Future Economy

Conditions for Growth

Growth for Business

Future Economy

Conditions for Growth

Growth for Business

Future Economy

Conditions for Growth

Growth for Business

Future Economy

Conditions for Growth

Growth for Business

Future Economy

Conditions for Growth

Growth for Business

Future Economy

Conditions for Growth

Growth for Business

November 2015

Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation: Evidence Base Appendices

This document was prepared by Amion Consulting Ltd in partnership with the C&IoS LEP and Cornwall Council

Cornwall Council

Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices October 2015

FINAL DRAFT

REPORT

Cornwall Council

Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices October 2015

FINAL DRAFT

REPORT

 Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices –  

 

  

 Contents    

Appendix A – ICF Report Appendix B – List of Sector Workshop Invitees and Consultees

 Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices –  

 

  

Appendix A – ICF Report 

 

 

 

 

Research, Development and Innovation Delivery Frameworks for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly  

 

July 2015  

 

   

  i 

 

 

 

   

  1 

1 Developing a Smart Specialisation Strategy 

1.1 Research, innovation, technology and local economic growth 

At both European and UK governmental levels, it is recognised that technological development remains at the heart of future economic growth. 

In the UK, the Innovation and Research Strategy for Growth (2011)1 has been followed by identification of the ‘Eight Great Technologies2’ and their continued development through a series of industrial strategies which recognise the competitive advantage of key sectors of the UK economy (for example, aerospace, automotive, life sciences, information and communication technology, etc.)3. These strategies are acting as the framework for a series of strategic investments by Government.  

Most recently, Sir Andrew Witty has reported on the relationships of key intermediaries ‐ namely, universities and Local Enterprise Partnerships ‐ in bringing research and business together locally to take forward the UK’s technology and business strengths4. Overall, all these strategies contribute to the Government’s Plan for Growth5. 

At European level, a similar set of Key Enabling Technologies have been identified6 and, in 2012, the European Commission launched a Guide to Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisations (RIS 3) to promote a strategic approach to economic development through targeted support to Research and Innovation (R&I), including the promotion of efficient and effective use of public investment in research7.  

Smart specialisation will form a key focus for innovation and competitiveness activity in the next round of European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds – and is a key component of investment strategies for ESI Funds currently under development and finalisation by Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs). 

1.1.1 Smart specialisation 

Smart specialisation involves a process of developing a vision, identifying the place-based areas of greatest strategic potential, setting strategic priorities and using smart policies to maximise the knowledge-based development potential of a region, regardless of whether it is strong or weak, high-tech or low-tech, including:

■ Supporting technological and applied research, manufacturing capabilities and first production in Key Enabling Technologies and diffusion of general purpose technologies;

■ Enhancing research and innovation infrastructure (R&I) and capacities to develop R&I excellence and promoting centres of competence; and,

                                                            1 http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/BISCore/innovation/docs/I/11‐1387‐innovation‐and‐research‐strategy‐for‐growth.pdf; 2 Willetts, D. (2013) Eight Great Technologies http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/publications/eight%20great%20technologies.pdf 3 https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/industrial‐strategy‐government‐and‐industry‐in‐partnership  4 Witty, A. (2013) Encouraging a British Invention Revolution: Sir Andrew Witty’s Review of Universities and Growth, BIS, October 5 HMT/BIS (2011) The Plan for Growth 6 European Commission (2012) A European Strategy for Key Enabling Technologies – A bridge to growth and jobs’ 7 http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/informat/2014/smart_specialisation_en.pdf; http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/en/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=e50397e3‐f2b1‐4086‐8608‐7b86e69e8553 

 

   

  2 

■ Promoting business R&I investment, product and service development, technology transfer, social innovation and public service application, demand simulation, networking, clusters and open innovation.

Smart specialisation, then, is founded upon a technology and innovation driven model of local economic development. The framework conditions for innovation have been well studied, although because their interaction and influence is place dependent it is difficult to generalise (Figure 1.1). This is explicitly recognised in the place-based assets process of smart specialisation.

For an effective innovation system to be self-sustaining businesses need to be creative and entrepreneurial, assisted by innovation networks (openness) and access to public research. This in turn requires resources (especially skills and finance). Successful innovation needs a market (demand) and leads to improved competitiveness that can mobilise resources (Figure 1.1).

Figure 1.1 Framework conditions for innovation8 

 

 

1.2 Cornwall and Isles of Scilly LEP and smart specialisation 

As place‐based development organisation, the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) can be seen to sit at the junction of European and national policy in bringing together industrial and technology policy to support sustained local economic growth.  

                                                            8 NESTA (2009) The wider conditions for innovation in the UK 

 

   

  3 

The Cornwall and Isles of Scilly LEP has over the past couple of years generated a series of local growth strategies and plans, culminating in the Strategic Economic Plan and European Structural and Investment Fund Strategy 2014‐2020. 

The Cornwall and Isles of Scilly LEP have been given an indicate allocation of ESI Funds, amounting to £505.5 million for the period 2014‐2020 (excluding EAFRD and EMFF). 

As specified in the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly 2014‐2020 Strategy for European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds, some £57 million of funding to the Future Economy strategic priority area. The objectives of the Future Economy strategic priority is to: 

■ drive growth through RD&I investment to support the local business base (existing and new) in integrating into the supply chains of key identified global markets where it can have a significant competitive advantage; and

■ support investment in activities with growth potential that develop Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly as a ‘green and marine’ region.

In particular, the following smart specialisation sectors have been identified for prioritisation: 

Table 1.1 Smart specialisation sectors 

Smart specialisation area  Specific market opportunities identified 

Links to the UK Industrial Strategy and the Eight Great Technologies 

Agri-tech ■ Animal health and welfare in dairy cattle

■ Resource efficiency in the production process

■ Plant health

■ Agri-science ■ Agri-technology ■ Big Data ■ Robotics and autonomous

systems

Digital economy ■ Digital media / gaming ■ Software development ■ Pervasive media (content

application services)

■ Information economy ■ Big Data ■ Information economy

E-health ■ E-wellbeing – using digital technologies to

■ Improve health outcomes ■ End to end skills

programme

■ Information economy ■ Big Data ■ Education (exporting)

Marine technology ■ Offshore renewables (wave and wind)

■ Advanced marine paint technologies

■ Green ship technologies

■ Offshore Wind Energy ■ Advanced materials and

nanotechnology ■ Energy and its storage

Space and aerospace ■ Goonhilly – satellite management and applications

■ Newquay Cornwall Airport – long runway; free airspace; unmanned vehicles

■ Aerospace ■ Space ■ Robotics and autonomous

systems ■ Big Data

Source: Cornwall and Isles of Scilly European Structural and Investment Fund Strategy, June 2014

Notwithstanding, the above opportunities, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly is also faced with a number of challenges. Firstly, a very low proportion of local businesses have historically been involved in innovation and R&D activities, and levels of R&D expenditure are therefore 

 

   

  4 

relatively low9. Recent data confirms the low levels of total intramural R&D expenditure10, equivalent to 0.24% of GDP in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly in 2011. This is significantly lower than the South West (1.85% of GDP) and UK (1.8% of GDP) averages.  

Second, there are significant challenges in establishing a strong innovation and research infrastructure and strengthening the role of research‐intensive businesses. The low levels of R&D expenditures are largely due to both the historic lack of university and research institutions in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, which has restricted opportunities to access expertise in innovation and R&D, and the historic structure of the local economy, which comprises relatively high numbers of self‐employed and micro businesses and relatively low levels of employment in business activities that invest highly in R&D.  

Thirdly, the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly economy is highly focused and dependent upon local markets and the distance from major centres means that local businesses are somewhat sheltered from competitive forces. This, combined with the low levels of innovation and R&D activity, is also reflected in relatively low levels of exports from businesses in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly. HMRC data suggest that the South West accounted for just 6.4% of England’s total export value in the 12 months to 2014 Q2 and was the lowest of all regions in terms of export value per working age person11. 

Indicative findings of a recent thematic evaluation of the Convergence Programme for the period 2007‐2013 suggest that the strategic funding needs in relation to innovation and business support are as follows: 

■ Designing a broad university offer that is relevant for, and engage, more local businesses.

■ Providing greater support for collaboration and cross-referrals.

■ Developing a new central ‘Growth Hub’.

■ Providing the necessary skills, encouraging an innovation culture change and providing suitable business accommodation.

■ Joining up ESI Funds and other EU and national funding sources.

■ Providing more specialist/ niche projects.

                                                            9   Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Convergence Operational Programme 2007‐13 

10   Total intramural R&D expenditure includes all expenditures for R&D performed in the area, regardless of whether the source of funds 

was within or outside the specified area. 11   HMRC (Sep 2014) UK Regional Trade in Goods Statistics, 2014 Q2 

 

   

  5 

2 EU regulations and funding opportunities 

Within the above context, the study team has reviewed constraints and opportunities from relevant EU regulations and funding opportunities.  

Firstly, this section presents a broad overview of EU funding opportunities against each of the framework conditions for innovation. Secondly, it provides a brief description of each of the relevant EU funds, followed by a description and analysis of possible synergies. Finally details of the relevant state aid frameworks are set out. 

2.1 The link between EU programmes/ frameworks and the wider framework conditions for innovation 

A 2011 NESTA report on ‘measuring wider framework conditions for successful innovation’ proposed a taxonomy of framework aspects for innovation. Table 2.1 sets out the framework conditions identified in the report and provides an overview of relevant EU programmes across these framework conditions. A number of potential EU funding sources are identified in Table 1.1. These are described further in the following sections. 

    

 1

 

 

Table 2.1

Wider fram

ework conditions for innovation 

 Description 

Inputs 

Outputs 

Relevant EU

 program

mes/ 

fram

eworks 

Pub

lic

rese

arch

ba

se

Uni

vers

ities

an

d p

ublic

se

ctor

res

earc

h en

terp

rises

(P

SR

E).

