Post on 27-Mar-2015
KITKnowledge, Innovation and Territory
ESPON 2013 Programme European Territorial Evidence for
EU Cohesion Policy and Programming
13-14 June 2012Aalborg, Denmark
The project team
Lead Partner (LP): BEST, Politecnico di Milano, Italy:Project Coordinator: Prof. Roberta Capello (Full Professor in Regional
Economics)Project Manager: Camilla Lenzi (Assistant Professor)Prof. Roberto Camagni (Full Professor in Urban Economics) Dr. Andrea Caragliu (Post-Doc Fellow)
Project Partner 2 (PP2): CRENOs, University of Cagliari, Italy:Prof. Raffaele Paci (Full Professor of Applied Economics)Proff. Emanuela Marrocu and Stefano Usai (Associate Professors of
Econometrics and Economics) Dr. Alessandra Colombelli (Post-Doc Fellow)Dr. Marta Foddi (Research Assistant)
Project Partner 3 (PP3): AQR, University of Barcelona, Spain:Prof. Rosina Moreno (Full Professor in Applied Economics)Prof. Jordi Suriñach (Full Professor in Applied Economics)Prof. Raúl Ramos (Associate Professor in Applied Economics)Dr. Ernest Miguélez (Technical Researcher and PhD student)
The project team
Project Partner 4 (PP4): LSE, Great Britain:Dr. Riccardo Crescenzi (Lecturer in Economic Geography) Prof. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose (Professor in Economic Geography)Prof. Michael Storper (Professor in Economic Geography)
Project Partner 5 (PP5): University of Economics in Bratislava, Slovakia:Prof. Milan Buček (Full Professor in Regional Economics and Policy)Dr. Miroslav Šipikal (Coordinator - Senior Lecturer)Dr. Rudolf Pástor (Lecturer)
Project Partner 6 (PP6): University of Cardiff, Great Britain:Prof. Phil Cooke (Full Research Professor in Regional Economic
Development)Dr. Selyf Morgan (Researcher)Julie Porter (Support Coordinator)
General goal of the KIT project (1)
The KIT project has the general aim to help – on the basis of sound scientific research – the setting up of strategies on innovation that are consistent with the overall reforms of EU Cohesion Policy.
The KIT project provides suggestions for implementing smart specialization policies in the field of innovation - called for by the EU in its official document Regional Policy Contributing to Smart Growth in Europe (EU, 2010) - and to launch a territorial strategy to achieve a “smart growth” in the years to come.
General goal of the KIT project (2)
The KIT project is at the heart of an important policy debate.
ERDF Reform 2009 - 2012
DG-Regio and ESPON 2006-2013
DG Research - 2009 Europe 2020 - 2010
Barca Report
2009
KIT Project ‘Regional Patterns of Innovation’
2011-12
‘Smart Specialization’ in R&D policies
Smart Growth pillar ‘Innovation Europe’ Flagship Initiative
Smart Innovation Policies
General goal of the KIT project (3)
The achievement of such a goal requires greater understanding of:
- diffusion processes of knowledge and innovation;- the identification of the pathways towards innovation and
modernization; - the socio-economic impacts of innovation and
knowledge in space.
Main result:
the geography of innovation is much more complex than a simple core-periphery model.
The identification of regional specificities in innovation patterns is essential to build targeted normative strategies efficient for a cohesion policy goal.
Main ideas throughtout the project
- R&D (and formal knowledge in general) does not necessarily equate innovation;
- innovation does not necessarily equate regional growth.
these linkages are strongly mediated by local territorial assets.
Specific goals of the KIT project
B) Identification of the regional pathways towards innovation and modernization and their territorial elements
A) Main spatial trends of innovation and knowledge
C) Impact of the different modes of innovation and knowledge on regional performance
D) Case studies
E) Policy implications for the development of a successful knowledge economy
Specific goals of the KIT project
B) Identification of the regional pathways towards innovation and modernization and their territorial elements
A) Main spatial trends of innovation and knowledge
C) Impact of the different modes of innovation and knowledge on regional performance
D) Case studies
E) Policy implications for the development of a successful knowledge economy
Definition of the Knowledge Economy
Basic idea: knowledge-based economy has not got a unique interpretative paradigm.
