View
5
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
© Fraunhofer ISI
H e n n i n g K r o l l –F r a u n h o f e r I n s t i t u t e f o r S y s t e m s a n d I n n o v a t i o n R e s e a r c h
REGIONAL INNOVATION MONITOR –THE BENCHMARKING TOOL
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 2
• regional benchmarking constitutes a “systematic process for comparing performance of [...] organisations, functions, processes of economies, policies, or sectors of business (European Commission 1999).
• most approaches include the comparison with a defined maximum (the “benchmark”) by means of quantitative indicators (IPTS, Joanneum 2002).
• limits to the application of benchmarking to innovation policy since oftentimes no aggregate indicator can cover the given diversity in policy goals, relations between policy intervention and due to a high degree of context dependency changes in outcome cannot easily be connected to policy action.
• However: benchmarking can be an important part of the policy learning process, which goes beyond mere comparisons, it can help to arrive at an understanding of the underlying processes that cause different performances (IPTS, Joanneum 2002).
Know where you stand when considering what to do
A ims of the Benchmark ing Tool
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 3
• PRO INNO Innovation Scoreboard (but: National Level)
• PRO INNO Regional Innovation Scoreboard (but: Report Format)
What i s ava i lab le so far?
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 4
• Eurostat (but: Raw Data)
What we are lacking is an easy-to use tool for the non-expert user
What i s ava i lab le so far?
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 5
To in a gradual fashion develop and improve tools for the benchmarking of regions in the course of the project
• To facilitate policy makers access to existing statistical information (e.g. Eurostat) by means of automated benchmarking applications,
• To provide access to not broadly available indicators so far only discussed in studies (e.g. Structural Funds data, Community Innovation Survey Data),
• To collect additional qualitative data through a network of regional correspondents and to make it accessible for benchmarking.
A ims of Benchmark ing in the context of theRegiona l Innovat ion Moni tor
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 6
Two main approaches:
• Easy-Access Standard Benchmarking Toolready-to-use solution for political stakeholders or other interested parties, easy-to-extract yet reliable answers to simple benchmarking questions,takeaway figure printout; to come: takeaway summary printouts
• Interactive Expert Benchmarking Tool
complex solution to satisfy expert demandscustomisable results to provide answers to complex questionsset up as online tool; to come: takeaway figure printout
Combination of easy-to-use approach (one-button-solution) andavailability of detailed query options should the need arise
Types of Benchmark ing Tools
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 7
What does i t look l ike in pract ice ?Easy-Access Standard Benchmark ing Tool
Simple, one-klick solution
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 8
For example, in the field of Socioeconomic Indicators:
Population (Total)
Degree of Urbanisation (households in densely-populated area (> 500 inhabitants/km2))
Share of Elderly (age 65+) in Population
Regional GDP (in current EUR)
Growth of Regional GDP (Real Growth at Market Prices)
Per Capita GDP (in current EUR)
Share of Economically Active Population with Tertiary Education (in Total)
Share of Employment by Aggregated Sector
Unemployment Rate (in %)
Change in Unemployment Rate
Share of Long Term Unemployment in Total Unemployment (in %)
Ind icators so far ava i lab le :F i r s t l y, 43 s tandard ind icators
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 9
For example, in the field of RTDI Indicators:
Gross Expenditure on R&D (GERD; in current EUR)
Gross Expenditure on R&D per GDP (in %)
Share of Public Expenditure on R&D in GERD (Higher Education) (in %)
Share of Public Expenditure on R&D in GERD (other Public) (in %)
Share of Business Expenditure on R&D in GERD (in %)
EPO Patent Applications (by Priority Year)
Share of Knowledge Workers (Share of HRST in Economically Active Population) (in %)
Share of Employment in Medium-high and High-tech Manufacturing (in Total)
Share of Employment in Knowledge-intensive Services (in Total)
Share of Population Involved in Life-long Learning (in %)
Share of Households with Broadband Access (in %)
Ind icators so far ava i lab le :F i r s t l y, 43 s tandard ind icators
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 10
(normalised scores within a 0 (lowest) to 1 (highest) range)
Non-R&D innovation expenditures of all enterprises as a percentage of turnover
SMEs innovating in-house as a percentage of all SMEs
Innovative SMEs collaborating with others as a percentage of all SMEs
SMEs introducing product or process innovations as a percentage of all SMEs
SMEs introducing marketing and/or organisational innovations as a percentage of all
Share of innovating SMEs where innovation has a highly important effect on reducing labour costs per unit of output as a percentage of all
Share of innovating SMEs where innovation has a highly important effect on reducing materials and energy per unit of output as a percentage of all
New-to-market sales of innovative SMEs as a percentage of turnover of all SMEs
New-to-firm sales of innovative SMEs as a percentage of turnover of all SMEs
Ind icators so far ava i lab le :Secondly, Community Innovat ion Survey
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 11
Expenditures during the Support Period 2000-2006, e.g.:
Total SF expenditures SF expenditures on core RTDI
SF expenditures on research projects based in universities and research institutes
SF expenditures on innovation and technology
SF expenditures on RTDI infrastructures
SF expenditures on training for researchers
Total SF expenditures on business innovation
SF expenditures on business advisory services for large business organisations
SF expenditures on environment-friendly technologies for SMEs and the craft sector
SF expenditures on business advisory services for SMEs and the craft
SF expenditures on shared business services for SMEs and the craft sector
SF expenditures expenditures on workforce flexibility, entrepreneurial activity, innovation
[…]
Ind icators so far ava i lab le :Th i rd ly , 44 St ructura l Funding ind icators
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 12
Allocations for the Support Period 2007-2013:
Total SF allocations SF allocations on core RTDI
SF allocations on extended RTDI
SF allocations on technology transfer and improvement of cooperation networks
SF allocations on advanced support services for firms and groups of firms
SF allocations on services and applications for SMEs
SF allocations on R&TD infrastructures
SF allocations on R&TD activities in research
SF allocations on other measures to stimulate research and innovation and entrepreneurship in SMEs
SF allocations on investment in firms directly lined to research and innovation
SF allocations on developing human potential in the field of research and
SF allocations on assistance to SMEs for the promotion of environmentally-friendly products
SF allocations on business innovation
SF allocations on assistance to R&TD, particularly in SMEs
Ind icators so far ava i lab le :Th i rd ly , 44 St ructura l Funding ind icators
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 13
value of the respective region is displayed in a column chart and an overview table
in comparison to
the 5 highest values, the 5 lowest values, the EU27 average,
the national value
Easy-Access Standard Benchmark ing Tool
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 14
Easy-Access Standard Benchmark ing Tool Country Leve l (NUTS0) Compar i sons
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 15
Easy-Access Standard Benchmark ing Tool NUTS1 (e .g . DE Länder ) Compar i sons
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 16
Easy-Access Standard Benchmark ing Tool NUTS2 (e .g . FR Départments ) Compar i sons
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 17
Accessible through the standard tool:
A little more complex to use,
Requires a number of settings but:
able to produce diverse outputs according to individual needs of the user:
• Line charts,
• Bar charts,
• Column charts,
• Pie charts,
• Spider charts.
In teract ive Expert Benchmark ing Tool
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 18
allows the user to benchmark
any NUTS 0, 1 or 2 region in Europe,
against group averages (or sums): groups of regions can be defined freely and treated as a single item.
In teract ive Expert Benchmark ing Tool
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 19
In teract ive Expert Benchmark ing ToolColumn Charts for Regions & Combined
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 20
In teract ive Expert Benchmark ing ToolP ie Charts & L ine Charts
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 21
In teract ive Expert Benchmark ing ToolSpider Charts & Scat ter P lots
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 22
• Improve Simple Benchmarking Tool to make it even easier to use
• Continue work on the Expert Benchmarking Tool
• Add additional qualitative Indicators
Out look: Soon to come
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 23
A combination of different outputs in
standardised multi page documents
to spare the user multiple queries
The following types of Summary Output are planned:
• Socio-Economic Indicators
• RTDI Indicators
• Structural Funds Indicators
• Governance Indicators
• Policy Indicators
Will be exportable as .pdf
To come: Execut ive Summary Output
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 24
Economic Indicators
•Regional GDP (in current EUR);
•Growth of regional GDP;
•Per Capita GDP (current EUR);
•Growth of regional per capita GDP;
•Gross fixed capital investment (current Euro);
•Share of employment in:
• Agriculture;
• Industry;
• Wholesale and retail trade etc.;
• Financial sector; real estate etc.;
• Public sector;
• Unemployment rate.
To come: Execut ive Summary Output(Example )
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 25
Based on a survey among the RIM regional correspondents
For example:
• the general degree of institutional autonomy of the regional authorities in the region,
• the degree of institutional autonomy of regional authorities with regard to RTDI policy,
• the set-up of regional institutions tasked with the development of innovation policy (if any),
• the degree of formalisation of regional innovation strategy (if any),
• the presence of horizontal coordination mechanisms between different regional players ,
• the presence of inter-regional co-ordination mechanisms between,
• the presence of vertical co-ordination mechanisms between e.g. regional and national level,
• the general set-up of the regional system of policy delivery (centralised, de-centralised),
• degree of relevance of the EU Structural Funds, in terms of funding,
• degree of the EU Structural Funds, for regional strategy development,
• the frequency of the use of evaluations for regional policy learning.
• […]
Soon to come:Qual i ta t ive Informat ion on Governance
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 26
Thank You !
Recommended