150 likes | 277 Views
RIS South Moravia – its knowledge base and policy framework. CRA workshop, Utrecht, 11.-13. 2. 2008. Content of presentation. Profile of the region Knowledge base composition Regional innovation strategies in South Moravia Main policy instruments Major projects under preparation
E N D
RIS South Moravia – its knowledge base and policy framework CRA workshop, Utrecht, 11.-13. 2. 2008
Content of presentation • Profile of the region • Knowledge base composition • Regional innovation strategies in South Moravia • Main policy instruments • Major projects under preparation • Conclusion
Profile of the region I. • strategic location in Central Europe • total regional population – 1,1 mil. • monocentric region with capital – Brno - 400.000 pop. • NUTS III • self- governing region since 2000 • structural indicators • GDP – 72% of EU average/ 7% growth • unemployment – 7%
Profile of the region II. • R&D investments • public - 0,7 % GDP (2005) (5 research universities, 16 institutes of Academy of Science) • private – 0,7 % GDP (2005) (mostly carried out by MNCs cca 60%) • Human resources • university degreeholders - 16% • nr. of university students -65 000 • employment in high-tech industry – 7% • nr. of researchers (% of total pop.) – 1,37% • Business sector – 1456 researchers • Govermentsector – 817 researchers • Univesitysector – 1320 researchers • nr. of university students -65 000
Knowledge base composition Employment in thousands (Labour Force Survey)
Regional innovation strategies in South Moravia I. • RIS I. – 2002 – 2005 • the first RIS in the Czech Rep. • only pilot survey among regional actors • very weak links to regional budget • regional government took only cognisance • Mainoutputs: • EstablishementofSouthMoravianInnovation Centre • Buildingupincubators • Settingup centre for technology transfer • Set upmicroloanfundforincubatedcompanies • Mainoutcomes • Increasedpoliticalawerness
Regional innovation strategies in South Moravia II. • RIS II. – 2005 – 2008 • no field research • Almost no involvement of local actors • But – approved by the regional government • Basic condition for co-financing projects • unjustified focus on biotech sector (only 15 companies!) • too focused on hard infrastructures and SMEs • RIS III. – being prepared now
Main policy instruments I. • Incubators with a team of consultants • Founded in 2003 • 4000 sq.meters + 8 conslutants • 25 incubated companies where four of them are promising • One succesfull exit so far • Centres for technology transfer • at two universities • still in an embryonic form
Main policy instruments II. • Micro – loan fund • established in 2005 • objective: to substitute business-angel-type investors • ten deals done - to date • Size 10,000 – 30,000 € • Patent fund • To cover expenditures on patenting • Only three deals done so far
Main policy instruments III. • Cluster alliances I. • Water Treatment Alliance • 16 companies + technology university • objective: „to deliver advanced technology plants in area of water treatment and to penetrate the world markets“ • Typical representative of the synthetic knowledge base • Funding from SF - 200 th. € for two years
Main policy instruments IV. • Cluster alliances II. • CEITEC Cluster – bioinformatics • 22 companies • Initial objective: to establish a mirrorplatform to largeresearchinfrastructureproject • Funding: 300,000€ fortwoyears • Concept of related variety taken into account • Due to the political instability – a real cooperation during designing project have not been carried out • Rather not innovativeactivites are running – such as common marketing
Major projects under preparation • Research infrastructure • Central European Institute of Technology (CEITEC), (400 mil. €) • Synchrotron Laboratory (300 mil. €) • Integrated Clinical Research Centre (120 mil.€) • Soft infrastructure • Fund for experienced researchers • Fund for talented students • Horizontal mobility schemes
Conclusion • Key strenghts of the regional innovation system • relatively strong science base – but still second/third league (there are exceptionsthough) • thesystem had to transformitsselfseveraltimes in history - 20s‘, 50s‘ andlate 90‘s • Key weaknesses of the regional innovation system • very weak connectivity (hugereluctance to cooperateesp. on academicside) • almost no big research company (except Honeywell or FEI)
Conclusion • Main strengths of the regional innovation strategy • significantpolitical support • theimplementationprocess has started • considerableamountofregionalactorsisinvolved • team spirit isbeingconstructed • Main weaknesses of regional innovation strategy • too focused on SMEs • proper field research among companies has never been done • no direct connection with regional/municipal budgets • no functioningevaluationand monitoring system
Thank you for your attention! Petr Chládek petr.chladek@rrajm.cz +420 602 611061