Gro

ss R

&D

exp

endi

ture

, Bus

ines

s E

xpe

nditu

re o

n

R&

D

(BE

RD

), H

igh

er

Ed

uca

tion

Exp

endi

ture

on

R&

D

(HE

RD

)

Nu

mbe

r of

pee

r-re

vie

we

d a

rtic

les

and

gre

y lit

erat

ure,

nu

mb

er

of c

ited

art

icle

s a

nd g

rey

liter

atu

re, n

umbe

r o

f pa

ten

ts o

r co

-pa

ten

ts h

eld

by

univ

ers

ities

an

d pu

blic

se

ctor

res

earc

h en

terp

rises

Hor

izo

n 2

020

Con

sum

er

dem

and

C

onsu

mer

de

ma

nd

for

new

tec

hno

log

ies,

bu

yer

soph

istic

atio

n,

i.e. l

eve

l to

wh

ich

cons

um

er d

em

and

co

mpl

ex

prod

uct

s an

d ca

n a

sses

s q

ual

ity o

f th

ese

Con

sum

er n

ee

ds, i

nco

me

, pre

fere

nces

, h

abits

, pr

ice

of s

ubst

itute

s an

d c

ompl

emen

ts, c

o–c

rea

tion

and

co-

desi

gn

Con

sum

er d

em

and

and

so

phi

stic

atio

n

n/a

Bus

ines

s de

ma

nd12

13

Fir

m-le

vel t

ech

nolo

gy

abso

rptio

n,

eng

agem

ent i

n

inn

ova

tion

act

iviti

es

with

sup

plie

rs

De

ma

nd-s

ide

inno

vatio

n po

licie

s –

from

pub

lic

pro

cure

men

t of i

nno

vatio

n, to

sta

ndar

ds a

nd

reg

ula

tions

, to

lead

mar

kets

and

use

r-/ c

onsu

me

r-dr

ive

n in

nov

atio

n in

itia

tives

, con

sum

er

rece

ptiv

ene

ss a

nd d

em

and

to/ f

or in

nov

atio

n

R&

D a

ctiv

ities

and

ca

paci

ty in

firm

s, in

nova

tion

ac

tiviti

es w

ith s

upp

liers

E

RD

F, H

oriz

on

202

0

Bus

ines

s en

viro

nm

ent

an

d

com

petit

ion

Leve

l of

com

petit

ion

be

twe

en b

usin

esse

s

E

U c

om

pe

titio

n

fra

me

wo

rk, S

ME

fr

am

ew

ork

Ent

repr

ene

ursh

ip

Dyn

am

ic w

ith w

hic

h

econ

om

ies

cre

ate

new

bu

sine

sses

En

trep

rene

uria

l SM

E p

olic

y, e

ncou

rage

men

t of

sp

inof

fs In

set

up

and

fu

ndin

g fo

r R

&D

N

o. o

f st

art-

ups,

spi

noffs

E

RD

F, E

SF

Ava

ilabi

lity

of

hig

h qu

ality

hu

ma

n

The

sto

ck o

f ac

cum

ula

ted

ex

peri

ence

, ski

lls a

nd

Inve

stm

ents

in H

igh

er

Edu

catio

n In

stitu

tions

(H

EIs

) an

d v

ocat

iona

l tra

inin

g a

nd

ed

uca

tion

E

xte

nt to

wh

ich

ava

ilabl

e sk

ills

me

et l

ocal

ski

lls

dem

an

ds

ES

F

                                                            

12 Jacob Edler (2007), “Dem

and‐based Innovation Policy” , Manchester Business School W

orking Paper, N

o. 529.  

13 NESTA

 (2011): M

easuring the nature of dem

and for innovation in the UK: The challenges of an

 indicator approach. Innovation Index W

orking Paper. 

https://www.nesta.org.uk/sites/default/files/kcfinder/files/8.M

easuringthen

atureofdemandforinnovationintheU

KThechallengesofanindicatorapproach.pdf  

    

 2

 

capi

tal

abili

ties

of t

he la

bo

ur

forc

e

Acc

ess

to

finan

ce

Ava

ilabl

e lo

ans

and

ve

ntu

re c

api

tal f

or

diff

eren

t st

art u

p st

age

s a

nd

cap

ital

nee

ds o

f fir

ms

Fin

anci

al in

fras

truc

ture

and

lega

l fra

me

wo

rk fo

r in

vest

me

nts

Hig

he

r di

vers

ity a

nd

nu

mb

er o

f ava

ilabl

e lo

ans

and

fin

anci

als

prod

uct

s fo

r fir

ms

ER

DF

, Hor

izo

n 2

020

Infr

astr

uctu

re

and

ser

vice

s P

hys

ica

l in

fras

truc

ture

, kn

ow

led

ge

inte

nsiv

e

busi

ness

ser

vice

s (K

IBS

), I

T s

ervi

ces

Inve

stm

ent i

n in

fras

truc

ture

and

gro

wth

hu

bs

Bet

ter

and

ch

eap

er a

cces

s of

firm

s to

kno

wle

dge

and

ph

ysic

al in

fras

truc

ture

to b

uild

R&

D c

apa

city

E

RD

F

Sou

rce

: NE

ST

A (

201

1):

Mea

surin

g w

ider

Fra

me

wo

rk C

ond

ition

s fo

r su

cce

ssfu

l inn

ova

tion.

 

   

  1 

2.1.2 European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) 

The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) will provide £379.1 million in funding for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly over the period 2014‐2020. The draft operational programme for ERDF in England14 has selected a single investment priority for research and innovation: 

■ Strengthening research, technological development and innovation by:

– promoting business investment in R&I;

– developing links and synergies between enterprises, research and development centres and the Higher Education sector;

– promoting investment in product and service development, technology transfer, social innovation, eco-innovation, public service applications, demand stimulation, networking, clusters and open innovation through smart specialisation; and

– supporting technological and applied research, pilot lines, early product validation actions, advance manufacturing capabilities and first production, in particular in key enabling technologies and diffusion of general purpose technologies.

This means that it is unlikely that the new ERDF programme will be able to fund R&I infrastructure investment. 

The Cornwall and Isle of Scilly E SIF programme for Cornwall and Isles and Scilly15 budgets £295m of ERDF (78% of total funding) the following ERDF priorities: 

■ Strengthening research, technological development and innovation;

■ Enhancing access to, and use and quality of, information and communication technologies;

■ Enhancing the competitiveness of small and medium-sized enterprises; and

■ Supporting the shift towards a low-carbon economy in all sectors

2.1.3 European Social Fund (ESF) 

The European Social Fund will provide £126.4 million over the 2014‐2020 funding period. It is the primary European fund for investing in education training, and vocational training and therefore offers extensive complementarities with Cornwall and IoS smart specialisation programme. The draft operational programme for England 2014‐202016  highlights support for skills for economic growth in priority axis 2.  This supports in particular: 

                                                            14 See England draft operation programme for ERDF 2014‐2020: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/354912/esf‐operational‐programme‐2014‐2020‐draft.pdf  15  16 See England draft operational programme for ESF 2014‐2020: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/342297/ERDF_Operational_Programme.pdf  

 

   

  2 

■ Enhancing equal access to lifelong learning: Improving the skills of individuals to meet their goal sand the needs of the local economy, primarily on training, advising or supporting individuals: and

■ Improving the labour market relevance of education and training systems. This focuses on improving employer participating and engagement in learning, to ensure it is responsive to the needs of the local economy and more individual’s progress into nor within learning, particularly by improving partnerships and educational and vocational systems.

For the 2014‐2020 funding period in Cornwall and Isles of Scilly, £38m of ESF will be allocated to ESF funding for the priority above. 

2.1.4 European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) 

Funds made available to Cornwall and IoS through the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) amount to £9.4 million. Further funding is available through the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF)17. 

Given the modest scale of EAFRD available to the C&IoS  LEP and the importance of the agri‐food sector, the majority of EAFRD funding will be targeted at driving productivity improvements in the agri‐food sector, whilst increasing supply chain integration. In particular, the investments will be targeted at supporting agri‐tech infrastructure, developing a renewables programme, business support, mentoring, grants and loans to create business growth as well as supporting skills development and assisting businesses to increase exports18. 

The E SIF strategy for Cornwall and Isles of Scilly in 2014‐2020 allocates £7.4 million of EAFRD to the following thematic objectives: 

■ Strengthening research, technological development and innovation;

■ Enhancing access to, and use and quality of, information and communication technologies;

■ Enhancing the competitiveness the agricultural sector (for the EAFRD) and the fisheries and aquaculture sector (for the EMFF)

■ Supporting the shift towards a low-carbon economy in all sectors

The strategy also includes £1 million of EAFRD investment in education, skills and lifelong learning. 

Further complementarities between ERDF and EAFRD are highlighted in the Rural Development Plan for England, which was approved by the European Commission on 13 February 2015.19 These include in particular the following themes: 

                                                            17 The draft UK strategic priorities for the EMFF are as follows: adapting the fisheries sector to the requirements of the reformed; fostering growth potential in key areas across fisheries, aquaculture and processing CFP; supporting the increased economic, environmental and social sustainability of the sector; and fulfilling the UK’s enforcement and data collection obligations. 18 Cornwall and Isles of Scilly European Structural and Investment Fund Strategy, June 2014 19 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (2015): United Kingdom – Rural Development Programme (Regional) – England, see: 

 

   

  3 

■ Extending access to broadband in the final, hard to reach areas;

■ Support for enhancing the competitiveness of micro, small and medium-sized businesses – RDPE will complement ERDF by targeted investments to increase the productivity of farming and forestry businesses and to support the growth of businesses in rural areas; and

■ Support markets and innovations towards a shift for a low carbon economy – here RDPE funds will focus on the role that agricultural land management and forestry can play in carbon storage.

