Learning from Policy Intelligence and Evaluation – ITPS’ Role in the Swedish Innovation System

1. Learning from Policy Intelligence and Evaluation– ITPS’ Role in the Swedish Innovation System Suzanne Håkansson Director, Policy Intelligence, ITPS Stockholm, May 24th, 2006

2. Outline • Why ITPS? • What is ITPS? • Learning from Foreign Based Policy Intelligence? • Example 1: Internationalization • Learning from Evaluation? • Example 2: Regional development policy and initiatives • Conclusions

3. Why ITPS? New role in the inno system • New ”Ministry of Growth” in 1998 • Parallel commissions on R&D financing and SME policy – desire to restructure and simplify agency flora • Identified need for independent evaluation, (foreign based) policy intelligence and structural analysis, including statistics • Established in 2001, like VINNOVA and the new research financing agencies • Part of a systems approach – other agencies should focus on analysis for their own needs • Merger of three; Swedish Institute for Regional Studies, Swetech (STATT), Nutek Analysis group

4. What is ITPS? • Mission: Provide facts and intelligence to the government and the growth policy community. Contribute to competent policymaking • Two policy areas: industrial policy and regional development policy (in practice also other policy areas) • Three methods: evaluation, statistics/growth analysis, foreign based policy intelligence • Four focus areas: • Internationalization • Business dynamics • Regional development • Technology development

5. Basic facts • Appr. 75 employees, out of which 24 abroad • Gov. grants: SEK 74 Million • Other grants/contributions: SEK 12-18 Million • Headquarters in Östersund • Offices in Stockholm, Washington D.C., Los Angeles, Brussels, Tokyo and Beijing. Establishment planned in India • Partnership with other agencies • Collaboration with research, link between science and policy, international perspective

6. Partners

7. Learning from foreign based policy intelligence • Internal challenges & success factors • Competence: fact-finding, analysis, communication • Lust & curiosity • Utilize unique contribution from people abroad and their networks: look ahead • Avoid getting stuck in simple benchmarking or descriptions of other countries • Ensure policy relevance and quality

8. Learning from foreign based policy intelligence • External challenges & success factors • Identify policy needs • Identify right people & embed ideas • Respect/handle people’s need to constantly invent the wheel … • Timing – match with financing • Provide information to your sources: give and take…

9. Example 1: Internationalization • Idea: originally statistics assignment from the Government in 1990s, need to know 1) the nature of internationalization, 2) its effects on Sweden • Reputation as reliable source opened for further studies inhouse, in international teams, with different methods • Linked up with international bodies like OECD, GAO, BEA etc. • Constant work to secure relevance (bilateral contacts, reference groups, financing) and ensure engagement • Review (quality, relevance, policy conclusions) • Communication (mode, target group, timing)

10. Example 1: Internationalization (cont.) • Huge issue, basis of innovation & industrial policy: (how) will Sweden be able to compete? What’s true? • What message will get the votes? • Identified needs: • Sort out concepts (what are we talking about?) • Collect basic facts and map trends • Identify policy issues (pressure to DO something) • Communication vital, public issue • Result: more competent as well as confident policy, basis for innovation policy but… • … do we focus the right issues? (internationalization per se instead of conditions for structural change)

11. Learning from evaluation • Challenges • Unclear policy objectives • Unclear policy border lines (industrial, regional, innovation) • Long time lags • Many circumstances, complexity • Lack of follow-up • Policy- rather than fact based initiatives • Program already finished – who’s there to learn? • Politicians’ need for action & visibility

12. Example 2: Evaluations of regional development policy and initiatives • Policy area with many lobbyists – great and constant demand for action • Little knowledge of results, each situation unique • Results: no visible effects, unclear objectives • Reactions: surprisingly positive from civil servants at Ministry of Industry, but less positive from politicians • Conclusions: Learning? Yes, perhaps, but it’s likely we’ll see similar initiatives…

13. Conclusions • Great need for and interest in analysis and policy intelligence • International perspective fundamental for a country like ours • Personal involvement from stakeholders essential – need to understand stakeholders incentives and objectives • A report alone won’t do the job! Communication! • Evaluations make people listen, but are often too late or suffer from unclear policy objectives • Unwillingness to learn from other countries, unless the domestic situation is in main focus • Clear policy conclusions desired, but also feared