Different approaches are necessary:
A1. Sectoral approach (presence in the region of science-based, high-technology sectors).
A2. Functional approach (presence in the region of functions like R&D, patents, human capital).
A3. Relation-based approach (presence in the region of interactive and collective learning processes).
The Knowledge Economy in Europe
The Knowledge Economy in Europe is a very fragmented picture.
What is striking from this map is the high number of regions in which the knowledge economy is still in its infancy.
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
Acores
Guyane
Madeira
Réunion
Canarias
MartiniqueGuadeloupe
Valletta
Roma
Riga
Oslo
Bern
Wien
Kyiv
Vaduz
Paris
Praha
Minsk
Tounis
Lisboa
Athina
Skopje
Zagreb
Ankara
MadridTirana
Sofiya
London
Berlin
Dublin
Tallinn
Nicosia
Beograd
Vilnius
Kishinev
Sarajevo
Helsinki
Budapest
Warszawa
Podgorica
El-Jazair
Stockholm
Reykjavik
København
Bucuresti
Amsterdam
Luxembourg
Bruxelles/Brussel
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Regional level: NUTS2Source: Own elaboration, 2011
Origin of data: EUROSTAT and REGPAT, 2007© EuroGeographics Association for administrative boundaries
This map does notnecessarily reflect theopinion of the ESPONMonitoring Committee
The know ledge econom y in Europe
© Politecnico di Milano, ESPON KIT Project, 20120 520260
km
Legend
No data
None (137 regions)
TAR only (8 regions)
Scientific regions only (11 regions)
Networking regions only (43 regions)
TAR and scientific regions (3 regions)
TAR and networking regions (20 regions)
Scientific and networking regions (29 regions)
TAR, scientific and networking regions (31 regions)
Spatial trends of innovation in Europe
Innovation•product innovation;•process innovation;•product and/or process innovation;•marketing and/or organisational innovation•environmental innovation•social innovation
Source: CIS/EUROSTAT
Spatial trends of innovation in EuropeProduct innovation only Process innovation only
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
Acores
Guyane
Madeira
Réunion
Canarias
MartiniqueGuadeloupe
Valletta
Roma
Riga
Oslo
Bern
Wien
Kyiv
Vaduz
Paris
Praha
Minsk
Tounis
Lisboa
Athina
Skopje
Zagreb
Ankara
MadridTirana
Sofiya
London
Berlin
Dublin
Tallinn
Nicosia
Beograd
Vilnius
Kishinev
Sarajevo
Helsinki
Budapest
Warszawa
Podgorica
El-Jazair
Stockholm
Reykjavik
København
Bucuresti
Amsterdam
Luxembourg
Bruxelles/Brussel
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Regional level: NUTS2Source: Own elaboration, 2011
Origin of data: EUROSTAT - Community Innovation Survey, 2002-2004© EuroGeographics Association for administrative boundaries
This map does notnecessarily reflect theopinion of the ESPONMonitoring Committee
Share of firm s in troducing product innovation on ly
© Politecnico di Milano, ESPON KIT Project, 20120 520260
km
Legend
No data
< 3.26
3.27 - 5.92
5.93 - 9.12
9.13 -12.80
12.81 - 17.30
17.31 - 23.43
23.44 - 33.45
> 33.45
Switzerland: share of firms introducing product innovationIceland: CIS3 dataLatvia and Slovenija: CIS2006 data
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
Acores
Guyane
Madeira
Réunion
Canarias
MartiniqueGuadeloupe
Valletta
Roma
Riga
Oslo
Bern
Wien
Kyiv
Vaduz
Paris
Praha
Minsk
Tounis
Lisboa
Athina
Skopje
Zagreb
Ankara
MadridTirana
Sofiya
London
Berlin
Dublin
Tallinn
Nicosia
Beograd
Vilnius
Kishinev
Sarajevo
Helsinki
Budapest
Warszawa
Podgorica
