistics branches – on Kostrzyńsko-Słubicka SSE, Łódzka SSE, Pomorska SSE and Wałbrzyska SSE,  From synthetic materials, metal and food processing industries – in Słupska SSE.

18

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

‘A’ Commune

Student Scientific Organisation for Entrepreneurship and Regional Analyses affiliated to the Institute of Enterprise of the Warsaw School of Economics, has again published the results of its research into the quality of investor assistance given by the communal authorities. The subject of this study of investment attractiveness is: an audit of Web sites and audit of e-contact in Polish and English with communal authorities. The effect of this study is a ranking ‘A’ Commune, which is thought to distinguish best performing self-government territorial units in terms of the use of means of electronic communication in their assistance. The research is carried out using the mystery client method. In this year’s edition all gminas belonging to Class A according to the PAI 2010 index were subject to query.

As a result 70 gminas have been distinguished; this includes 8 gminas situated in Lubusz voivodship.

Chart 5. Gminas in Greater Poland voivodship distinguished as the ‘A’ Communes

Audit of e- Audit of Web Audit of e- Gmina Poviat contact in Sum sites contact in Polish English

Piła (1) pilski 10 5 0 15 Wolsztyn (3) wolsztyński 8,5 5 0 13,5 Gostyń (3) gostyński 9,5 4 0 13,5 Luboń (1) poznański 9 4 0 13 Śrem (3) śremski 9 4 0 13 Leszno (1) Leszno 9 4 0 13 Swarzędz (3) poznański 8,5 4 0 12,5 Środa Wielkopolska średzki 8,5 4 0 12,5 (3) wielkopolski

Source: Authors’ own materials.

What makes the Web sites of all communes in question is their presence in social media networks and foreign language versions (prevalence of the German and French languages). Wolsztyn offers interesting means of communication on its Web site, i.e. through an online inquiry form, in which a particular department of local authority office can be indicated. In direct contact Piła took the lead. In an e-mail a link to a Web site dedicated to conducting business activity was sent as well as a resolution of a city council regarding real estate tax exemptions. Both Piła and Wolsztyn offered personal contact regarding an investment.

5. Region’s strengths and weaknesses

Greater Poland voivodship has its unique character and clear specificity which influences its strengths and weaknesses. If divided according to the main factors of location and location conditions classified into microclimates composing potential and real investment attractiveness, they can be grouped into strengths (microclimates ranking A, B or C) and weaknesses (microclimates ranking D, E or F) – see Chart 6.

19

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Chart 6. Strengths and weaknesses of Greater Poland voivodship

Strengths of the region according to the Weaknesses of the region according to microclimates by IP SGH the microclimates by IP SGH National economy Microclimate Human Resources Class A Microclimate Administration/Governance Microclimate Technical Infrastructure Class B Class E Microclimate Social Infrastructure Class B Microclimate Social Capital Class C Microclimate Market Class C Microclimate Innovativeness Class C Labour productivity in enterprises Class C Returns on tangible assets Class B Profitability of enterprises Class B Self-financing of self-government units Class C Investment outlays Class C Capital intensive industry Microclimate Human Resources Class A Microclimate Social Capital Class AD Microclimate Technical Infrastructure Class B Microclimate Administration/Governance Microclimate Social Infrastructure Class A Class E Microclimate Market Class C Microclimate Innovativeness Class C Returns on tangible assets Class A Labour productivity in enterprises Class C Self-financing of self-government units Class C Investment outlays Class C Labour intensive industry Microclimate Human Resources Class A Microclimate Administration/Governance Microclimate Technical Infrastructure Class B Class F Microclimate Social Infrastructure Class B Microclimate Social Capital Class C Microclimate Market Class C Returns on tangible assets Class A Labour productivity in enterprises Class C Self-financing of self-government units Class C Investment outlays Class C Trade Microclimate Human Resources Class A Microclimate Social Infrastructure Class D Microclimate Technical Infrastructure Class C Microclimate Administration/Governance Microclimate Social Capital Class C Class E Microclimate Market Class C Returns on tangible assets Class B Labour productivity in enterprises Class A Self-financing of self-government units Class C Investment outlays Class A Tourism Microclimate Human Resources Class A Microclimate Social Capital Class D Microclimate Technical Infrastructure Class B Microclimate Administration/Governance Microclimate Social Infrastructure Class A Class F

