Strengthening the Regional Innovation Profile STRINNOP the Experiences with Regional Innovation Indi

1
Strengthening the Regional Innovation
ProfileSTRINNOP the Experiences with
Regional Innovation Indicators

• Metropolis II MeetingHelsinki, Finland 24th
  April 2003
• Hans-Christian Jäger

2
Agenda

• The STRINNOP Approach
• Pilot study on regional innovation indicators
• Set of indicators (under discussion)
• Further proceeding
• Barriers to measuring the Regional Innovation
  Profile

3
The STRINNOP Approach
Attachment of Good Practice Tools
4
Good Practice cases available under
www.strinnop.net
5
Pilot survey on regional innovation indicators
according Innovation Scoreboard (June 2002)
6
Pilot survey on regional innovation indicators
according Innovation Scoreboard (June 2002)
1.2 Population with tertiary education
( of total population)
1.3 Participation in life-long learning
6.4 Share of manufacturing value-added in
high-tech
( of 25-64 years age class)
sectors
1.4 Employed in medium / high-tech manufactuing
6.3 Share of ICT markets
( of total workforce)
( of GDP)
6.2 Home internet access
1.5 Employed in high-tech services
( of total workforce)
( of all households)
6.1 Sales of
2.1 Public RD expenditures
new-to-market products
( of GDP)
( of sales by manuf. firms)
2.3 Business RD
4.4 New capital raised
( of GDP)
( of GDP)
2.6 High-tech EPO patents
4.1 High-tech venture capital
(Per million of population)
( of GDP)
3.4 Innovation expenditures
2.5 RD Personnel
( of all turnover in manufacturing)
Best EU country
( of total workforce)
EU average
3.3 SMEs innovation co-operation
1.1 New SE graduates
( of manufactaring SMEs)
Bremen
(Per thousand of 20 - 29 years)
Niederösterreich
2.7 High-tech USPTO patents
3.1 SMEs innovating in-house
Funen
(Per million of population)
( of manufactaring SMEs)
7
Consequence of these findings

• Development of a set of indicators
• Assigned to single STRINNOP steps
• Including quantitative indicators of European
  Innovation Scoreboard, which are already
  available on regional level (or can be made
  available within a manageable effort)
• Including quantitative and qualitative
  indicators,eg. from the analyses of
  RITTS/RIS-projects, further surveys,expert
  enquiries
• under its way

8
Set of indicators according (under
discussion)STRINNOP Approach step 1

• Identification of regional competencies and
  innovation potentials
• 1.1 Transparency of regional know-how and
  competencies
• 1.2 Transparency of firms needs in innovation
  support
• 1.3 RNSII (Regional National Summary Innovation
  Index)
• 1.4 RRSII (Revealed Regional Summary Innovation
  Index)

9
Set of indicators according (under discussion)
STRINNOP Approach step 2

• Creation of regional knowledge
• 2.1 Population with a tertiary education ( of
  25-64 years age classes)
• 2.2 Participation in life-long learning ( of
  25-64 years olds)
• 2.3 Public RD Expenditure (GERD BERD) (
  GDP)
• 2.4 Business Expenditure on RD (BERD) ( GDP
• 2.5 High-tech EPO patent applications (per
  million population)
• 2.6 Adequate interfaces at technology providers
• 2.7 Education and training with respect to
  future entrepreneurs
• 2.8 national technology leadership (of total
  sample of firms)
• 2.9 International technology leadership

10
Set of indicators according (under discussion)
STRINNOP Approach step 3

• Stimulation of innovation activities
• 3.1 Existence of "regional innovation culture"
  and "entrepreneurship culture
• 3.2 Existence of proactive approach to contact
  firms'
• 3.3 Communication platform to facilitate firms'
  access to technology and service providers
• 3.4 Range of stimulation activities and quality
• 3.5 Existence of (pre-)seed activities