El-Jazair
Stockholm
Reykjavik
København
Bucuresti
Amsterdam
Luxembourg
Bruxelles/Brussel
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Regional level: NUTS2Source: Own elaboration, 2011
Origin of data: EUROSTAT - Community Innovation Survey, 2002-2004© EuroGeographics Association for administrative boundaries
This map does notnecessarily reflect theopinion of the ESPONMonitoring Committee
Share of firm s in troducing process innovation on ly
© Politecnico di Milano, ESPON KIT Project, 20120 520260
km
Legend
No data
< 5.40
5.41 - 8.09
8.10 - 10.09
10.10 - 12.32
12.33 - 14.71
14.72 - 18.01
18.02 - 25.92
25.93 - 55.08
Switzerland: share of firms introducing process innovationIceland: CIS3 dataLatvia and Slovenija: CIS2006 data
Share of innovation by type of knowledge-economy regions
Product innovation
Process innovation
Product and/or process
innovation
Marketing and/or
organizational innovation
Household propensity to adopt
innovation
Environmental innovation
TAR 17,42 13,76 43,66 32,75 57 0,007
Scientific 18,16 13,48 43,71 29,51 62 0,007
Networking 16,19 13,2 44,24 31,95 57 0,007
Other 6,34 9,88 27,4 20,58 41 0,003
R&D expenditures on GDP and innovationR&D expenditure / GDP Share of firms introducing product
and/or process innovation
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Roma
Riga
Oslo
Bern
Wien
Kyiv
Vaduz
Paris
Praha
Minsk
Tounis
Lisboa
Skopje
Zagreb
Ankara
Madrid
Tirana
Sofiya
London Berlin
Dublin
Athinai
Tallinn
Nicosia
Beograd
Vilnius
Ar Ribat
Kishinev
Sarajevo
Helsinki
Budapest
Warszawa
Podgorica
El-Jazair
Ljubljana
Stockholm
Reykjavik
København
Bucuresti
Amsterdam
Bratislava
Luxembourg
Bruxelles/Brussel
Valletta
Acores
Guyane
Madeira
Réunion
Canarias
MartiniqueGuadeloupe
This map does notnecessarily reflect theopinion of the ESPONMonitoring Committee
0 500250km© Politecnico di Milano, Project KIT, 2011
Regional level: NUTS2Source: Politecnico di Milano, 2011
Origin of data: Community Innovation Survey 2004© EuroGeographics Association for administrative boundaries
KIT estimates
Share of both product and process innovationNA0 - 7.797.80 - 10.2410.25 - 13.1513.16 - 16.6916.70 - 21.3721.38 - 28.3428.35 - 42.6342.64 - 98.82
Iceland: CIS3 data.
Latvia and Slovenija: CIS 2006 data.
Switzerland: share of product and process innovation.
R&D expenditures on GDP (average 2006-07)In 2007 33 regions had achieved 3% of R&D expenditures on GDP (11% of NUTS2, representing 16% of EU GDP) and concentrated in a few countries in the North of Europe. Moreover, a very high number of regions belong to the lowest class, with R&D on GDP lower than 0.5% (representing 5% of GDP).
Do we really take advantage from an innovation policy with a common aim for all countries/regions?
Patenting activity: comparison with China and India
… and USA
The spatial concentration of R&D in order to exploit economies of scale seems to be the model followed by emerging countries, re-launching in a decisive way the debate of the importance of the identification of a European Research Area.
Results and questions from the descriptive analysisResults:Only a few regions have achieved the 3% of R&D/GDP, and most are below 0.5%.
Only a few regions show a pattern of innovation that goes from R&D to innovation.
Questions:How do regions innovate without R&D?
Which are the territorial preconditions in order for regions to move from knowledge to innovation and to growth?