2.1.5 Horizon 2020 

Horizon 2020 is the current EU framework programme for research and innovation. It has a budget of nearly €80 billion over the 2014‐2020 programme period. Specific instruments of relevance in Horizon 2020 include: 

■ The new Teaming actions, which can help conceiving infrastructure projects;

■ The new Twinning and ERA-Chairs actions, which can help attracting leading professors and research teams; and

■ Marie Skłodowska-Curie COFUND, which can support the internationalisation of human resources in research.

SME participation is highlighted across Horizon 2020 activities and should amount to a minimum of 20% of the overall Horizon 2020 budget. A number of activities and instruments have been introduced to support SME/business innovation and are worth highlighting in the context of the Cornwall and IoS smart specialisation plan. 

A specific SME instrument has been introduced under the Industrial Leadership Pillar. It aims to fund SMEs with high‐growth potential with a combination of lump sum seed funding and research and innovation grants to support a combination of demonstration activities (testing, prototyping, etc), market replication across three individual stages. 

Furthermore, Horizon 2020 supports specific instruments to facilitate access to risk capital and equity capital which operate in conjunction with the COSME programme and are managed by the European Investment Bank. 

The Programme Access to Risk Finance is built around a number of financial instruments amounting to a total of EUR 622 million over 2014‐15, financing intermediaries or firms directly. The instruments are being promoted under the portfolio of InnovFin – EU Finance for Innovators.20 By 2020, InnovFin is expected to make over EUR 24bn of debt and equity financing available (Horizon 2020 and EIB funds) to support € 48bn of final R&I investments. 

The individual instruments include specific loans services for R&I in large firms, SMEs and midcaps21, guarantee instruments for R&I intensive SMEs and midcaps, an equity facility for R&I in early‐stage SMEs as well as a technology transfer financing facility. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/404607/rdpe‐england‐2014‐2020.pdf [accessed on 7 April 2015]. 20 InnovFin website at EIB (accessed on 20 October 2014) http://www.eib.org/products/innovfin/index.htm  21 Medium‐sized corporates. 

 

   

  4 

The equity facility for R&I looks in particular at early‐stage SMEs. The European Investment Fund (EIF) will use this facility to invest in a range of financial intermediaries, including those cooperating with business angels. Funds supported will provide VC and quasi‐equity early‐stage investments in start‐ups and SMEs. 

Relevant instruments described above for enterprises’ growth, research and innovation from early stage up to expansion and growth stage are managed jointly through the single EU Equity Financial Instrument. Relevant debt and guarantee instruments described above are brought together under the Single EU Debt Financial Instrument. 

Furthermore, a Fast Track to Innovation pilot action (FTI) will be implemented in the form of a full scale pilot action running from 2015‐16. 100 proposals with an expected budget of around €200 million are foreseen to be funded under the new pilot action. It will support innovation actions under the specific objective "Leadership enabling and industrial technologies" and under the societal challenges, relating to any technology field, on the basis of a continuously open call.  

2.2 Potential synergies between EU funds on research and innovation 

There are significant opportunities for creating synergies between the various EU funds for research and innovation. Horizon 2020 funding can in principle be combined with all the ESI Funds, if the following apply: 

■ No crowding out of non-EU and private finance: No substitution of national/regional or private co-funding to EU projects/programmes under direct Commission management by E SIF money (and vice versa).

■ No double financing: The same costs are not financed twice by any budget or funding programme.

Synergies between Horizon 2020 funding and E SIF programmes can be achieved through: 

■ Bringing together Horizon 2020 and E SIF funds in the same project. This is only possible with Horizon 2020 and no other EU programme;

■ Successive projects that build on each other;

■ Parallel projects which complement each other; and

■ E SIF programmes which are designed and implemented to take up high quality Horizon 2020 proposals for which there is not enough budget available.

Based on the JRC guidebook for synergising EU funds on research and innovation22, there are number of important recommendations for regional policy makers in charge of the Cornwall and IoS smart specialisation strategy and E SIF programme. These recommendations are summarised below:  

■ Work together with authorities and bodies involved in designing SME and industry policy and research and innovation policies, e.g. Horizon 2020 actors23;

                                                            22 Ibid. 23 Members of the H2020 programme committee, participants from their territory in European Innovation Partnerships (EIP), European Technology Platforms (ETP), Public‐Private Partnerships (PPP), Knowledge and 

 

   

  5 

■ Include Horizon 2020 actors in the smart specialisation development process and in the E SIF partnerships for Partnership Agreement and programme development;

■ Consult international research and business networks in relevant industry and research sectors (not only the players from Cornwall and IoS);

■ Evaluate as part of the smart specialisation process the needs of industry and public procurers (e.g. hospitals, facility companies - water, waste, urban transport, etc. - and research for innovative solutions);

■ Focus the preparatory work for synergies on the strategic aim of the smart specialisation strategy in terms of economic transformation and the fields that emerge as smart specialisation priorities and on what the region of Cornwall and IoS can actually influence, i.e.:

– Strengthen research and innovation capacity building, including research infrastructure (e.g. in universities, competence centres, etc.), innovation infrastructure and equipment (e.g. pilot lines, LivingLabs, FabLabs, Creative Factories, advanced manufacturing capabilities, science and technology parks) and skills (including in creative thinking, design, e-commerce);

– advisory services for potential Horizon 2020 applicants to increase chances to succeed in Horizon 2020 project proposals;

– At the project conception stage, applicants should be advised to identify the different work packages (e.g. a test series), or types of activity (e.g. costs of training activities), or types of cost (e.g. personnel costs) as well as the geographical location where the actions will be implemented to attribute costs clearly to the different corresponding EU funds. Applicants should be reminded that they will have to monitor and record costs/expenditure accordingly;

– Strengthen the capacity to provide innovation support services to facilitate getting innovations into the market. Support services might include: Innovation management, IPR management, advice for business plan development and investor readiness, technology audits to help SMEs detect needs and technology absorption potentials, etc.

■ Establish and maintain international networks to comparator regions and business networks to support the development of multi-country proposals for Horizon 2020 and European Territorial Cooperation (INTERREG) calls for transnational cooperation; and

■ Foresee close-to-market support in the smart specialisation strategies, e.g. for

– technology readiness levels (TRL) 4-7 industrial research, development (including via contract or collaborative research actions linking SMEs and universities/public research bodies), demonstration and experimentation grants.

– TRLs 8 and 9, i.e. market introduction and expansion of productive capacities, e.g. via early product validation and first production actions, certain innovation infrastructures

                                                                                                                                                                                                Innovation Communities (KIC) under the European Institute for Innovation and Technology (EIT), National Contact Points of Horizon 2020 (NCP), research institutions with success in FP7 or EUREKA including consultation of National Roadmaps for research infrastructures linked to the ESFRI Roadmap; furthermore with COSME Supported entities (e.g. the Enterprise Europe Network consortia members, participants in cluster/innovation platforms and large scale demonstrator projects, in projects for pre‐commercial procurement and public procurement of innovative solutions, participants in the large‐scale pilot projects for interoperable e‐government solutions, etc.   

 

   

  6 

(e.g. LivingLabs, FabLabs, Creative Factories), cluster facilitated projects for new industrial value chains and cross-sectorial cluster cooperation, large scale demonstrators or public procurement of innovative solutions, and support to the development of advanced manufacturing capabilities.

2.2.1 Regulatory scope for synergies between EU programmes 

The regulatory stock governing relevant 2014‐2020 EU programmes allow for certain synergies and combination of funds. 

The regulation laying down common provisions for E SIF24 provides the following framework conditions relevant for Cornwall and IoS regional strategy: 

■ Article 65(11) allows the cumulation of grants from different EU funding instruments (or from one or more ESI Fund through one or more programmes and other Union instruments) for the same beneficiary or the same project, provided that the same expenditure/cost item does not receive support also from another EU fund (from the same Fund under different programmes, from another Fund or from other Union instruments).

■ Article 67(5)b and 68(1)c allows for an alignment of cost models (scales of unit costs, lump sums and flat rates) for corresponding costs and similar types of operations and beneficiaries in Horizon 2020 and other EU programmes.

■ Article 70(2) stipulates a possibility of up to 15% of the support from the ERDF, Cohesion Fund and EMFF at the level of the priority (up to 5% of the support from the EAFRD at the level of the programme), and up to 3% of the budget of a ESF operational programme (Article 13(3) ESF) to be allocated to operations located outside the programme area.

■ Article 96(6)a: E SIF programmes are to set out the mechanisms that ensure coordination between E SIF and other EU and national funding instruments, and with the EIB.

■ Regulation EU No 1290/2013 laying down the Horizon 2020 rules for participation (Article 37) and the Common Provisions Regulation on the E SIF (Article 65(11)) allow for the funding of the same project (action/operation) through several grants from different EU instruments, including from different E SIF funds and programmes, subject to the absence of double funding. To ensure the latter, Horizon 2020 and E SIF funding shall not cover the same cost / expenditure item.

■ The right to combine E SIF and Horizon 2020 does however not waive the obligation for the beneficiaries to provide national/regional/private co-funding, if required by the grant agreement.

The regulatory framework conditions set out above apply only for grants awarded.25 The regulations on Erasmus+, Creative Europe, CEF and COSME do not allow for cumulation of 

                                                            24 Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, The Cohesion Fund, The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council regulation (EC) No 1083/2006. 25 The non‐cumulative principle set out in Article 129 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 applies only to grants. Hence, the derogation can only apply to grants and must be authorised in the relevant basic acts. 

 

   

  7 

funding, meaning that for these programmes a combination of funds within the same project is not possible. 

2.2.1.1 Eligible costs Eligible costs/expenditures are costs actually incurred by the beneficiary of a grant and which meet the criteria of the EU financial rules regulation. 