11
Set of indicators according (under discussion)
STRINNOP Approach step 4

• Implementation of firms innovation activities
• 4.1 GDP per capita
• 4.2 employment in medium/high tech manufacturing
  ( of total work force)
• 4.3 employment in high tech services ( of
  total work force)
• 4.4 turnover with new products (less than 3
  years) (of total turnover)
• 4.5 of innovative firms (of total sample)
• 4.6 Range and quality of implementation services
• 4.7 Infrastructure and accompanying services for
  start-ups and quality
• 4.8 Number of new start-ups in innovation
  relevant areas

12
Set of indicators according (under discussion)
STRINNOP Approach step 5

• Focus on regional strength clustering and
  networking
• 5.1 existence of distinctive regional sector
  profil sectors with highest labour force
• 5.2 focus on thematic topics
• 5.3 private imitative within the regional cluster
  activities
• 5.4 public initiatives for networking and
  clustering

13
Set of indicators according (under discussion)
STRINNOP Approach step 6

• Internationalisation
• 6.1 of export / total turnover
• 6.2 Existence of international networks
• 6.3 Range and quality of services to foster
  firms internationalisation activities

14
Set of indicators according (under discussion)
STRINNOP Approach step 7

• Marketing if the regional innovation profile
• 7.1 Communication and promotion activities
• 7.2 participation in international innovation
  supporting networks/Projects
• 7.3 (inter)national Lobbying

15
Set of indicators according (under discussion)
STRINNOP Approach step 8

• Accompanying step Coordination of the regional
  innovation supporting infrastructure
• 8.1 Existence of communication platform
  (steering committee)
• 8.2 existence of holistic regional innovation
  strategy (vision, turning into action, adoption
  and further development)

16
Set of indicators according (under discussion)
STRINNOP Approach step 9

• Accompanying step Monitoring and evaluation of
  the regional innovation activities
• 9.1 Monitoring and evaluation of Step 1
• 9.2 Monitoring and evaluation of Step 2
• 9.3 Monitoring and evaluation of Step 3
• 9.4 Monitoring and evaluation of Step 4
• 9.5 Monitoring and evaluation of Step 5
• 9.6 Monitoring and evaluation of Step 6
• 9.7 Monitoring and evaluation of Step 7

17
Set of indicators according (under discussion)
STRINNOP Approach step 10

• Financing of the regional innovation activities
  and supporting infrastructure
• 10.1 Total amount of public money for regional
  innovation support
• 10.2 regional public money for innovation
  support (of GDP)

18
Barriers to measuring the Regional Innovation
Profile (STRINNOP experiences)

• Limited availability of data
• not compulsory for the regions to provide the
  data on regional level
• availability varies from region to region,
• depending among others from the size of the
  regions
• Time-consuming and high effort required
• different sources
• some regional data exist but are not official
  available
• Costs for data
• Insufficient freshness of data to monitor impact
  of activities
• Qualitative indicators
• missing transparency of regional innovation
  system in single regions
• Significance definition and common understanding
  of single qualitative indicators
• Who is authorised in the region to assess the
  Regional Innovation Profile?
• Agreement by involved regions on most important
  indicators

19
but there are also increasing number of
activities on Regional Innovation Indicators

• DG Enterprise (contact Peter Löwe)European
  Innovation Scoreboard EU Regions, Technical
  Paper No 3
• DG Enterprise (contact Dr. Michael
  Busch)Analyses of RITTS/RIS-projects with
  respect to common regional indicators for
  innovation and the innovation supporting
  infrastructure
• TN Metropolis Innovation Regional Indicators
• Activities in single European regions and on
  national level
• Activities of single northern American
  states/regions in USA and Canada
• ...

20
Further proceeding of STRINNOP

• Feedback of regions on suggested indicators
• First drawing of Regional Innovation Profile by
  each STRINNOP member
• (STRINNOP internal) Benchmark of Regional
  Innovation Profiles
• Open STRINNOP Conference in Bremenon 16th 17th
  October 2003

Thank you for your attention!