Specific goals
B) Identification of the regional pathways towards innovation and modernization and their territorial elements
A) Main spatial trends of innovation and knowledge
C) Impact of the different modes of innovation and knowledge on regional performance
D) Case studies
E) Policy implications for the development of a successful knowledge economy
Territorial patterns of innovation
A territorial pattern of innovation is a combination of context conditions and of specific modes of performing the different phases of the innovation process.
Context conditions:Internal generationExternal attraction
Different phases of the innovation process: - from knowledge to innovation- from innovation to regional performance
of knowledge and innovation
An endogenous innovation pattern
1) A European science-based area: basic general purpose technologies
2) An applied science area: high patent activities in diversified applied technology fields
Phases Territorial preconditions for knowledge creation
Knowledge output Territorial preconditions for innovation
Innovation Economic efficiency
Specific, applied knowledge
Education, human capital, accessibility, urban externalities
Education, human capital, accessibility, urban externalities
Territorial receptivity
Cross-regional cognitive proximity
relational capacity
Basic knowledge
(General Purpose Technologies, GPTs)
Collective learning
Entrepreneurship
Product and process innovation
Economic efficiency
Basic knowledge
(General Purpose Technologies, GPTs)Specific, applied knowledge
Education, human capital, accessibility, urban externalities
Education, human capital, accessibility, urban externalities
Basic knowledge
(General Purpose Technologies, GPTs)Specific, applied knowledge
Region j
Region i
Territorial receptivity
A creative application pattern
3) A smart technological application area External specific technologies enhancing the upgrading of local innovation
4) Smart and creative diversification area External tacit knowledge enhacing local innovation
Phases Territorial preconditions for knowledge creation
Knowledge output Territorial preconditions for innovation
Innovation Economic efficiency
Product and process innovation
Economic efficiency
Collective learning
Entrepreneurship
Specific and
applied knowledge
Capabilities
Territorial creativity
Basic knowledge (General Purpose Technologies, GPTs)
Specific and applied knowledge
Region j
Education, human capital, accessibility, urban externalities
Region i
An imitative innovation pattern
5) An imitative innovation area Innovation imitation through territorial attractiveness
Phases Territorial preconditions for knowledge creation
Knowledge output Territorial preconditions for innovation
Innovation Economic efficiency
Education, human capital, accessibility, urban externalities
Product and process innovation
Economic efficiency
Specific and applied knowledge
Territorial attractiveness:
FDIs
Product and process innovation
Collective learning
Entrepreneurship
Region i
Basic knowledge (General Purpose Technologies, GPTs)
Region j
Territorial patterns of innovation
Pattern 1= A European science-based area
Pattern 2 = An applied science area
Pattern 3 = A smart technological application area
Pattern 4 = A smart and creative diversification area
Pattern 5 = An imitative innovation area
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
Acores
Guyane
Madeira
Réunion
Canarias
MartiniqueGuadeloupe
Valletta
Roma
Riga
Oslo
Bern
Wien
Kyiv
Vaduz
Paris
Praha
Minsk
Tounis
Lisboa
Athina
Skopje
Zagreb
Ankara
MadridTirana
Sofiya
London
Berlin
Dublin
Tallinn
Nicosia
Beograd
Vilnius
Kishinev
Sarajevo
Helsinki
Budapest
Warszawa
Podgorica
El-Jazair
Stockholm
Reykjavik
København
Bucuresti
Amsterdam
Luxembourg
Bruxelles/Brussel
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Regional level: NUTS2Source: Own elaboration, 2012
Origin of data: EUROSTAT, 2012© EuroGeographics Association for administrative boundaries
This map does notnecessarily reflect theopinion of the ESPONMonitoring Committee
Territoria l patterns o f innovation in Europe
© Politecnico di Milano, ESPON KIT Project, 20120 520260
km
Legend
No data
Imitative innovation area
Smart and creative diversification area
Smart technological application area
Applied science area
European science-based area
Territorial conditions associated to each pattern
Regional preconditions for knowledge and innovation creation
Regional preconditions for external knowledge and innovation acquisition
Results and questions from the patterns identification
1. Differentiated patterns of innovation and modernization, much more complex than a core-periphery model;
2. our impression is that none of these patterns is by definition superior to another and, on the contrary, each territorial pattern may provide an efficient use of research and innovation activities generating growth.
