Professor Svetan Ratchev NanoCom Project Coordinator University of Nottingham

1. Overcoming Barriers to Commercialisation of Nanotechnology Research.Policy Advice Framework at EC, National and Regional levels Professor Svetan Ratchev NanoCom Project Coordinator University of Nottingham

2. NanoCom - Motivation • Investment in Nanotechnology related research by EU Framework programmes in excess of €2Billion • Studies show critical gaps in commercialising results*: • A very low proportion (only 3,5%) of global nanotechnology venture capital is invested in Europe. • Despite public funding which is on a par with the US, Europe is lagging behind in the number of nanotechnology patents granted. • Industrial investment in nanotechnology is also only half that of the US and Japan. * Commercialisation of Nanotechnology – Key Challenges, Tom Crawley, Spinverse, http://www.spinverse.com/documents/NanotechCommercialisation_Helsinki_March07.pdf

3. NanoCom Vision • ....contribute to bridging the gap between lab based and industrial applications in nanotechnologyby creating a European wide approachandmechanisms for lowering the barriers and spreading best open innovation practices for rapid commercialisation and investment in innovative nanotechnologydriven products… Theme: NMP-2009-1.2-5 Grant Agreement: 247967 Start Date: 01 Dec 2009 Duration: 36 months Project Co-ordinator: University of Nottingham, UK

4. NanoCom Partners

5. Support for NANOfutures

6. NanoCom Approach – Final Output • Publication of a Strategic Roadmap,Policy Guidelines and Commercialisation Strategy to support the EU and national governments in increasing successful commercialisation of nanotechnology research.

7. Commercialisation readiness assessment TRL TRL • Scale based on 4 components 9 9 8 5 5 8 7 4 4 7 6 3 3 6 5 2 2 5 1 1 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Manufacturing Capability Readiness Level (MCRL) Organisational Capability Maturity Level (CML) Investment Readiness Level (IRL)

8. Open Innovation: The NanoCom approach • … customisable and adaptable Open Innovation Model and Methodology… source: Bayer Technology Services GmbH source: RWTH

9. Policy Advice - Purpose • Draw upon analysis of: • barriers to and • best practices for commercialisation of nanotechnology. • Develop set of policy planning materials with specific advice covering: • future investment strategies, • mechanisms for engagement with key industrial sectors, • new measures for efficient technology and knowledge transfer in to commercially successful applications. • Go beyond state-of-the-art and current opinions. • Provide both insightful and leading recommendations at EC, member states and regional levels. • Embedded involvement of key stakeholders to ensure validity.

10. Policy Scope • Development of recommendations based on identified policy areas. • Spheres of influence: • Europe • EU funded - invested in results • Actions as a result of recommendations • ‘Top down’ policy • National • Relevance of specific recommendations • ‘Top down’ and ‘bottom up’ policies • Regional • Where nanotechnology is a priority • Recognition of support from clusters • ‘Local level’ policy

11. Policy Framework • Challenge led agenda focussed on the analysis of barriers and best practices. • Three phased iterative process:

12. Policy Inputs Identified barriers & best practices Cultural background Statistical analysis Economic priorities Natural resources and skills base Stakeholder interviews On-line Surveys Constructive Creative thinking Policy maker Interviews Current legislation/regulation Open forum discussions Societal & Environmental needs

13. Identified Policy Areas by Domain 2 policy topics 3 policy topics 5 policy topics 6 policy topics • 16 key barriers identified across the four domains.

14. Manufacturing • Efficiency • Cost Policy TopicsManufacturing Domain • Manufacturing • Lack of available access to adapted equipment necessary for pre-production development • Lack of investment in full production capability (€1-5M)

15. Manufacturing • Efficiency • Cost Policy Topic Manufacturing Example • Lack of available access to adapted equipment necessary for pre-production development • Commercialisation Barriers • New business applications of MNT can require specialised or enhanced equipment for production that is either immature or need to be adapted. • MNT are Key enabling technologies and are often required at an early stage in the product development chain. • Capital equipment for manufacturing products is expensive, and time consuming to establish, and often requires highly specialised personnel. • SME's have difficulty in raising the money or want to start production quickly.

16. Manufacturing • Efficiency • Cost Policy Topic Manufacturing Example • Lack of available access to adapted equipment necessary for pre-production development • Key Recommendations • Promote exploitation of suitable existing open access or commercially available pilot plant facilities through the creation of an ‘European Directory’ of such capabilities. • Identify and fill gaps in the above provision by promoting strategic publically funded open access facilities delivering key enabling pilot plant capabilities e.g. nanomaterials & dispersions, MEMS, Thin Films. • Propose amendments to existing funding mechanisms: • Increase flexibility for SME’s to further participation e.g. FP Capacities programme or ERDF. • Target and support the development of manufacturing infrastructures suitable for full scale production of proven nanomaterials or nano-enabled products.