The nature of eligible costs (including indirect cost, and depreciation costs, etc.) and thus the cost/expenditure items differ under Horizon 2020 depending on the project formats with their different grant agreement types. 

A cost/ expenditure item is defined as the amount declared as eligible for Union funding. Depending on the budgeting approach, the cost or expenditure item might be under the budget category per activity (e.g. costs of training activities, work package), per nature (e.g. personnel costs, costs for durable equipment or for consumables, etc.) or by a combination of the nature and activity (e.g. costs of personnel assigned to the training activities). In addition, cost and expenditure items are only eligible to the extent that they have ‘actually incurred’, i.e. the extent actually consumed for the activity or project in question. 

A project co‐funded by E SIF and other EU funds can consist of several actions, contracts or grant agreements which are managed in a coherent manner. 

Figure 2.1 illustrates the interplay between Horizon 2020 funding and E SIF programmes.

Figure 2.1 Combining Horizon 2020 and E SIF funding 

Source: Joint Research Centre (2014): Enabling synergies between European Structural and Investment Funds, Horizon 2020 and other research, innovation and competitiveness-related Union programmes.

 

   

  8 

Considering the practical implementation of the above in Cornwall and IoS, it should be noted that: 

■ Authorities concerned by Horizon 2020 and other EU programmes in Cornwall and IoS need to be associated in the Smart Specialisation programme and selection process; and

■ A dedicated support offer to plan and execute the combination of different funding sources/grants in one project would be of strong added value.

2.3 Relevant state aid frameworks 

In principle, any public funding spent from E SIF funding can be assumed to be compliant with state aid rules, once the relevant Operational Programmes for England have been approved by the European Commission. However, if no block exemptions or explicit state aid approval can be assumed, the standard EU state aid rules apply and impose a framework on the amount of support single firms can receive. 

Regarding research, development and innovation activities in particular, the European Commission adopted a new set of state aid rules in 2014.26 The first part of the new rules is covered by the General Block Exemption Regulation (GBER)27, which includes a list of eligible aid objectives, including all research and innovation objectives for which state aid may be granted without prior notification and approval by the European Commission. The new GBER also includes a number of exemptions which apply specifically to SMEs. Table 2.2 presents an overview of the new GBER provisions relevant to research and innovation activities. 

Table 2.2 General Block Exemption Regulation provisions for RD&I  activities 

Type of activity  Previous GBER  New GBER 

Fundamental research 20 million 40 million

Industrial research 10 million 20 million

Experimental development 7.5 million 15 million

Specific provisions Doube R&D project thresholds for EUREKA projects28

Doube R&D-project thresholds for EUREKA and Article 18529 and 187 Joint Undertakings30

                                                            26 European Commission (2014): Supporting R&D and innovation in Europe: new State Aid rules. Competition policy brief issue 5. 27 Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 of 17 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty Text with EEA relevance. 28 EUREKA is an intergovernmental organisation for market‐driven industrial R&D.  It is a decentralised network facilitating the coordination of national funding on innovation aiming to boost the productivity & competitiveness of European industries. The network integrates over 40 pan‐European economies, but also includes Israel, South Korea, and Canada. 29 Article 185 measures (P2P) include joint programmes such as Eurostars, a transnational programme to support research‐intensive SMEs in the development/commercialisation of new services and products. 30 Article 187 TFEU include Joint Technology Initiatives (JTIs), which are long‐term Public‐Private Partnerships. JTIs support large‐scale multinational research activities in areas of major interest to European industrial competitiveness as well as issues of high societal relevance, contractual public‐private partnerships and public‐public partnerships. Ten such partnerships with the industry and Member States were proposed as part of the 

 

   

  9 

50% increase for repayable advances

Feasibility studies 7.5 – 20 million depending on subsequent research category

7.5 million

Research infrastructure no aid objective 20 million

Innovation clusters not block-exemptible 7.5 million per cluster

Process and organisational innovation

not block-exemptible 7.5 million per undertaking/project

SME innovation aid Different provisions 5 million per undertaking/project

Source: European Commission (2014): Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 of 17 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty Text with EEA relevance

The second part of the new set of rules is a revised framework on state aid in research, development and innovation, which applies to activities not eligible for block exemptions under the GBER. The Commission will assess measures notified by Member States according to these criteria individually.31 

Under the new RD&I  Framework, the allowed aid intensities have been increased in particular for close‐to‐the market aid categories. This means that support for applied research, including demonstrators and pilots, can range from 60‐90 per cent of direct costs, and innovation aid in general is set at 50 per cent of direct costs. Table 2.3 summarises the allowed aid intensities under the new RD&I  framework and the GBER regulation. Differences between the block exemptions and activities outside of the block exemptions are highlighted where applicable. 

Table 2.3 Aid intensity ‐ European Commission Framework for state aid for RD&I  and GBER 

  Large enterprise  Medium‐sized enterprise 

Small enterprise 

Aid objective Range of allowed aid intensities from basic to maximum

Fundamental research

100 per cent 100 per cent 100 per cent

Industrial research

GBER 60-65 per cent 60-75 per cent 70-80 per cent

Other activities (Framework)

60-70 per cent 70-80 per cent 80-90 per cent

Experimental development

GBER 25-40 per cent 35-50 per cent 45-60 per cent

Other activities 60-70 per cent 70-80 per cent 80-90 per cent

                                                                                                                                                                                                Innovation Investment Package, and one more followed. The EU's contribution of €9 billion stems from Horizon 2020 and is expected to be matched with a €10 billion investment from the private sector and €4 billion from Member States. See European Commission (2013): Commission Communication (COM/2013/0494) on Public‐private partnerships in Horizon 2020: a powerful tool to deliver on innovation and growth in Europe. 31 Commission Communication on Framework for state aid for research and development and innovation. COM (2014) 3282. 

 

   

  10 

(Framework)

Feasibility studies 50 per cent 60 per cent 70 per cent

Innovation aid for SMEs32

not eligible 50 per cent 50 per cent

Process and organisational innovation

15 per cent 50 per cent 50 per cent

Innovation clusters 50-65 per cent 50-65 per cent 50-65 per cent

Research infrastructure

GBER 50 per cent 50 per cent 50 per cent

Other activities (Framework)

60 per cent 60 per cent 60 per cent

Source: European Commission (2014): Communication COM(2014)3282 on a Framework for state aid for research and development and innovation and Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 of 17 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty Text with EEA relevance

As regards the cumulation of aid, the new RD&I  framework stipulates that: 

■ Aid may be awarded concurrently under several aid schemes or cumulated with ad hoc aid, provided that the total amount of state aid for an activity or project does not exceed the maximum aid intensities described in table 2.3;

■ Funding centrally managed by the institutions, agencies, joint undertakings or other bodies of the European Union (‘Union funding’) that is not directly or indirectly under the control of Member States does not constitute state aid and should not be taken into account;33

■ Where such Union funding is combined with state aid, the total amount of public funding awarded in relation to the same eligible costs cannot exceed the most favourable funding rate laid down in the applicable rules;

■ Where such Union funding is combined with state aid, only the latter will be considered for determining whether notification thresholds and maximum aid intensities are respected; and

■ Aid for RD&I may not be cumulated with de minimis support in respect of the same eligible costs if that would result in an aid intensity exceeding the maximum aid intensities described in table 2.3.

Furthermore, the structure and compatibility criteria of the RD&I  Framework include the following: 

                                                            32 (a) Costs for obtaining, validating and defending patents and other intangible assets. (b) Costs for secondment of highly qualified personnel from a research and knowledge dissemination organisation or a large enterprise, working on RD&I  activities in a newly created function within the beneficiary and not replacing other personnel. (c) Costs for innovation advisory and support services. In the particular case of aid for innovation advisory and support services the aid intensity can be increased up to 100 % of the eligible costs provided that the total amount of aid for innovation advisory and support services does not exceed EUR 200 000 per undertaking within any three year period. 33 Such as funding provided under Horizon 2020 or the EU programme for the Competitiveness of Enterprises and Small and Medium‐sized Enterprises (COSME). 

 

   

  11 

■ The aid must promote an objective of common interest, and address a market failure. The extent of a market failure could be confirmed on the basis of comparing the situations of specific sectors or lines of business;

■ The appropriateness of aid compared to alternative (aid and non-aid) measures must be shown;

■ Member States must demonstrate that the aid actually changes the behaviour of the beneficiary (i.e. that it has an incentive effect);

■ It will be verified that the aid amount does not exceed the minimum necessary for the aided project to be sufficiently profitable;

■ The Framework identifies cases of manifest negative effects that can never be found compatible (e.g. where an aid measure is contrary to internal market rules on the free movement of goods and services), whilst providing criteria to determine whether competition distortions are limited or not;

■ There is now a legal presumption of the necessity of aid for projects that are also EU co-financed.

An additional set of state aid regulations will need to be considered for projects funded through EAFRD and EMFF. Similar principles of cumulation apply under these funds as set out above under the GBER and RD&I  framework. Furthermore, it will need to be set out clearly that any additional public funding will need to respect aid intensity thresholds are permissible in the respective regulations. 

For EAFRD funding, aid for research and development in the agricultural and forestry sectors are limited to €7,5 million per project with a maximum aid intensity of 100 per cent of the eligible costs.34 

Regarding EMFF funding, aid for innovation in fisheries and aquacultures, for partnership between scientists and fishermen, innovation linked to the conservation of marine biological resources, is exempt from state aid notification requirements, given that it fulfils requirements set out in the relevant implementing acts.3536 The maximum aid intensity can range from 50 per cent to 100 per cent. 

2.3.2 De minimis caps 

The de minimis rules of the European Commission stipulate that both non SME’s and SME’s can receive up to €200,000 in public funding over a rolling three year period, without being subject to state‐aid approval. De minimis aid is often not granted for or attributable to specific 

                                                            34 Article 8 and 31 of Commission Regulation (EU) 702/2014 of 25 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. 35 Article 95 Regulation (EU) 508/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council of 15 May 2014 on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and relevant implementing acts. 36 Article 8 and of Commission Regulation (EU) 1388/2014 of 16 December 2014 declaring certain categories of aid to undertakings active in the production, processing and marketing of fishery and aquaculture products compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. 

