International Collaboration of CRCsInterim Report- COMPERA Ljubljana

Patries BoekholtErik ArnoldJon van Til

16 september 2009

2

This presentation

• Overview of what we have done so far

• Main results from literature review, survey and interviews

• Summary of conclusions

• Our proposal for six case studies at CRC level

3

Overview of our approach and planning

Preparation & Kick-offPreparation & Kick-off

Generic study Desktop study and telephone interviews

Generic study Desktop study and telephone interviews

Questionnaire to CRCsQuestionnaire to CRCs

Interim Report & Meeting 2Interim Report & Meeting 2

Case StudiesCase Studies

Synthesis, Final Report & Meeting 3

Synthesis, Final Report & Meeting 3

May

June-August

September

September/

October

November/December

4

Method

• Survey

• 191 Invitations to CRC managers in the COMPERA

programmes.

• Response: n=42; response rate: 22%.

• Response rate low in Slovenia (0%), Germany (8%), and

Northern-Ireland (10%)

• For the other countries, generally a good response rate

• Interviews

• Interviews with programme managers

• We were not able to contact all managers.

5

Attention to different levels of actors

National & RegionalFunding Agencies

Private sector participants

Public sector participants

Competence Research Centres

Private sector participants

Public sector participants

Competence Research Centres

National & RegionalFunding Agencies

CRC programmes CRC programmes

Country A Country X, Y, Z

6

Trends in internationalisation of S&T policy• Spurred by discussions of the Lisbon agenda and

particularly ERA• EU Commission is pleading for better coordination in

S&T policy:• Debate on Joint Programming• Debate on ‘Opening-Up’ of national programmes• Via ERA-type measures such as ERA-NETs, but also Joint

Technology Initiatives• Political support more clear for basic research and

‘societal challenges’ than for industrially oriented research and public-private CRC type centres

• It is not a European development alone• Non-European CRC programmes starting to include foreign

partners• BRICS are active in setting up more S&T collaborations

7

External drivers for increased policy attention• The emergence of the BRIC countries and particularly China as a country with a

large research and technological development capacity that is becoming recognised for meeting high international quality standards

• The increased political debate and urgency of global challenges such as climate change, health issues and sustainable energy resources

• The globalisation of R&D, which is not a new phenomenon, but it is becoming more visible particularly in industrial research and also in the world wide mobility of researchers

• Particularly in Europe, general demographic developments and the decreasing share of graduates in science and engineering have made the shortage of research talent very urgent; STI collaboration can be used to attract talent from partner countries

• The ERA type debates in Europe

Internationalisation of CRC programmes

9

Internationalisation in COMPERA countries

• In all but one case (Germany) no explicit and codified S&T internationalisation strategy

• Austria, Estonia and Sweden allow foreign participants (including funding), Flanders through subcontracting only, Germany allows membership without funding, for others it is not allowed

• Still political resistance against funding flows going abroad

• Internationalisation a secondary role, partly because many programmes are very young

10

Barriers at programme level

• Absence of policy (and political) incentives to co-operate internationally

• Lack of funding

• Fear of losing competitiveness advantage

• Different national framework conditions (incl. IPR)

• Practical issues

11

However, CRC-managers feel supported….

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Totally agree Agree Neutral Disagree Totally disagree

Our national (or regional) CRC funding organisation is very supportive of international co-operation of our CRC

International collaboration at CRC-level

13

Modes of collaboration

69%

59%

41% 41%38%

31% 31%28%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Cross-borderresearch

programmeswith multi-

national interests

Mobility offoreign actors(researchers)between CRCs

Opening up of aspecific researchprogramme toparticipants ofother countries,

i.e. allowingforeign

participants in anational

programme

Bilateral co-operation withforeign CRCs

Allowing fullparticipation offoreign actors in

the CRC

Networks ofCRCs: co-operation

between themanagement ofCRCs in various

countries

Joint activities inthird countries

(Non-EUcountries)

The brokerageand partnering of

individualmembers from

CRCs in differentcountries

14

Drivers for international collaboration

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

New sources of knowledge on how to manage a competencecentre

Access to / training of qualified human capital

New and additional sources of thematic knowledge

Increase critical mass

New funding sources

Become involved in international development projects

Opportunities to raise quality of the work undertaken

Become more attractive as a location for research centres andmultinationals

New market opportunities

Very important Important Unimportant Very unimportant

15

Desired collaboration partners

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

With foreign CRCs

With foreign companies

With foreign researchinstitutes

Very important Important Unimportant Very unimportant n/a

16

For who is collaboration important?

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

NGOs

Public research institutes

Private research institutes

Large companies

SMEs

Academic research groups

Very important Important Unimportant Very unimportant N/A

17

Planned cooperation modes in next 5 years

82%

69%64%

46% 46% 44%36%

31%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

Cross-borderresearch

programmeswith multi-

nationalinterests

Mobility offoreign actors(researchers)between CRCs

Bilateral co-operation withforeign CRCs

Fullparticipation offoreign actors

in the CRC

Joint activitiesin third

countries (non-EU countries)

Networks ofCRCs: co-operation

between themanagementof CRCs in

variouscountries

Opening up ofa specificresearch

programme toparticipants ofother countries

Internationalbrokerageservices

18

Selection criteria for partners

5.81

4.78 4.69 4.694.25

2.76

1.45

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Sector /technological

themes

Key universities /research institutes

in the CRC

Key companies inthe CRC

Excellence ofscience in the

targeted countries

Potential marketopportunities in thetargeted countries

Geographicalproximity

Other determinants

19

Geographical direction of collaboration

85%

77%

49%

33%

15% 13% 10%5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

EU-wide Neighbouringcountries

Non-EU: US Non-EU: Asia Non-EU: South-America

Non-EU:countries informer USSR

Non-EU:Mediterraneancountries (incl.North Africa,Middle East)

Non-EU: Africa

20

Barriers to international cooperation for CRC-managers

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Language barriers

Academia are not willing to co-operate

Private sector members are notwilling to co-operate

Distance /time zone barriers

National programme regulations donot allow international co-operation

IPR Regulations

Difficulties finding required partners

Constraints in budget and/or time

Large barrier Barrier Small barrier Not at all a barrier

21

Main conclusions

• International collaboration not yet common across CRC (programmes)

• At programme level: lack of political support main barrier

• At CRC level: funding/time, finding partners, IPR

• Mostly using international research programmes as mode to overcome the funding barrier

• Foreign research institutions most popular as partner

• CRC-CRC cooperation not very high on the agenda

22

We used a set of criteria for the selection of case studies:

• The number of international co-operations;

• The visibility of the co-operations to the programme managers;

• Good geographical spread;

• Mix of virtual and physical CRCs;

• Mix of regional and national CRCs;

• Mix of different instruments

• Mix of EU co-operations and co-operations with third countries (i.e. extra-EU co-operation)

• The extent to which CRCs are internationalised.

23

Suggested case studies

• K2 Mobility Centre in Austria (Automotive)• VIB in Flanders (Life Sciences)• ELIKO in Estonia (ICT)• AIDICO in Valencia (Construction)• Sweden GigaHerz Centre• BalticNet Plasmatec in Germanny (Plasma

Technology)

24

Thank you

Technopolis Group has offices in Amsterdam, Ankara, Brighton, Brussels, Paris, Stockholm, Tallinn and Vienna.