Conceptual framework

1. Conceptual framework Stefano Tarantola

2. challenges Three crucial challenges for the scientific community to establish a theoretical framewirk of good quality 1) check the feasibility of the effect of the proposed framework in relation to different dimensions (technical, economic, social, political, cultural) and different scales: from local (technical coefficients), to large (trend analysis and benchmarks to compare trajectories of development)

3. challenges 2) address several legitimate (and often contrasting) perspectives found among the stakeholders on how to structure the problem 3) handle in a credible way the unavoidable degree of uncertainty (or genuine ignorance) associated to any multi-scale, multi-dimensional analysis of complex systems (Giampietro et al, 2004)

4. The challenge To integrate a broad set of (probably conflicting) points of view And reduce the complexity in a measurable form Example: non-measurable issues (eg sustainability) need to be replaced by intermediate objectives whose achievement can be observed and measured.

5. essential aspect for the use of a composite indicator is � the existence of a community of peers (individuals, regions, countries) willing to accept the composite indicator as common yardstick and based on their mutual acceptance of the theoretical framework.

6. However good is the scientific basis for a given composite indicator, its acceptance relies on negotiation

7. Two examples Innovation index 2005 e-business index for eEurope 2005 and for i2010

8. Framework for innovation Innovation is identified as the process leading to the adoption and diffusion of new technologies, aimed at creating new processes, products and services. Adoption represents the final stage of an invention, diffusion focuses on the supply of new goods and services to the consumer. In this context, Innovation is the mean to achieve competitiveness in the framework of the revised Lisbon agenda.

9. Framework for innovation (2) The general framework, the choice of the conceptual groups and the selection of the indicators have been carried out in consultation with a panel of experts from different Member States: the GSO = Group of Senior Officials

10. Framework for innovation (3) The Summary Innovation Index is composed of two main groups, Innovation Input and Innovation Output. The relevant elements of innovation Input are captured by three sub-groups of indicators:

11. Framework for innovation (4) The relevant elements of innovation Input are captured by three sub-groups of indicators: Innovation drivers, to measure the structural conditions required for innovation potential Knowledge creation, to measure the investments on human factors and on R&D activities, considered as the key elements for a successful knowledge-based economy Innovation & entrepreneurship, to measure the efforts towards innovation at the microeconomic level

12. Framework for innovation (5) The relevant elements of innovation Output are captured by two sub-groups of indicators: Application, to measure the performance, expressed in terms of labour and business activities, and their value added in innovative sectors Intellectual property, to measure the achieved results in terms of successful know how, especially referred to high-tech sectors.

13. Framework for innovation (6) The choice of the indicators for the description of the phenomenon of innovation has been based on two main criteria: Policy relevance, with the aim of identifying indicators that are meaningful for decisional processes and reflective of the political orientations (i.e. Lisbon objectives); Conceptual resonance in respect to the phenomenon object of study; in other words ability of the formalised model to represent the issue.

14. Selection of indicators Redundancy: when 2 indicators are found to be redundant, which means that they give the same information, it is recommended to select only one. Political impact: when 2 indicators are highly correlated and convey strong political messages, they can be both included in the final list. Availability: indicators which prove to be available for a large number of countries, and which can be extracted from regularly updated databases are recommended. First comer privilege: when two indicators are redundant, it is recommended to select the one that was already included in the EIS 2004.

15. Second example: e-business index for eEurope 2005 and for i2010

16. Framework for e-business Aim: definition and calculation of a composite indicator to monitor country progress in the implementation of the e-Europe 2005 Action Plan... The Council Resolution in 2003 provided a list of the component indicators. Example of a lacking conceptual framework

18. Framework for e-business The list of component indicators adopted by the Council is not well structured: partially overlapping of the category Adoption and Use. Some experts have criticised the composition of the list Some dimensions are missing like eg. connection costs, firm management by ICT. Human capital is under-represented Member States have always expressed skepticism about this index A modification of the composition of the list would have requires negotiations with the Council (impossible!)

19. Framework for e-business A new conceptual framework for e-business has now to be established for i2010: European Information Society 2010 (ICT phenomena have quick dynamics) Negotiations with task forces and working groups of policy makers have been (and will be) carried out in various areas of information society and in various sectors of enterprises (e-business W@tch)

20. Framework for e-business Preliminary actions: Consultations with stakeholders for the definition of the Information society strategy up to 2010 ? Commission Communication on challenges A survey has been carried out by Eurostat among policy makers in order to identify core indicators for e-business in 2010

21. Framework for e-business Key policy guidance issue is the revised Lisbon process, with a set of guidelines ( COM (2005) 141 final, 12.4.2005) 1. encourage the widespread use of ICT in public services, SMEs and households; 2. fix the necessary framework for the related changes in the organisation of work in the economy; 3. promote a strong European industrial presence in the key segments of ICT; 4. encourage the development of strong ICT and content industries, and well functioning markets; 5. ensure the security of networks and information, as well as convergence and interoperability in order to establish an information area without frontiers; 6. encourage the deployment of broad band networks��

22. Framework for e-business E-business: Capability of a company to engage in electronic transactions with the objective of increasing business competitiveness Adoption: efforts made by companies to invest in e-business and efforts made by countries to remove barriers Use: The concrete use of e-business tools by companies Impacts: the perceived impacts on the economy due to the change in working practices induced by e-business.

24. Framework for e-business