20

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Microclimate Market Class C Investment outlays Class D Returns on tangible assets Class C Labour productivity in enterprises Class C Self-financing of self-government units Class C Professional, scientific and technical activities Microclimate Human Resources Class B Microclimate Administration/Governance Microclimate Technical Infrastructure Class B Class E Microclimate Social Infrastructure Class A Microclimate Social Capital Class C Microclimate Market Class C Microclimate Innovativeness Class C Returns on tangible assets Class C Labour productivity in enterprises Class C Self-financing of self-government units Class C Investment outlays Class B

Source: Authors on the basis of the results of research of the Institute of Enterprise of the Warsaw School of Economics (IP SGH).

21

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

APPENDIX Exhibit 1. Potential investment attractiveness of Polish voivodship broken down by basic sections of the national economy

Source: Authors’ own materials.

22

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Exhibit 2. Real investment attractiveness of Polish voivodship broken down by basic sections of the national economy

Source: Authors’ own materials.

23

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Chart 1. List of investment attractiveness indices for voivodships

MASURIAN

-

POMERANIAN

-

ŁÓDŹ

OPOLE

LUBLIN

LUBUSZ

SILESIAN

MASOVIAN

PODLASKIE

POMERANIAN

Voivodship

LESSER POLAND LESSER

SUBCARPATHIAN

LOWER SILESIAN LOWER

ŚWIĘTOKRZYSKIE

GREATER POLAND GREATER

WARMIAN

WESTERN POMERANIAN WESTERN KUYAVIAN

PAI1 GN A E F C D C A E D E B A F D B C PAI2 GN A E F D C B A D D E C A F E C D RAI GN A D F E B C A C F F B B E E B C PAI1 C A D F C C C A D E E B A F E C C PAI2 C KAPITAŁ A E F D D B A D D E B A F F C E PAI2 C PRACA B D F D C B A E E F C A E E C D RAI C A D F D D C A D F F B A D E B E PAI1 G A E F C D B A D E F B A F C C C PAI2 G B C F E C B A D E E C A F E B D RAI G C C F E B C A C E F C B E F B D PAI1 I B E F B E B A E D E B D F B C A PAI2 I A E F C E B A E E E B D F C C A RAI I B C E E A E A E E E E C E B C D PAI1 M A E F C D C A D D F B B F D B C PAI2 M A E E D D C A D D E C B F E C D RAI M A D E D D C A D F F C A F E B C

Source: Authors on the basis of the results of statutory research carried out in the Collegium of Business Administration under the guidance of H. Godlewska-Majkowska.

24

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Chart 2. Potential investment attractiveness of poviats of Greater Poland voivodship for the national economy and selected sections

PAI1_GN_ PAI1_C_ PAI1_G_ PAI1_I_ PAI1_M_ Poviat PAI1_GN klasy klasy klasy klasy klasy The city of Poznań 0,383 A A A A A The city of Leszno 0,370 A A A A A The city of Konin 0,353 A A A A A The city of Kalisz 0,321 A A A C A poznański 0,319 A A A A A turecki 0,279 C C D D C pilski 0,275 C C C C C chodzieski 0,266 C C D D C śremski 0,265 C C C C C

Source: See Chart 1.

Chart 3. Potential investment attractiveness of gminas of Greater Poland voivodship for the national economy and selected sections

PAI1_C_ PAI1_G_ PAI1_I_ PAI1_M_ Gmina (commune) PAI1_GN PAI1_GN_classes classes classes classes classes Tarnowo Podgórne (2) 0,292 A A A A A Kościan (1) 0,286 A A A C A Leszno (1) 0,281 A A A A A Turek (1) 0,281 A A A B A Suchy Las (2) 0,278 A A A A A Czarnków (1) 0,277 A A A A A Poznań (1) 0,277 A A A A A Chodzież (1) 0,274 A A A B A Konin (1) 0,270 A A A A A Piła (1) 0,269 A A A A A Komorniki (2) 0,266 A A A A A Luboń (1) 0,261 A A A A A Ostrów Wielkopolski (1) 0,260 A A A B A Wągrowiec (1) 0,255 A A A B A Gniezno (1) 0,251 A A A B A Puszczykowo (1) 0,247 A A A A A Kalisz (1) 0,246 A A A B A Dopiewo (2) 0,246 A A A B A Swarzędz (3) 0,244 A A A A A Słupca (1) 0,242 A A A C A Kórnik (3) 0,240 A A A A A Złotów (1) 0,237 A A A B A Koło (1) 0,237 A A A B A Czerwonak (2) 0,235 A A A A A Kleszczewo (2) 0,232 A A A A A

