Innovation Policy and Technology Transfer

- Concepts and experiences -

Michael Guth

Workshop on Innovation Policy

Kiev, March 22, 2010

Contents Contents

1. Concepts of innovation and technology transfer

2. Examples of transfer schemes

3.1 Cases from NRW

3.2 Examples from Romania (EU R&D FP/ national funding)

3.3 Business Incubators in Algeria

3. Summary and preliminary conclusions

2. Innovation and Technology Transfer

Innovation can be defined as:

1) „the result of individual and institutional learning processes, the knowledge created by this and its economic application“(ZENIT)

2) “Innovation is the ability to take new ideas and translate them into commercial outcomes by new processes, products or services….)1)

We only speak about „innovation“ when new knowledge is actually being applied in new products, services, organisational procedures or management procedures!!

1) Nedis, R. and Byler E. (2009), Creating a national innovation framework, in Science progress April(2009)

Transfer

In this perspective technology (knowledge) transfer is key for innovation processes to take place!

Technology Transfer and Innovation are two sides of one medal

BUT

How does Technology Transfer and Innovation (TTI) function??

Traditionally the RTD&I systems both in market and in Traditionally the RTD&I systems both in market and in transition environments were (and still are!?) based transition environments were (and still are!?) based

on a rather linear way of thinking technology on a rather linear way of thinking technology transfer/innovation transfer/innovation

Basic Research

ProductDemonstration/

FeasibilityApplied

ResearchMarket

The concept of innovation

XBasic

ResearchProduct

Demonstration/Feasibility

Applied Research

Market

The concept of innovation

X X

It is not that easy!

It is more complex: It is more complex:

Non – linear process

Involving different actors (science, firms, governments, public)

Complex feed back loops between the actors

=> Innovation is a system

Elements of innovation are:

Innovation Innovation SystemSystem

Research Firms

Gov. Institutions

Competitiveness

Growth

Supply Demand

Research may no longer be the only focus of science policy measures

Pure technology aspects become less important

Interaction of actors is equally important for the success of innovation policy (Transfer as critical element)

A striking new element for policy measures are the links between actors! (Networks, Cluster, Exchange)

What does this mean for Innovation Policy?

This is why I am presenting in the following part selected examples for TT-schemes as well as some lessons deriving from that

3.1 Cases for TT schemes in North Rhine Westphalia

On-going proposal submission

call/competition/selection committee

call/competition/selection committee

Selection process

4 months – 1 year2 years1 – 3 yearsProject

duration

-Max 60% of gross annual salary

- Max 12,750€ (male)and 15,300€ (female)

via personnel costs amounting to part-time placement at university + 5000€ for consultancy services

Max. 50% funding rate for winning projectsFunding

through “heads”

through “heads”young graduates bring university know how into new firms

- joint projects - joint development- joint application of

knowledge

Know how transfer

SMEyoung start ups (pre-starting phase)

SMEs + research institutions, network

Target

IPTPFAUZukunftsWett-

bewerbRuhrgebiet

On-going proposal submission

call/competition/selection committee

call/competition/selection committee

Selection process

4 months – 1 year2 years1 – 3 yearsProject

duration

-Max 60% of gross annual salary

- Max 12,750€ (male)and 15,300€ (female)

via personnel costs amounting to part-time placement at university + 5000€ for consultancy services

Max. 50% funding rate for winning projectsFunding

through “heads”

through “heads”young graduates bring university know how into new firms

- joint projects - joint development- joint application of

knowledge

Know how transfer

SMEyoung start ups (pre-starting phase)

SMEs + research institutions, network

Target

IPTPFAUZukunftsWett-

bewerbRuhrgebiet

3. Examples of TT schemes

ZukunftsWettbewerb Ruhrgebiet :

Through the broad orientation all sectors benefited from this programme (not only the old industries).

There had to be a “spirit of co-operation” between industry and research institutions. Where this spirit was lacking, projects faced problems in critical situations.

PFAU:

Due to the high rate of created start ups, stemming from the projects selected, a lot of new jobs could be created, with a small financial effort

Most of the start ups were build near the respective universityRegions without an university did not benefit from this tool

Lessons from NRW 1/2

Lessons from NRW 2/2

IPT:

The personnel transfer (IPT) can also be seen as an instrument with a good cost-benefit ratio:

Good instrument for regions with structural change

For 40 % of firms the know how transfer was more important than the funding!