 

   

  12 

identifiable eligible costs. In such a case it should be possible to freely cumulate de minimis aid with State aid exempted under the GBER regulation. Where de minimis aid is granted for the same identifiable eligible costs as State aid exempted under GBER, cumulation should only be allowed up to the maximum aid intensity and provisions set out in tables 2.2 and 2.3. 

3 EU best practice and comparators 

The Joint Research Centre of the European Commission has published a number of relevant guidance documents, which include a wide collection of best practice advice on the programming and management of smart specialisation programmes. These guidance documents include in particular: 

■ Guide on research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3 Guide). Including a number of practical tools for policy makers in Annexes, http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/s3pguide;

■ An ‘assessment wheel for policy makers, which serves as a self-assessment tool of the progress made in drafting and designing a smart specialisation strategy, http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ris3-assessment-wheel;

■ A guide on Enabling synergies between European Structural and Investment Funds, Horizon 2020 and other research, innovation and competitiveness-related Union programmes , http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/10157/267027/Guide%20on%20synergies_en.pdf ; and

■ Policy brief on smart specialisation and innovation in rural areas, https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/eur-scientific-and-technical-research-reports/smart-specialisation-and-innovation-rural-areas-s3-policy-brief-series-no-092014.

Further guidance is provided on the JRC’s website.37 

Policy makers and managing authorities can also identify the smart specialisation intentions of other Member States and regions via the S3Platform38 their sectorial and cross‐sectorial regional industrial strength via the European Cluster Observatory39 and cluster organisations and other SME intermediaries active in or interested in the building of European Strategic Cluster Partnerships via the European Cluster Collaboration Platform40. 

The above sources are used below to provide a review of best practice and to identify comparator areas. 

                                                            37 http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/guides;jsessionid=ZJ7VVkFNJGJs5lgrgWB0czdTKpv17MgrdVly2g0Xdwh1NKxMp6WY!2491139!1428424013548  38 http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/activities  39 http://www.clusterobservatory.eu/index.html  40 http://www.clustercollaboration.eu/  

 

   

  13 

3.1 Saxony ‐ Best practice in programme preparation and management 

In terms of preparing and implementing a Smart Specialisation Strategy, the approach taken by the state of Saxony in Germany has been highlighted as a best practice example by the Joint Research Centre. Figure 3.1 summarises Saxony’s approach to programming and programme management. 

Figure 3.1 Overview of programming approach – Smart Specialisation strategy Saxony 

 

Source: Saechsisches Staatsministerium fuer Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Verkehr (2013): Innovationsstrategie des Freistaates Sachsen.

Saxony’s strategy focussed specifically on four key areas, which address cross‐cutting issues rather than support for specific sectors:41 

■ Support for a modern and innovative economy, including support for innovation capacity in companies, strengthening value chain oriented business and science parks as well as support for technology driven start-ups;

■ Strengthening scientific outputs and efficient public-private cooperation, including the formulation and strengthening of value propositions for universities, support for high-potential scientists and an improved commercialisation of research outputs by industry;

                                                            41 Saechsisches Staatsministerium fuer Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Verkehr (2013): Innovationsstrategie des Freistaates Sachsen. 

 

   

  14 

■ Human Capital and society, focussing on improving the regional skill base and immigration of highly-skilled personnel, as well as societal acceptance of technological innovation and aligning technological innovation to societal needs of the region;

■ Cross innovation, which looks specifically at linking up key enabling technologies and strong innovation drivers which have an established industrial base in the region and can fertilise other sectors and diverse products across the value chain.

In addition to these aspects, the programme specifically targets high‐growth sectors with specific support such as environmental technologies and resource management, renewable energies, mobility and logistics, health and nutritional science.  

3.2 Smart specialisation in rural areas 

A Joint Research Centre publication on Smart Specialisation42 in rural areas highlighted a number of aspects which are of key importance to rural areas, similar to Cornwall and IoS. First, it emphasises the need to look beyond agricultural technology support. Second, it emphasises a different notion of rural innovation which has emerged, contrary to past policies for specialisation in rural areas which mainly introduced new technologies for the agriculture sector. Recent experience shows that innovation in rural areas mainly came from diversification into other activities than agriculture.43 Innovation programmes in rural areas might need to adopt a broader definition of innovation which goes beyond patents, R&D spending and high‐profit activities, allowing a stronger focus on social innovation, organisational and marketing strategies. 

A recent OECD publication44 also questioned the role of universities in rural innovation and looked specifically at the cases of south west and north east England. It is assumed that innovation and added value is generated in close spatial proximity to universities as a natural incubator, providing support structures for discovery, intellectual and commercial ventures. However, places such as the north east of England have attempted to spread the benefits of universities beyond an urban centre to rural areas. Emphasis in Newcastle’s Science City initiative is therefore placed on establishing connections and linking the wider region’s knowledge infrastructure with designated “innovation connectors”, which are locations that have been identified as having the greatest potential for using innovation to stimulate economic development, effectively business clusters with a clear geographical and sectoral focus. The major challenge of this setup seems to be to establish strong awareness in businesses, e.g. by linking “innovation connectors” into established business networks and forums. 

3.3 Potential EU comparator areas 

The purpose of this section is to identify EU regions that share similar characteristics and/ or that focus on the same priority sectors – e.g. ‘leading’ regions in the priority sectors. These comparator regions will be used to compare performance as well as identify potential areas for 

                                                            42 Joint Research Centre (2014): Smart Specialisation and Innovation in Rural Areas. S3 Policy Brief Series No 09/2014. 43 OECD (2014). Innovation and Modernising the Rural Economy. 44 Ibid. 

 

   

  15 

collaboration (in terms of the latter it is not necessary for the regions to share similar characteristics).  

International comparators can be identified using a number of different approaches. A convenient metric can be drawn from the Regional Innovation Scoreboard annual reports, which groups regions into four groups: innovation leaders, innovation followers, modest innovators and moderate innovators. 

The Innovation Union Scoreboard does not include the region of Cornwall and IoS, but rather the South West region (NUTS level 3). The annual report of the Innovation Union scoreboard 2014 groups the South West region with innovation followers, ie. regions performing between 90% and 120% of the EU average. Intuitively, this seems to contradict the system analysis conducted as part of the thematic evaluation of the Cornwall and IoS 2007‐2013 programme. Therefore, the Innovation Union Scoreboard does not seem to offer viable tools to identify comparator regions. 

Another approach would be to filter manually by similar key sectors and related smart specialisation areas (via Eurostat, macro‐regional strategies and the above‐mentioned types of platforms and networks) or have related public procurement needs, similar levels of R&D investment compared to overall GDP. A quick analysis of regions with an initially low share of R&D investment compared to overall GDP which have experiences a steep climb in Eurostat data is presented in Error! Reference source not found.. 

Table 3.1 Best practice regions ‐ by growth in relative R&D investments 

Region  Total intramural R&D expenditure as % of GDP(Eurostat) 

Key industries  Characteristics of regional R&I system 

2009  2010  2012   

Podkarpackie, Poland

0.37 0.97 0.95 Forestry, agriculture and tourism

No research universities, no large industry

North Eastern Scotland, United Kingdom

1.7 1.49 2.9 Agriculture, fisheries, oil Large cities (Aberdeen and Dundee) and a number of research universities. Large structural differences to Cornwall and IoS.

Jihovýchod, Czech republic

1.62 1.69 2.16 Agriculture, mechanical engineering

Large cities and a number of research universities. Large structural differences to Cornwall and IoS.

Cumbria, United Kingdom

0.47 0.77 1.12 Hi-tech industries, large industrial companies such as nuclear processing , and aerospace

One university and strong industry base. Large structural differences to Cornwall and IoS.

Drenthe, Netherlands

0.4 - 1.28 Agriculture, tourism No research universities but a number of universities of applied sciences, no large industry

Midtjylland, 1.19 2.52 2.72 Environmental and energy Strong industrial and research

 

   

  16 

Denmark technologies, tourism base, multiple universities. Large structural differences to Cornwall and IoS.

Cornwall and IoS

0.19 0.18 0.24 Agriculture, marine technology, digital economy, space and aerospace, e-health, tourism

No research universities, no large industry

Source: Eurostat, total intramural R&D expenditure (GERD) by sectors of performance and NUTS 2 regions [rd_e_gerdreg]. 

Further possible lines of comparison include: 

■ the type and size of business and key industries;

■ a lack of high profile Higher Education Institutions (HEI);

■ a relatively closed regional market and low levels of export;

■ comparable geographical features (peninsula, no large urban areas); and

■ specific innovations with regards to programming E SIF funds and designing funding instruments under the E SIF priority on innovation, research and technological development.

Eurostat’s structural business statistics (SBS) aggregate data on national level and exclude important comparator sectors, such as fisheries and agriculture, therefore it is not possible to conduct a comprehensive comparison along the type and size of key industries using primary quantitative data from Eurostat. 

The European Cluster Observatory assigns a star rating to clusters across NACE 2.0 sectors in Nuts 2 regions. The Observatory has also published a report highlighting strong clusters in innovative regions.45  

Similar challenges concerning the lack of HEI provide a good further comparator. The UNICREDS project, in which Cornwall Council and the Combined Universities of Cornwall were a lead partner, looked at how different models of higher education can benefit regional economic development. The project involved a number of potentially relevant comparator46 regions, with which established contacts can be assumed.47 

3.3.2 S3 platform specialisation mapping 

The S3 platform is a tool that assists EU countries and regions to develop, implement and review their Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3). The S3 platform also provides an integrated dataset of specialisation areas in 176 EU regions. Based on the smart 

                                                            45 Stockholm School of Economics (2011): Strong Clusters in Innovative Regions. http://www.clusterobservatory.eu/common/galleries/downloads/Strong_Clusters_in_Innovative_Regions_Report.pdf  46 Project partners included South Bohemia (Czech Republic), Västerbotten (Sweden), the Bulgarian Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works and the Jajdu‐Bihar County (Hungary). 47 http://www.unicreds.eu/general/partners.html  

 

   

  17 

specialisation areas identified in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, the following EU and non‐EU regions have been identified as potential comparators. 