But this last statement calls for empirical analysis.
Specific goals
B) Identification of the regional pathways towards innovation and modernization and their territorial elements
A) Main spatial trends of innovation and knowledge
C) Impact of the different modes of innovation and knowledge on regional performance
D) Case studies
E) Policy implications for the development of a successful knowledge economy
Selected questions to be answered
Knowledge input (R&D)
Knowledge output Innovation
Productivity growth
GDP growth
Employment growth
3.1
3.3
3.2
4.1
4.3
4.4
4.2
Migration of inventorsResearch collaborations
What is the return of knowledge production to R&D expenditure?
Map: Elasticity of knowledge production to R&D
The return of R&D expenditure to knowledge production increases by increasing R&D expenditure up to a certain level, then it starts decreasing.
Pattern 5
Pattern 1
Pattern 2
Pattern 4
Pattern 3
Elasticity of knowledge production to R&D: an international comparison
Elasticity of knowledge production to R&D:
EUROPE
USA
CHINA
INDIA
0.430
0.041
1.303
0.995
(all coefficients are statistically significant)
Knowledge Production
What is the return of knowledge production to human capital?
Increasing returns up to a certain threshold, then decreasing returns.
Elasticity is higher than for R&D.
Pattern 5
Pattern 4
Pattern 1
Pattern 2
Pattern 3
What is the return of knowledge production to external knowledge ?
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
Acores
Guyane
Madeira
Réunion
Canarias
MartiniqueGuadeloupe
Valletta
Roma
Riga
Oslo
Bern
Wien
Kyiv
Vaduz
Paris
Praha
Minsk
Tounis
Lisboa
Skopje
Zagreb
Ankara
MadridTirana
Sofiya
London
Berlin
Dublin
Athinai
Tallinn
Nicosia
Beograd
Vilnius
Kishinev
Sarajevo
Helsinki
Budapest
Warszawa
Podgorica
El-Jazair
Stockholm
Reykjavik
København
Bucuresti
Amsterdam
Luxembourg
Bruxelles/Brussel
Regional level: NUTS 2Source: EUROSTAT, own calculation, 2011
Origin of data: AQR - University of Barcelona© EuroGeographics Association for administrative boundaries
This map does notnecessarily reflect theopinion of the ESPONMonitoring Committee
© Project KIT, 20120 560280
km
Elasticity of knowledge production to cross-regional mobility by patterns of innovation
Imitative innovation area = -0,10
Smart and creative diversification area = No impact
Smart technological application area = 0,02
Applied science area = 0,06
European science-based area = 0,05
No data
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
Acores
Guyane
Madeira
Réunion
Canarias
MartiniqueGuadeloupe
Valletta
Roma
Riga
Oslo
Bern
Wien
Kyiv
Vaduz
Paris
Praha
Minsk
Tounis
Lisboa
Skopje
Zagreb
Ankara
MadridTirana
Sofiya
London
Berlin
Dublin
Athinai
Tallinn
Nicosia
Beograd
Vilnius
Kishinev
Sarajevo
Helsinki
Budapest
Warszawa
Podgorica
El-Jazair
Stockholm
Reykjavik
København
Bucuresti
Amsterdam
Luxembourg
Bruxelles/Brussel
Regional level: NUTS 2Source: EUROSTAT, own calculation, 2011
Origin of data: AQR - University of Barcelona© EuroGeographics Association for administrative boundaries
This map does notnecessarily reflect theopinion of the ESPONMonitoring Committee
© Project KIT, 20120 560280
km
Elasticity of knowledge production to cross-regional co-patenting by patterns of innovation
Imitative innovation area = No impact
Smart and creative diversification area = No impact
Smart technological application area = 0,14
European science-based area = 0,26
Applied science area = 0,31
No data
Pattern 5
Pattern 4
Pattern 3
Pattern 2
Pattern 1
Pattern 5
Pattern 4
Pattern 3
Pattern 2
Pattern 1
Do knowledge spillovers play a role in producing internal knowledge?
