Promoting knowledge transfer:
networks and exchanges
The regional innovation challenge
Luc Soete
UNU-MERIT,
University of Maastricht
http://www.merit.unu.edu
EU Conference “Innovating through the structural funds”, Brussels 12-13 June 2006
Outline
• Some personal macro observations about Lisbon and
the knowledge based economy
• The emerging regional policy challenge of Lisbon
• Regional knowledge diversity in Europe
• A framework for regional innovation policy
• Conclusions
Some personal broad macro-economic
observations with respect to EMU
• “National” competitiveness policies have in a monetary union
potential beggar-thy-neighbour implications:
– Impact of national “wage settling” policies on
(un)employment in other member countries
– Danger of a European “race to the bottom” with respect to
social, welfare and tax policies
• Lisbon and the knowledge society challenge should be seen as a
“race to the top”:
– Up to now a top down approach: European targets
translated in national targets/benchmarks
– How to formulate a bottom up approach: regional diversity
as factor for knowledge activation policies
The EU is more than an EMU: role of social
cohesion and structural funds
• Europe was/is a unique laboratory of regional development policies,
but social cohesion aims becoming questioned:
• Effectiveness: national growth convergence within the EU, but
regional growth divergence (national failure in first instance)
• Physical borders of European solidarity being questioned with
enlargement
• Intrinsic limits of regional policy: success implies
discontinuation; vulnerability of created European goodwill
• Diversity of regional development is mixture of factors:
• Geographical ones: peripheral location
• Physical endowments: agriculture, mining, logistics
• Agglomeration effects: snowball size effect; population
density closely linked to knowledge activities
• New endowments: sustainability (pollution, congestion, urban
development); ageing (health and care, mobility, housing)
The regional dimensions of Lisbon and the
knowledge based economy
• Social cohesion implications of Lisbon and the KBE underresearched:
– Likely internal EU migration effects of highly skilled
– Regional/local implications of so-called “Matthews effect”
of research excellence
– Local knowledge cluster effects could lead to further
regional (and national) growth diversity
• Crucial role of cross-border or neighbouring spill-over effects
– E.g. recent research highlights the effects of the level of
education in neighbouring countries on GDP
– Behind this particular forms of knowledge transfers
On regional knowledge diversity
•
Regions with strong domestic so-called “Anchor tenants”
–
–
–
Focus on local knowledge transfers, regional “crowding in” of private R&D
Matching and building strong linkages between private R&D activities and public
research
Local spin-offs from both public and private side
•
Regions with strong foreign MNCs presence
•
Regions with strong public knowledge centres (universities, polytechnics,
technical schools) presence:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Focus on local anchorage through suppliers
Improve interactions/contacts between foreign and local knowledge
Focus on provision of skilled manpower from local technical schools and
universities
Focus on local quality and dynamism of technical and higher education
Strong cooperation with local authorities, chambers of commerce, create local
innovation platforms. Support techno starters
Attract firms as bringing the “global clout to make things work”
General framework for regional innovation
policy
• From regional system of innovation perspective 4
elements appear particularly relevant for regional
growth and development:
– Quality of human capital formation
– International openness and connectivity of research
capacity
– Local strength of innovative performance
– Absorptive capacity
• Let me focus briefly on each one of those
Regional quality of human capital formation
• Focus on quality/upgrading of local education
institutions: from primary schools to universities and
professional training schools, including life long
learning
• Broad emphasis on quality, including reduction in
failure rates, drop outs, early schooling, increasing
participation of underrepresented groups
• Increase attractiveness to “foreign” students
• Regional policy interest in quality enhancing
measures in local education
International openness of research capacity
• Attempt at creating global “hotspots” of research
excellence with openness to “foreign” research(ers),
and international (rather than EU) networking
• Strengthening of local research presence in regional
economic, industrial and political tissue (seminars,
(in)formal networks, local media, cooperation)
• Joint public-private regional initiatives to develop
further knowledge hotspots
• Assist in national and European competition to
attract best researchers, pay particular attention to
research environment conditions
Local innovative performance
• Recognition of importance of local scientific spin-off
– prize for scientific entrepreneurs, etc.
• Strengthening of links between public research
institutes/researchers/teachers and local SMEs
(local knowledge or innovation “vouchers”)
• Embedment of the dominant local or foreign MNCs in
public research infrastructure (anchorage, increasing
costs of foot looseness)
• Regional/local PR of innovative identity
Absorptive regional capacity
• Focus on regional bèta users and those in
neighbouring regions/countries
• Exploit to the maximum the role of regional public
authorities in terms of procurement
• Enhance regional presence “abroad” (fairs, etc.)
• Focus on regional diffusion and knowledge
distribution policies based on local specialisation
• Develop appropriate innovation strategies to
underrepresented groups, local conditions, network
with similar other “foreign” regions, European or
global
HUMAN CAPITAL
RESEARCH CAPACITY
ABSORTION CAPACITY
INNOVAT. PERFORMANCE
Conclusion: a new regional policy challenge
• National Lisbon (Barcelona) knowledge targets were ultimately
primarily inspired by national statistics and national policy
makers
• But the knowledge economy is an economy without borders:
pieces of knowledge acquired, reshuffled from all over the
world
• New geography and agglomeration effects: regions are the
natural environment for local “anchorage” of knowledge
related activities
• Need for a bottom-up approach highlighted by the limited
success on implementation of cross-border cooperation:
dominance of nationalism in RTD and innovation policies
• In search of European regional clusters towards an ERRA… only
way to achieve Lisbon.