Table 3.2 S3 platform ‐ comparator regions by area of specialisation 

Smart specialisation area  EU priority   Research & Innovation Capabilities 

EU and non‐EU regions  

Agri-tech ■ Sustainable innovation ■ Public health & security ■ Nature & biodiversity

■ Agriculture, forestry & fishing

■ Ipeiros ■ Galicia ■ Pays de la

Loire ■ Corse ■ Guadeloupe ■ Western

Netherlands ■ Lubelskie

Digital economy ■ Digital Agenda ■ Information & communication technologies (ICT)

■ Services ■ Tourism, restaurants

& recreation

■ Flemish Region

■ Praha ■ Moravskoslezs

ko ■ Rheinland-

Pfalz ■ Schleswig-

Holstein ■ Castilla y León ■ Centre ■ Alsace ■ Franche-

Comté ■ Languedoc-

Roussillon ■ Martinique ■ Lubelskie ■ Centro (PT) ■ Região

Autónoma dos Açores

■ Vojvodina ■ Uppsala län ■ Östergötlands

län

E-health Digital Agenda – e-health ■ Manufacturing & industry

■ Information & communication technologies (ICT)

■ Human health & social work activities

■ Midtjylland ■ Alsace ■ Languedoc-

Roussillon ■ Martinique ■ Lubelskie ■ Wales

Marine technology Blue growth ■ Manufacturing & industry

■ Energy production & distribution

■ Hamburg ■ Weser-Ems ■ Schleswig-

Holstein

 

   

  18 

■ Møre og Romsdal

Space and aerospace Aeronautics & space ■ Manufacturing & industry

■ Public administration, security & defence

■ Services

■ Praha ■ Baden-

Württemberg ■ Bremen ■ Cantabria ■ Castilla-La

Mancha ■ Andalucía ■ Haute-

Normandie ■ Midi-Pyrénées ■ Piemonte ■ Lombardia ■ Campania ■ Puglia ■ Sardegna ■ Umbria ■ Lazio ■ Podkarpackie

Source: Eye@RIS3 http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/eye-ris3

3.3.3 Relevant Joint Research Centre peer reviews 

A further qualitative approach to identify international comparators along characteristics outlined in Error! Reference source not found. are the peer reviews published on the Joint Research Centre’s website.48 These are conducted using a common methodology and have covered around 70 regions since 2012. 

Relevant peer reviews from possible comparator regions include: 

■ Kujawsko-Pomorskie, Poland, 4-5 July 2013 (comparably low R&D investment as share of GDP, different industries and different HEI infrastructure), http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/9th-peer-review-4-5-july-2013

■ Pomorskie (Zachodniopomorskie), Poland, 7-8 February 2013 (comparable geographic features, some overlap in key sectors, comparable low R&D investment as share of GDP) http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/10157/62973/Pomorskie_3S_280113_final_with_comments.pdf

■ South Ostrobothnia, Finland, 6-7 November 2014 (comparable focus sector agricultural technology, comparable HEI infrastructure), http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/baiona-november-2014

■ Friesland, Netherlands, 31 January 2012 (comparable sectors agriculture and marine, comparable HEI infrastructure), http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/peer-review-310112

■ North East, Romania, 10-11 April 2014(comparable sectors and R&D investments), http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/10157/385414/Presentation%20NE%20RDA%20for%20per%20review%20Novi%20Sad%20%2004%2004%202014_FINAL.pdf

                                                            48 http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/peer‐review  

 

   

  19 

■ Puglia, Italy, 3 May 2012 (key sector agriculture and tourism, similar geographical feature and R&D investments ), http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=a86c2df9-7c3f-49e7-b0c0-03e14017d4e2&groupId=11362

■ Algarve, Portugal, 5 July 2013 (key sectors tourism and related services, low R&D investments, similar geographical features), http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/10157/187136/Presentation_Algarve.pdf

3.3.4 Comparator regions – shortlisted candidates 

A triangulation of the above lines of comparison results in three candidates for closer inspection, which are presented below: 

■ Podkarpackie, Poland

■ Drenthe/Northern Netherlands, Netherlands

■ South Ostrobothnia, Finland

3.3.4.1 Podkarpackie, Poland The region is dominated by the following industries: aerospace, electrical machines, chemistry and food. Almost 70% of industrial production of the region comes from these branches together.  

The formulation of a smart specialisation strategy built strongly on existing clusters and the Podkarpacka Innovation Council, which brings together business, research and government representatives. Among the clusters in the region are: an Association of Polish Aerospace Industry Entrepreneurs Group “AVIATION VALLEY” ‐ a unique high‐tech cluster, associating over 110 companies (www.dolinalotnicza.pl ), the Eastern Poland IT Companies Cluster, the Eastern Casting Cluster KOM‐CAST, the Podkarpackie Renewable Energy Cluster. 

The Smart Specialisation and ERDF Operational Programme are embedded in a more long term regional development strategy, which is available online in English.49 The total amount  ass part of the Regional Operation Programme of the Podkarpackie Region 2014‐2020 and the Operational Programme for Eastern Poland 2014‐2020 is €1.182 billion from ERDF and €473.85 million from ESF funding. 

Priority actions for funding include 

■ Mobility: Technologies and products of the aerospace industry. Multimodal, sustainable transport.

■ Climate and energy: Renewable energy sources and technologies associated with them. Balanced and intelligent construction (buildings, neighborhoods, cities). Biodegradable plastics. Electrical machinery industry.

■ Sustainable tourism: Cognitive tourism. Leisure tourism, eco-tourism, rural tourism. Adventure tourism. Health tourism. Business tourism. Culinary Tourism Religious tourism.

                                                            49http://monitoruj.podkarpackie.pl/Grafika/Menu%20boczne/Dokumenty%20strategiczne/Region%20Development%20Strategy.pdf [accessed 3rd July 2015]. 

 

   

  20 

■ Health, food, nutrition: Organic, regional and traditional food. Healthy, optimized, non-GMO diet. Preventive medicine. Care for the elderly.

■ ICT: High speed Internet access

The regional government has also developed a detailed monitoring system, to measure progress in the chosen priority areas. These include e.g. domestic and international sales in sectors related to the aviation and ICT, ndustry, the percentage of passive, zero‐energy and energy plus house; the share of renewable energy in total energy production; overall life expectancy. 

The Operation Programme 2014‐2020 can be found online, but is at the moment only available in Polish.50 However, a detailed ex‐ante evaluation of the RIS3 has been commissioned and conducted my Metis in 2013 and has been made available to the study team. 

Contact for further enquiries 

Marcin Galak, Regional Innovation Strategy, Marshall’s office, Regional Government Podkarpackie, Tel.: +48 17 747 64 52, email : m.garlak@podkarpackie.pl  

3.3.4.2 Drenthe (Northern Netherlands), Netherlands The province of Drenthe is the fourth smallest province of the Netherlands with 2,680 km2. As of 2012, it had 490,807 inhabitants (2.9 per cent of total Dutch population). Its regional GDP of €12.72b is 2.2 per cent of Dutch GDP (2010). The annual growth rate of regional GDP was 1.2 per cent between 2005‐2010, which is below Dutch average for the same period (2.3 per cent) and shows a decrease between 2008‐2010.51 

At 0.4 per cent of GDP in 2009, Drenthe had the lowest research and development (R&D) intensity of all of the Dutch provinces (national average 1.82 per cent) together with Friesland (0.8 per cent) and Zeeland (0.63 per cent).52 Private contributions of 86.8 per cent of gross expenditures on R&D (GERD) were extremely high compared to the Dutch average (57 per cent of GERD). This can be explained by the fact that the province has no research universities. According to recent Eurostat figures, the regional GERD rose to 1.28 per cent in 2012. 

In drafting a smart specialisation strategy, Drenthe has joined forces with the neighbouring regions of Friesland and Groningen and developed a joint Smart Specialisation strategy for Northern Netherlands.53  

The strategy has embedded sectoral specialisation in a number of societal challenges relevant for the region. These societal challenging include; 

■ Health, Demography and Welfare;

■ Food Securit, Sustainable Agriculture and bio-economy;

■ Reliable, clean and efficient energy; and

                                                            50 http://www.rsi.podkarpackie.pl/Aktualnosci/Documents/RSI_woj.%2520podkarpackiego_2014‐2020%2520_Konsultacje%2520spoeczne.pdf [accessed on 3rd July 2015] 51 DG Research Regional Key Figures Database, 2010. 52 DG Research Regional Key Figures Database, 2010. 53 Northern Netherland Provinces (2013), Northern Netherlands Research and Innovation Strategy for Smart Specialisations (RIS3) http://www.snn.eu/upload/documenten/europa/ris3/draft‐ris3.pdf [accessed 3rd July 2015]. 

 

   

  21 

■ Clean and safe water.

The implementation of the strategy is built on five main strands: 

■ A results-oriented approach: in the inception phase of the new funding period, the three regions involved will define societal effects the strategy aims to achieve along key societal challenges tackled and specific growth and employment targets;

■ Diligent monitoring and evaluation: A combination of quantitative and qualitative monitoring and evaluation tools are being used, built on bundling and coordination of regional surveys already conducted, including labour market surveys, regional disaggregation of national statistics on high growth sectors, qualitative monitoring on the regional scale, project-level monitoring, as required for European programmes;

■ Regional collaboration: aiming at creating synergies between the high number of SMEs and large enterprises, specific support for universities of applied sciences and vocational education institutions ; and

■ National and international collaboration, including partnership with Northern German regions implementing the new Interreg programme and participation in the RIS3 network, managed by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre.