Intra-regional inventors’ mobility Inter regional inventors’ mobility
Mobility
European science-based area
* Significant at conventional level
Knowledge creation
(patenting)
0.01*
Imitative innovation area
Smart technological application area
Applied science area
Smart and creative diversification area
Knowledge creation
(patenting)
Mobility in:
0.09*
0.08*
0.05*
0.03*
No impact
Mobility
European science-based area
* Significant at conventional level
Knowledge creation
(patenting)
0.01*
Imitative innovation area
Smart technological application area
Applied science area
Smart and creative diversification area
Knowledge creation
(patenting)
Mobility in:
0.09*
0.08*
0.05*
0.03*
No impact
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
Acores
Guyane
Madeira
Réunion
Canarias
MartiniqueGuadeloupe
Valletta
Roma
Riga
Oslo
Bern
Wien
Kyiv
Vaduz
Paris
Praha
Minsk
Tounis
Lisboa
Skopje
Zagreb
Ankara
MadridTirana
Sofiya
London
Berlin
Dublin
Athinai
Tallinn
Nicosia
Beograd
Vilnius
Kishinev
Sarajevo
Helsinki
Budapest
Warszawa
Podgorica
El-Jazair
Stockholm
Reykjavik
København
Bucuresti
Amsterdam
Luxembourg
Bruxelles/Brussel
Regional level: NUTS 2Source: EUROSTAT, own calculation, 2011
Origin of data: AQR - University of Barcelona© EuroGeographics Association for administrative boundaries
This map does notnecessarily reflect theopinion of the ESPONMonitoring Committee
© Project KIT, 20120 560280
km
Elasticity of knowledge production to cross-regional mobility by patterns of innovation
Imitative innovation area = -1,78
Smart and creative diversification area = No impact
Smart technological application area = 2,33
Applied science area = 5,82
European science-based area = 7,27
No data
Does innovation impact on employment growth rates?
Map: Elasticity of employment growth to product innovation
On average, product innovation is a labour saving activity but:
- it creates jobs in regions where production functions are present
(new products need to be produced)
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Roma
Riga
Oslo
Bern
Wien
Kyiv
Vaduz
Paris
Praha
Minsk
Tounis
Lisboa
Skopje
Zagreb
Ankara
Madrid
Tirana
Sofiya
London Berlin
Dublin
Athinai
Tallinn
Nicosia
Beograd
Vilnius
Ar Ribat
Kishinev
Sarajevo
Helsinki
Budapest
Warszawa
Podgorica
El-Jazair
Ljubljana
Stockholm
Reykjavik
København
Bucuresti
Amsterdam
Bratislava
Luxembourg
Bruxelles/Brussel
Valletta
Acores
Guyane
Madeira
Réunion
Canarias
MartiniqueGuadeloupe
This map does notnecessarily reflect theopinion of the ESPONMonitoring Committee
0 500250km
© BEST - Politecnico di Milano, Project KIT, 2012
Regional level: NUTS2Source: EUROSTAT, own calculation, 2011Origin of data: BEST - Politecnico di Milano
© EuroGeographics Association for administrative boundariesLegend
No data
< -0,250000
-0,24 - -0,05
-0,04 - 0
0,01 - 0,05
0,06 - 0,25
> 0,25
Elasticity of employment growth to product innovation at different levels of blue collar functions
}
}}
Share of blue collars = 18%
Share of blue collars = 24%
Share of blue collars = 30%
Does R&D expenditure generate innovation?