Most of the young graduates (60 %) remained in the firm after the project (and funding) ceased (one year after the project’s end)

Focus on SMEs

3.2 Examples from Romania

• The use of the European FP for building up networks (RoDi)

• A national financing scheme for TT infrastructures

FP6 Project: Romanian Days of Innovation RoDI

Partners:

• RO Ministry of Education and Research

• Research Institute for Automation Design (IPA), Bucharest

• University of Agricultural Sciences in Bucharest

• ZENIT

• gtz (German technical assistance corporation)

FP6 Project: Romanian Days of Innovation RoDI

What was it all about?

• Building up of two networks: IST and biotechnology

• Promotion of FP6 and FP7 participation for RO researchers

• Training seminars on FP 7 in all 8 regions

• National FP6/FP7 conferences

Sustainability and enhancement of the IST Network assured via a National Research Project: Prom IST PC7

Programme of the National Authority for Scientific Research in support of TTI infrastructures (INFRATECH):

• Technology and Science Parks

• Business Incubators

• Technology Transfer Centres

• Centres for Technology Information

• Industry Liaison Offices

• Technology Clusters and Brokers

• 2 components:

- Institutional build up (1 year)

- Specific services (5 years)

• Budget: up to 500.000 EUR per project

• Network of Romanian TTI structures

Infratech

Exploiting synergies between EU and national resources!

Networking is an important element for innovation. BUT: depending on the actual infrastructural endowment, the infrastructure up-grade must not be forgotten.

Refrain from too strict legal codifications. A law is not really needed. Can be an obstacle in the implementation.

Importance of a demand orientated approach. Not all > 60 TTI entities regard themselves as innovation service providers!

Financial sustainability is a problem

Lessons from Romania

3.3 Business Incubators in Algeria

• National law for building up and financing incubators (4 years)

• No real activity so far. Introduction of the topic into the German-ALG technical cooperation agreement (ALG Ministry and GTZ)

• ZENIT selected as process consultant

• Decision of ALG Ministry to focus on incubators for technology based start ups

Lancement Conception Déroulement

Atelier de lancement

à Alger(Ministère,Régions)

Atelier Alger

(Ministère, 3 Pilotes)

Pilote 1

Pilote 2

Pilote 3

Pilote 1

Pilote 2

Pilote 3

Pilote 1

Pilote 2

Pilote 3

Pilote 1

Pilote 2

Pilote 3

Pilote 1

Pilote 2

Pilote 3

(Monitoring) Supervision & Évaluation

SWOTÉlaboration du concept (brouillon)

Concept

(Accord)

Plan de déroulement

Échange d‘expériences

One year from project start to begin of the implementation

Is a bit early! For comprehensive lessons

“Codification of TT infrastructures in a (national) law again turned out to be a hindrance factor for efficient implementation”

“Also: good networking (locally/nationally) requires sufficient knot points: minimum level of TT-infrastructural endowment is necessary”

“Money (from the law), actors (local gov., univ. + business organisations) and certain problem pressure (high unemployment) were not sufficient for getting the process started. A trigger from a “fourth force” (process consultant) was necessary”

Lessons from Algeria?

Innovation without Technology/Know how transfer is not possible!

TT represents a key element of innovation policy (different motivations of the actors)

We must not expect too much (financially, technologically)

Incremental but permanent flows of knowledge and subsequent application may not be so appealing but still they are very efficient

This has consequences for TT-schemes: smaller projects, broad approaches (technologically), involving people (transfer through heads, networks, local clusters, …)

4. Summary and Conclusions

Most of the points discussed are general! They apply for Germany as much as for Ukraine

Legal framework is an issue! Transition states tend to codify too much (national law for incubators, national cluster law, …): Think twice before you issue a new law in the TTI-field

Networking (triple helix) versus bad-buddy-groups (closed shops, nepotism, cartels/trusts):Organise broad participation – even on the cost of efficiency. Identify project forms which create local/regional network (RIS, foresights, benchmarking workshops)

Specific Transition aspects?

Thank you very much for your attention!

Contact:

Michael Guth

Phone ++49-208-30004-56

Mail: mg(at)zenit.de