The Operational Programme itself focuses mainly on SME support and improving their uptake of innovation.54 This is based on a needs assessment conducted by Panteia, which established that the percentage of SMEs who are developers and leaders is significantly smaller than on national average (see table 3.4). 

Table 3.3 SME Innovation Pyramid, Northern Netherlands  

  Netherlands  Provinces of Northern Netherlands 

Innovation leaders 5% 2%

Innovation developers 17% 12%

Innovation adopters 19% 13%

Innovation followers 34% 43%

Non-innovators 25% 31%

Panteia (2013, Innovatie in het MKB in Noord-Nederland [Innovation in the SME Sector in the Northern Netherlands].

The Operational Programme seeks to address this by tackling two main perceived obstacles to innovation: 

■ Small businesses appear to be insufficiently capable of exploiting existing knowledge and/or generating knowledge, and

■ Small businesses are insufficiently successful when it comes to valorising knowledge, which involves converting knowledge into new products and services.

                                                            54 Northern Netherland Provinces (2014), Operational Programme. European Development Regional Fund 2014‐2020. Prioritising innovation and a low‐carbon economy. http://www.snn.eu/upload/documenten/subsidies/subsidieprogrammas/op‐efro_summary_web.pdf   [accessed 3rd July 2015].] 

 

   

  22 

Three main priorities have been set by the Operational Programme to address these shortcomings.  

■ Strengthening of human capital – including actions to include: – support clusters of businesses and education institutions to develop demand-driven

curricula that facilitate the alignment of demand for and supply of highly skilled workers (in the form of business training programmes and work placement programmes for tutors, for example).

– to develop structures that allow corporate R&D facilities to be used by education institutions.

– To support E-portfolio systems that provide an overview of and enable the exchange of knowledge and experience within and between clusters (digital curriculum vitae with additional information about skills, references, feedback, etc.).

– setting up of structures that are analogous to Centres of Expertise, or additional activities undertaken by existing Centres of Expertise and research groups.

■ Fostering knowledge development – including actions to – Knowledge development and research by businesses working in partnership with

knowledge institutions or other businesses.

– assist small businesses with the acquisition of new knowledge.

– Enable staff exchange among small businesses, or between small businesses and large businesses or small businesses and knowledge institutions for the purpose

■ Promoting valorisation – including – Innovation processes aimed at the development of new products, concepts,

technologies and services. – Testing of innovative applications in a practical environment with a view to valorisation of

new technologies provided that the testing is a logical part of the innovation process. – Valorisation of products and services that involves the creation or improvement of

testing ground facilities designed to support innovation processes conducted by or involving the corporate sector.

Contact for further enquiries 

■ Danny Kerstholt, T +31(0)50 5224 964, M +31(0)6 4129 2847, E-mail kerstholt@snn.eu , www.snn.eu

3.3.4.3 South Ostrobothnia, Finland The region of South Ostrobothnia (Etela‐Pohjanmaa in Finnish) covers an area of 13,444 km2 with a population of 193,977. The region has a highly educated population, with 85.6 per cent of the 20‐59 olds having completed post secondary school qualification.55 The intramural R&D expenditure of the region was 0,66 per cent in 2014.56 

                                                            55 Presentation at the Peer Review Workshop of the Joint Research Centre’s Smart Specialisation Platform 6‐7 November 2014. http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/baiona‐november‐2014 [accessed on 29 April 2015]. 56 Ibid.  

 

   

  23 

The region invests in a series of ‘skill and service entities’ which will support company growth and internationalisation. These are: 

■ Start up and grow up! – International cooperation with other regions to support creation and growth of start-ups;

■ Go global! – International cooperation in smart specialisation sectors

■ Get talent! – Investments in education to improve the region’s skill level

Similar to Cornwall and IoS, South Ostrobothnia has a large proportion of SMEs. However only a small number of regional companies show significant growth or internationalisation trends. Export as a proportion of production was under 10% in 2012. 

In the preparation of South Ostrobothnia’s Strategy for Smart Specialisation, different skill sectors and their aligned operations were identified, combining the views of business concerning sectors with development potential and that are growth seeking, and the development possibilities identified by education and training organisations.57  

This mapping exercise resulted in the following smart specialisation sectors:

■ Sustainable food systems and new solutions for the bioeconomy: New systems and solutions for agrotechnology, new solutions in the field of bioeconomy and high added value, food systems and expert services, consumer oriented and unique products for the food stuff sector, food safety in the foodstuff production chain;

■ Smart and energy efficient systems: User friendly and smart machines and instruments, new health technology applications, thermal management, smart and efficient logistical systems, new solutions of metal and wooden construction; and

■ Regeneration of service and experience production: Welfare and event tourism, event production, networked welfare services.

Contact for further enquiries 

Jaako Hallila, Manager of International Affairs, Tel. +358 40 3565 630, jaakko.hallila@etela‐pohjanmaa.fi , Regional Council of South Ostrobothnia, Finland. 

 

 

    

                                                            57 Regional Council of South Ostrobothnia (2014), South Ostrobothnia. Smart Outstanding. Strategy for Smart Specialisation. http://www.epliitto.fi/images/B_64_South_Ostrobothnia_Smart_and_Outstanding_Strategy_for_Smart_Specialisation.pdf  [accessed 3rd July 2015]. 

Cornwall Council   Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices ‐ 

APPENDICES to Evidence Report      October 2015 

    

Appendix B – List of Sector Workshop Invitees and Consultees58 

                                                            58 Not all invitees to the workshop events attended. 

Cornwall Council   Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices ‐ 

APPENDICES to Evidence Report      October 2015 

    

   

 

Event Names  E‐digital Workshop and Consultations 

Workshop Date  20th May 2015  

Name: Invited  Company 

Miriam Venner  Cornwall College Group 

Toby Parkins  Uknetweb/Headforwards 

Paul Clark  CEO of Packet Ship Technologies 

Mike Barritt  MD at Sullivan Cuff Software Ltd 

Ben Coleman  Design director @ fffunction 

Brenda Graham  AMION Consulting 

Cindy Dalgleish  Affiliatespace 

Jo Pyrah  MD of Green Light PBS Ltd 

Liz Brooks  Product Management and Marketing Consultant 

Belinda Waldock  Agile on the Beach and Software Cornwall 

Steve Jan Hawker  Director & Technical Specialist Kernow Business Intelligence Solutions Ltd 

Roger Isaacson  MD at Data‐Frame Solutions Ltd 

Angelo Spencer‐Smith  Positioning and differentiation strategist 

Eleanor Jubb  AIR, Falmouth University‐Interface of digital research 

Wo King  Digital Solutions Company  

Mark Jennings  N‐coders ‐ Bespoke software/server management 

Elliot Walker  Coast 360 Digital Marketing 

Jean Taylor  Head of Strategic Economic Dev, University of Exeter 

Dr Andrew Jupe  Altcom Ltd 

Ian Baker  Catalys 

Professor Anne Carlisle  Falmouth University 

Professor Phil Moore  Falmouth University 

Graham Russell  AMION Consulting 

Cornwall Council   Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices ‐ 

APPENDICES to Evidence Report      October 2015 

    

 

Event Names  Future Economy – General Innovation Workshop & Consultations 

Workshop Date  1st June 2015  

Name: Invited  Company 

Eleanor Jubb  Falmouth University 

Jean Taylor  Head, Strategic Economic Development, Cornwall Research & Knowledge Transfer Exeter University 

Mel Colton‐Dyer  Business Connections Manager ‐ Cornwall Chamber of Commerce  

Lindsey Hall  CEO Real Ideas Organisation 

Professor Philip Moore  Pro Vice Chancellor (R&I), Director of AIR, Falmouth University 

Andrew Brewer  FG Brewer and Sons Farms Ltd 

Colin Roberts  Health and Wellbeing Innovation Centre Strategy Board 

Karen Murray  Manager, Health and Wellbeing Innovation Centre  

Matt Borne  Cornwall College (representing) 

Deborah Bennets  Cornwall College 

Alex Lake  Cornwall Marine  

Richard Scutt  Manager, Pool Innovation Centre 

Ian Jones  CEO Goonhilly Earth Station Ltd 

Professor Ann Carlisle  FE Board Chair, Falmouth University 

Jo Hancock  Truro Penwith University 

Toby Parkins  HeadForwards 

Adrian Dawson  Plymouth University 

Matthew Thomson  Cornwall Food Foundation 

Matt Hodson  Mojo Maritime 

Jo Banks  Cornwall Council 

Ken Martin   Cornwall Manufacturing Forum  

Edward Chapman  Regional Secretary ‐ Federation of Small Businesses 

Graham Russell  AMION Consulting 

Brenda Graham  AMION Consulting 

Thelma Sorenson Cornwall Business Partnership 

Eleanor Jubb AIR, Falmouth University 

 

Cornwall Council   Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices ‐ 

APPENDICES to Evidence Report      October 2015 

    

 