Elasticies of GDP Growth to Knowledge and Innovation
GDP growth (2005-2007)
R&D on GDP
Share of innovative firms
Elasticity of GDP growth to R&D
Elasticity of GDP growth to innovation
EU average 3.64 1.37 35.54 0.12 0.38
European science-based area (ESBA)
3.29 2.56 63.16 0.24 0.41
Applied science area (ASA) 3.65 1.84 46.92 0.15 0.49
Smart technological application area (STAA)
3.17 1.71 38.43 0.16 0.26
Smart and creative diversification area (SCDA)
3.85 0.97 27.69 0.10 0.22
Imitative innovation area (IIA)
4.2 0.41 18.14 Not significant Not significant
Note: elasticity values to knowledge and innovation are computed according to the estimated coefficients reported in table 4. Elasticity values of GDP growth to knowledge are computed according to model 2 (EU average value) and model 4 (elasticity values by patterns of innovation). Elasticity values of GDP growth to innovation are computed according to model 6 (EU average value) and model 10 (elasticity values by patterns of innovation).
Does R&D expenditure generate GDP growth?
Map: Elasticity of GDP to R&D by patterns
A critical mass is required in order to achieve increasing returns (U-shaped form).
Pattern 2
Pattern 1
Pattern 5
Pattern 3
Pattern 4
Do knowledge and capabilities increase TFP?
Does innovation generate increases in GDP growth rates?
Yes, but if innovation achieves a critical mass!
Imitative innovation generates lower GDP growth rates than new innovation
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
Acores
Guyane
Madeira
Réunion
Canarias
MartiniqueGuadeloupe
Valletta
Roma
Riga
Oslo
Bern
Wien
Kyiv
Vaduz
Paris
Praha
Minsk
Tounis
Lisboa
Athina
Skopje
Zagreb
Ankara
MadridTirana
Sofiya
London
Berlin
Dublin
Tallinn
Nicosia
Beograd
Vilnius
Kishinev
Sarajevo
Helsinki
Budapest
Warszawa
Podgorica
El-Jazair
Stockholm
Reykjavik
København
Bucuresti
Amsterdam
Luxembourg
Bruxelles/Brussel
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Regional level: NUTS2Source: Own elaboration, 2012
Origin of data: EUROSTAT, 2012© EuroGeographics Association for administrative boundaries
This map does notnecessarily reflect theopinion of the ESPONMonitoring Committee
Elastic ity o f G D P grow th to innovation by patterns of innovation
© Politecnico di Milano, ESPON KIT Project, 20120 520260
km
Legend
No data
Imitative innovation area = no impact
Smart and creative diversification area = 0,425
Smart technological application area = 0,434
Applied science area = 0,632
European science-based area = 0,810
Pattern 5Pattern 4
Pattern 3Pattern 2
Pattern 1
Case studies
B) Territorial elements explaining spatial trends.
Different modes of innovation and knowledge creation and diffusion.
A comparison with other regional knowledge economies in more advanced and emerging countries
Output: typologies of territorial patterns of innovation
WP 2 3.1 and 2.5
A) Main spatial trends of innovation and knowledge.
(both endogenous knowledge creation and flows from outside)
Output: typologies of innovative regions
WP 2.1 and 2.2
C) Impact of the different modes of innovation and knowledge on regional performance.
Output: typologies of regional performance based on innovation and knowledge
WP 2.3.2
D) Case studies
WP 2.4.1 and 2.4.2
E) Policy implications for the development of a successful knowledge economy
WP 2.6
12 case studies
6 case case on best practice of knowledge creation:- Electronics (Pisa, Tuscany)- Automotive in Piedmont- Biotech in Oxford- ICT in Cambridge- ICT in Kosice- ICT in Bratislava
6 case studies on best practice of knowledge acquisition:- Wine in Tuscany area;- Wood processing in Banska Bystrica region - Digital media in Cardiff (Wales)- Food sector in West Wales- ICT Milan (Lombardy)- Automotive in Bratislava region
Value added of the case studies Territorial elements explain innovation patterns more than the sectoral elements.
Case studies have provided an in-depth analysis of the territorial elements behind patterns of innovation.