17. Policy TopicsTechnological Domain Technological • Reproducibility • Reliability & Durability • Technological • Lack of investment in technical process control and development • Lack of resources for, and awareness of, up-scaling technologies • High cost of testing of new nano-enabled products for the market

18. Policy Topic Technological Example Technological • Reproducibility • Reliability & Durability • Lack of investment in technical process control and development • Commercialisation Barriers • Fundamental physical production processes are not well characterised and understood, especially at the nanoscale. • (Offline-metrology) Measurement and characterisation equipment and testing facilities are expensive to buy and to use for SMEs. A wide array of techniques are needed to best develop and define new products. • Complexity of measurement issues precludes easy translation into on-line measurement. Integrated process control parameters cannot be easily employed so lengthening development cycles.

19. Policy Topic Technological Example Technological • Reproducibility • Reliability & Durability • Lack of investment in technical process control and development • Key Recommendations • Integrate thought leadership from European participation in enabling nano standards development into process/production metrology development. • Ensure development of metrology, standards, modelling tools and the coordination of existing innovators are supported and driven by application need, not just high-end instrument development. • Promote the development of skilled technician workforce capable of using sophisticated metrology and implementing advanced manufacturing techniques. • Disseminate developments widely via training programmes, trade associations, ETPs, ...

20. Policy TopicsMarketing & Strategy Domain • Marketing & Strategy • Lack of agreement between regulatory environment, consumer organisations and technical community • Lack of standard definitions, test methods and guidance documents for industry • Lack of specific applications and new markets for nanotechnologies • Cautious public attitudes and perceptions for nano-enabled products • Lack of commercialisation expertise with nano community Marketing & Strategy • Regulations & Standards • Market Opportunities

21. Policy Topic Marketing & Strategy Example • Lack of commercialisation expertise within the nano community • Commercialisation Barriers • A general lack of entrepreneurial awareness in the EU. • Technologists with the best know-how and access to new technologies lack sufficient business skills to successfully commercialise. • SME's have enabling technologies with a lot of different applications and markets, but lack business focus. • Technologies presented by academics or SME's are unproven or too risky to adopt or invest in (lack of understanding of customer needs) • Customers usually interested in performance gains as opposed to completely new innovation (incremental innovation vs radical). Marketing & Strategy • Regulations & Standards • Market Opportunities

22. Policy Topic Marketing & Strategy Example • Lack of commercialisation expertise within the nano community • Key Recommendations • Assistance in the training of entrepreneurs to effectively develop business models and pitch to investors and potential customers. • Assistance in identification and utilisation of potential public piloting environments to fund proof of concept work and show rooms (e.g. nano room in a hospital). • Support for improving business skills: • Basic innovation related know-how for graduating academics; new European academic civilization • Continuous flow of business skills courses • Support for mentoring programs: • Serial entrepreneurs and starting entrepreneurs • Corporate directors and/or SMEs Marketing & Strategy • Regulations & Standards • Market Opportunities

23. Policy TopicsInvestment & Organisational Domain • Investment & Organisational • Lack of coverage, readiness level continuity and timeliness of funding schemes • Lack of suitable protection and exploitation of intellectual property • Difficulty in attracting enough private investment funding for nanotechnologies • Lack of high quality collaborations by SMEs • Lack of good technology transfer mechanisms and incentives • Lack of workforce training and readiness Investment & Organisational • Return on Investment • Innovation Infrastructure

24. Policy Topic Investment & Organisational Example • Lack of coverage, readiness level continuity and timeliness of funding schemes • Commercialisation Barriers • Funding schemes do not cover complete commercialisation readiness scale. • Geographical discrepancy, diversity and complexity of public support measures decrease their efficiency at EU level • Exploitation of research has limited time slot for SME’s, funding calls deemed to be lacking and perception of public support as complicated by SMEs. • Individual organisations satisfied with relatively small amounts of finance (<€50,000) to cover market feasibility studies/proof of concept - these funds cannot be raised easily. Investment & Organisational • Return on Investment • Innovation Infrastructure

25. Policy Topic Investment & Organisational Example • Lack of coverage, readiness level continuity and timeliness of funding schemes • Key Recommendations • Promotion and increase in adaptive and flexible funding mechanisms, based on a continuous open mode, for the specific commercialisation of nanotechnologies (provision of schemes which are attractive for SMEs). • Review sources of funding for TRL 6+ during the Horizon 2020 formulation. Development of new strategies and funding models to overcome significant barriers (e.g. tax breaks and incentives, regional funds (ERDF), private investment funds). • Prepare for the introduction of new funding mechanisms with smaller budgets (<€200k) shorter delivery times (<9 Months) and smaller consortia(<3 partners) to support commercialisation of nanotechnologies, especially for SMEs. Investment & Organisational • Return on Investment • Innovation Infrastructure

26. Timeline

27. THANKYOU for www.nanocom-eu.org