Event Names  Agri‐tech Workshop & Consultations 

Workshop Date  30th April 2015 

Name: Invited  Organisation 

David Rodda  CDC 

Andrew Brewer  Dairy farmer; member of the DairyCo research panel   

Dr Phil LeGrice  Duchy College 

Andrew Williams  LEP 

David Simmons  Riveria Produce 

Dr Steve Tones  Agricultural and Horticultural Development Board or AHDB 

Mark Oliver  Dairy farmer 

Richard Jones  Dairy Crest 

Mike Hambly  Arable Grower 

Catherine Mead  Lynher Dairies 

Mel Squires MBE  National Farmers Union 

Stephen Bone  Dairy Crest Direct/Mole Valley Farmers 

Jeremy Oatey  Haye Farm Produce 

Prof Michael Winter  University of Exeter 

Prof Kevin Gaston  University of Exeter 

Rachel Brice  Cornwall Council ‐ natural capital concept 

Sir Tim Smit  Eden Project 

Dan James  Development Director EDEN Project 

Charlotte Russell  Head of Learning Partnerships EDEN Project 

Andrew Ormerod  Alchemy_360 & Eden Project 

Prof Robbie McDonald  University of Exeter 

Ian Richmond  Arla 

Mike Houghton  Andersons Consulting 

Lily Hiscock  Andersons Consulting 

Richard Thomas  Farmer 

Andrew Richards   

Farmer 

Jo Button  Farmer 

Cornwall Council   Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices ‐ 

APPENDICES to Evidence Report      October 2015 

    

Bill Clarke  Trewithen Dairy 

Martin Whell  Farmer 

Matt borne  Duchy College 

Jonathan Jones  Tregothnan 

Martin Stanbury  Farmer 

Phil Ugalde   Proper Cornish Food 

Peter Hardaker  Cornwall Grain 

Andrew May  Farmer 

Elisia Bott  Cornwall Council 

Anthony Wills  Farmer 

Darren Croft  UoE 

Kevin Sales  UoE 

John Mortimer  CLA 

Rob Poole  RCC 

Edward Richardson  Farm Cornwall, Penwith, Cornwall 

Cllr Jim Candy  Cornwall Council 

Paul Ward  Rural Business School 

Wayne Simmons  Rural Business School 

Ian Baker  Catalys 

Jo Talbot  JOHT 

Matthew Thomson  Cornwall Food Foundation 

Richard Soffe  Director – Rural Business School 

Cornwall Council   Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices ‐ 

APPENDICES to Evidence Report      October 2015 

    

Adrian Rundle  Barclays 

Patrick Aubrey‐Fletcher  NFU 

    

Cornwall Council   Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices ‐ 

APPENDICES to Evidence Report      October 2015 

    

 

Event Namea  E‐health and E‐Well‐being Workshop & Consultations 

Workshop Date  1st May 2015 

Name: Invited  Organisation 

Jackie Andrade  Plymouth University 

Anthony Ball  Cornwall Council Public Health  

Michael Barritt  INR Star/Sullivan Cuff 

Emma Bland  University of Exeter  

Elisia Bott  Cornwall Council 

William Box  Carnego Systems 

Chris Cannaby  Royal Cornwall Hospital Trust 

Caroline Court  Cornwall Clinical Commissioning Group/Public Health 

Denbigh Cowley  Cornwall Council 

Trevor Drage  BT Cornwall Telehealthcare 

Lora Fleming  University of Exeter  

Stephen Frankell  Wadebridge Renewal Energy 

Steven Graham  University of Exeter 

Tamsyn Harris  Truro‐Penwith College 

Aisling Hick  Council of the Isles of Scilly 

Charlotte Hill  Cornwall Council/Health and Wellbeing Board 

Ian Jones  Volunteer Cornwall 

Ray Jones  Plymouth University 

Eleanor Jubb  Falmouth University 

Lorraine Long  NHS Kernow CCG 

Ethna McCarthy  Royal Cornwall Hospital Trust 

Philip Moore  Falmouth University 

Simon Nichols  Microtest 

Ulrike Richards  Plymouth University 

Colin Roberts  Health and Wellbeing Innovation Centre Board  

Sandra Rothwell  Cornwall & Isles of Scilly LEP 

Natalie Russell   Cornwall Development Company 

Angela Shore  University of Exeter 

Jon Sidall  South West Academic Health and Science Network 

Edward Trewhella  Mobility Centre 

Paul Upton  Ultramed Ltd 

Cornwall Council   Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices ‐ 

APPENDICES to Evidence Report      October 2015 

    

Douglas Webb  Cornwall Care 

Robert Woolf  Made Open  (was Sea Communications) 

Andrew Abbott  Kernow Clinical Commissioning Group 

Mike Thomas  Cornwall Sports Partnership 

Dan Goodwin  fffunction 

Toby Parkin  (Headforwards and) Cornwall Chamber of Commerce 

Jonathan and Sarah Trethowan  TRAC Services 

Dan Williams  My Clinical Outcomes 

Tom Gillibrand  Headforwards 

Paul Axten  Buzz Interactive 

Emma Thomas  Sprint  Digital 

Lisa Clark  Cornwall College 

    

Cornwall Council   Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices ‐ 

APPENDICES to Evidence Report      October 2015 

    

 

Event Names  Marine Tech Workshop & Consultations 

Workshop Date  22nd May 2015 

Name: Invited  Organisation 

Andy Bristow  Seatricity 

Tim Sawyer  Carnegie 

Rebecca Cutter  Carnegie 

Rob Misslebrook  DWE 

Aki Luukkainen  Wello 

Sam Roch‐Perks   Simply Blue 

Ronan Costello  Wave Venture 

Rob Eavis  Polygen 

Paul Weston  A&P 

Jezz Littlejohns   A&P 

Nikki Meek  Gobe Consultants 

Steve Jermy   Mojo Maritime 

Ben Gowers  BG Renewables 

Tim Salmon  Reflex Marine 

Laura Hamilton  Reflex Marine 

David Rubie‐Todd  Wave Power (Private investors based in Glastonbury) 

Robert Rawlinson Smith  DNV GL 

Michael Bullock   Renewable Risk Advisers 

Lars Johanning  Exeter University 

Deborah Greaves  Plymouth University  

Peter Holland   Plymouth University  

Matt Borne  Cornwall College and Falmouth Marine School 

Claire Gibson  Wave Hub 

Helen Wilson Prowse  Wave Hub 

Alex Whatley  FaB Test 

John Pollard  Cornwall Council 

Paul Holmes   CMN & MOR  

Johnny Gowdy  SWMEP  

Councillor Richard Macarthy  Isles of Scilly 

Paul Wickes  Cornwall Marine Network 

Simon Cheeseman  ORE Catapult 

Cornwall Council   Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices ‐ 

APPENDICES to Evidence Report      October 2015 

    

Amanda Pound  Invest in Cornwall 

Lucy Hunt  Invest in Cornwall 

Stuart Farmer  ORDP 

Brenda Graham   Amion 

Graham Russell   (Director at AMION 

Jo Talbot  JOHT Resources 

Capt. Mark Sansom  CEO and Harbour Master at Falmouth Harbour Commissioners 

Robert Keeling  Local Economic Growth Team 

Jason Clark  LDDrill 

Peter Mitchell   Seatricity 

Adrian Jones  Rustler Yachts 

Nick Offord  Rustler Yachts 

Mike Reynolds  CMN  Board Member 

Jim Grant  Exeter University  

Ian Godfrey  SWMEP  

     

Cornwall Council   Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices ‐ 

APPENDICES to Evidence Report      October 2015 

    

 

Event Names  Aerospace Workshop & Consultations 

Workshop Date:  19th May   

Name: Invited  Organisation  

Graham Russell   AMION Consulting  

Maria Salcedo   AMION Consulting  

Richard Trevail   DP Engineering  

Andrew Hosking  

WES Ltd 

Alison Parker  

Smiths Advanced Metals  

Kevin Glenister   Apple Aviation  

Michael Gibbs  

European Springs  

Derek Pollitt   Teddington Electronics Ltd  

Christopher Savage  Pall Redruth 

John Hicks   RAM Gaskets 

Gary Hicks   Preci Spark 

James Watt  Flann Microwave  

David Ashford   Bristol Spaceplane Operations  

Andrew Cameron   Lowley Engineering  

Suzanne Bennett  R & R Bassett  

Andy Gauler   Righton Aerospace  

Al Titterington   Newquay Cornwall Airport  

Lucy Hunt    Invest in Cornwall  

Yvonne Elsorougi   

BIS  

Rob Emony   

UKTI  

Simon Young   WEAF 

Ken Martin   Cornwall Manufacturing Forum  

Miles Cardin   Aerohub  

Paul Readfern   Aerospace Consultant  

Tim Rice   GMX 

Edward Hornagold   Cornwall College  

Jean Taylor   Exeter University  

Simon Dawes   Aerospace Advisory Panel  

Elisia Bott   Cornwall Council  

Phil Woods   Cornwall Council  

Dr Paul Gilmore   Plymouth University  

Professor Philip Moore   Falmouth University  

 

Cornwall Council   Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Research, Development and Innovation Evidence Base Appendices ‐ 

APPENDICES to Evidence Report      October 2015 

    

 

Event Name  Isles of Scilly Workshop  

Event Date  22nd June 2015 

Name: Invited  Organisation  

Diana Mompoloki  Council of the Isle of Scilly – Strategic Development 

Doug Holt   Marine Tech 

Luke Humphries  Duchy Land Steward‐ Agri Tech / Strategic overview 

Theo  Lejester  CIOS – Chief Executive 

Joel Williams  CIOS – Senior Manager‐ Services to the community 

John Peacock  Marine Tech  

Daisy Kelly Fletcher  Marine Tech interest   

Andrew May  Chairman Cornwall Agri‐food Council 

Sophie Hughes  CIOS  

Penny Penn‐Howard  Health and Well Being 

Trish Peacock  Council of Isles  of Scilly‐Skills  

David Jackson  Island Partnership 

Jo Evans  Lifelong Learning 

Brenda Graham   AMION Consulting  

Maria Salcedo   AMION Consulting  

  

 

Consultations with Space Sector contacts  

Name  Organisation  

Andrew Fry   Avanti Communications  

Ian Jones   GES Ltd 

James Watts   Flann Microwave 

Samantha Lavender   Pixalytics 

Colin Baldwin   UK Space Agency  

Iain Mackleworth   Cornwall Council  

Jean Taylor   Exeter University  

Phil Moore  Falmouth University