Case studies demonstrated the dynamics of regions from one pattern of innovation to another.
Inductive analysis witnesses that the territorial elements supporting the different innovation patterns are those conceptually identified.
Specific goals of the KIT project
B) Territorial elements explaining the spatial trends
A) Main spatial trends of innovation and knowledge
C) Impact of the different modes of innovation and knowledge on regional performance
D) Case studies
E) Policy implications for the development of a successful knowledge economy
Key policy messages (1)
Unconventional policy warnings with regard to some general beliefs, namely:
- an innovation-driven economy is not necessary linked to a knowledge economy;
- formal knowledge is not the only knowledge asset on which a modern economy rests;
-R&D expenditures are not the only policy tools to develop innovation and growth;
Key policy messages (2)- if a knowledge economy is developed, this does not give rise to the same growth opportunity everywhere;
- external knowledge cannot easily and automatically be used in an efficient way by all regions.
There is a clear need for thematically-regionally focused innovation policies.
Smart innovation policies
Smart innovation policies may be defined as those policies able to increase the innovation capability of an area by boosting effectiveness of accumulated knowledge and fostering territorial applications and diversification, on the basis of local specificities and the characteristics of already established innovation patterns in each region.
Smart innovation policies
Territorial patterns of innovation
Policy aspectsEuropean science-based
area(Pattern 1a)
Applied science area(Pattern 1b)
Smart technological application area
(Pattern 2a)
Smart and creative diversification area
(Pattern 2b)
Imitative innovation area
(Pattern 3)
Policy goals Maximum return to R&D investmentsMaximum return to applications and co-operation in
applicationsMaximum return to
imitation
Policy actions for local knowledge generation
(Embeddedness)
Support to R&D in: Support to creative application, shifting capacity from old to new uses, improving productivity in existing
uses, through:
Fast diffusion of existing innovation
Enhancing receptivity of existing innovation
New basic fields
General Purpose Technologies
Specialized technological fields
Incentives to technological
development and upgrading
Identification of international best practices
Support to search in product/market diversification
Support to entrepreneurial creativity
Support to local firms for complementary projects with MNCs
Support to local firms for specialized subcontracting
Smart innovation policiesPolicy actions for
exploitation of knowledge spillovers
(Connectedness)
Incentives to inventors attraction.
Support of research cooperation in:
Incentives for creative applications through: Incentives for MNCs attraction
GPT and trans-territorial projects (ERA)
specific technologies and trans-territorial projects
(ERA), in related sectors/domains
Encourage labour mobility among related
sectors/domains
Co-operative research activities among related
sectors
Co-operative search for new technological solutions
participation of local actors to specialized
international fairs
attraction of “star” researchers even for short
periods
work experience in best practice knowledge creation firms of the same domains
Bargaining on innovative ‘local content’
procurement by MNCs
Policy style Provide a critical mass of funds
Support triangular projects by Universities-Research Centres-Enterprises
Stimulate knowledge and technological transfer mechanisms in related sectors
Thematical/ regional orientation of R&D funding:
Stimulate a bottom up identification of industrial vocations, by raising awareness on local capabilities and
potentials, in order to:
Stimulate cooperation projects
between MNCs and local firms
Towards researchers and laboratories in general purpose
technologies
in specific fields of technological specialization of
the area
targeted choice of joint research activities with partners
external to the area
Stimulate co-operation with strong external
partners in the specialization sectors of the
area
Support local actors’ participation to international
fairs in specialization sectors
Support targeted work experiences in best practice knowledge creation firms
Beneficiaries University, research centers, large local firms Local firms Local entrepreneurs Local firms
Evolutionary smart innovation policies
Creation of new local competences adding local value to external competences
3
2
1
5
Reinforcement of local applied science
Diversification of technological fields in which to innovate
New applications in new industries
Reinforcement of local science-based knowledge
4
Elasticity
of GDP to R&D
R&D / GDP
Thank you very muchfor your attention!