25

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Kępno (3) 0,232 A A A B A Śrem (3) 0,231 A A A A A Rokietnica (2) 0,228 A A A C A Przykona (2) 0,228 A A A B C Kleczew (3) 0,226 A A A B B Buk (3) 0,226 A A C B A Środa Wielkopolska (3) 0,224 A A B B A Gostyń (3) 0,223 A A A A A Ostrzeszów (3) 0,220 B B C C A Nowy Tomyśl (3) 0,217 B B B B A Pobiedziska (3) 0,217 B B B C A Grodzisk Wielkopolski (3) 0,215 B B B B B Mosina (3) 0,215 B B B B B Jarocin (3) 0,214 B B B C A Międzychód (3) 0,214 B B C C B Murowana Goślina (3) 0,212 B B B B A Rawicz (3) 0,211 B B C C A Margonin (3) 0,210 B B C B B Oborniki (3) 0,210 B B C B B Wolsztyn (3) 0,210 B B C C B Baranów (2) 0,209 B B C C C Łubowo (2) 0,209 B B B B B Krotoszyn (3) 0,208 B B B C A Stęszew (3) 0,207 B B C C B Kostrzyn (3) 0,206 B B C C B Szamotuły (3) 0,206 B B B A B Pniewy (3) 0,205 B B C B B Chodzież (2) 0,204 B B C B C Pakosław (2) 0,203 B C C D C Kościan (2) 0,202 B B C D B Kaczory (2) 0,201 C C C D B Opalenica (3) 0,201 C C C C B Kazimierz Biskupi (2) 0,200 C C C D B Września (3) 0,200 C C C C B Włoszakowice (2) 0,199 C C D D B Zaniemyśl (2) 0,199 C C C D B Doruchów (2) 0,199 C C C D C Władysławów (2) 0,198 C C B C D Ślesin (3) 0,198 C C C B C Ujście (3) 0,197 C C C D C Stare Miasto (2) 0,197 C C C C B Grabów nad Prosną (3) 0,195 C C E E C Zduny (3) 0,195 C C C B B Obrzycko (1) 0,195 C C C D C Powidz (2) 0,195 C C A B C Trzcianka (3) 0,195 C C C B B Rogoźno (3) 0,194 C C C E C

26

Regional investment attractiveness 2012

Słupca (2) 0,194 C C D D C Budzyń (2) 0,194 C C C B C Granowo (2) 0,194 C C C E B Jutrosin (3) 0,193 C C D E B Siedlec (2) 0,192 C C C D C Nekla (3) 0,192 C C C B C Witkowo (3) 0,191 C C D D C Raszków (3) 0,190 C C C D D Zbąszyń (3) 0,189 C C C B C Krobia (3) 0,188 C C D E C Sieraków (3) 0,188 C C C B C Krzykosy (2) 0,188 C C C C D Rydzyna (3) 0,187 C C D C C Przemęt (2) 0,187 C C E E C Miłosław (3) 0,187 C C D B D Koźmin Wielkopolski (3) 0,187 C C D E C Duszniki (2) 0,186 C C D D C Połajewo (2) 0,186 C C C D D Lipno (2) 0,186 C C D C C Kłodawa (3) 0,185 C C C D D Pleszew (3) 0,185 C C D D C Wronki (3) 0,185 C C C B C Odolanów (3) 0,185 C C C E C Tuliszków (3) 0,185 C D D D D Brudzew (2) 0,184 C D C E D Skoki (3) 0,184 C C C D C Kaźmierz (2) 0,184 C C C D C Sulmierzyce (1) 0,184 C C C D C Kobyla Góra (2) 0,183 C D D D C Poniec (3) 0,183 C C D D C Perzów (2) 0,183 C C D D C Nowe Skalmierzyce (3) 0,183 C C D C C Rakoniewice (3) 0,183 C D D E C Łęka Opatowska (2) 0,183 C D C C D

Source: See Chart 1. Note: all indices in this report have been computed on the basis of the most up-to-date data from the Local Data Bank (2012).

27