1 / 24

MONIT Project Background

Innovation Governance in Ireland: the problem of coherence in a newly emerging NIS Rachel Hilliard CISC Seminar 11 November 2004. MONIT Project Background. 1995 - 2001 OECD project on National Innovation Systems redirecting innovation policy  interactive model

ryder
Download Presentation

MONIT Project Background

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Innovation Governance in Ireland: the problem of coherence in a newly emerging NISRachel HilliardCISC Seminar 11 November 2004

  2. MONIT Project Background • 1995 - 2001 OECD project on National Innovation Systems • redirecting innovation policy  interactive model • Is it feasible that national governments and their policy making modes can remain largely the same?

  3. Project Methodology • 15 partner countries – cross comparison • Innovation policy governance • Case study policy areas: Info Society; regional; environmental  learn from efforts to develop national capabilities for innovation policy governance.

  4. Innovation Policy Governance 1. STI performance 2. Policy challenges 3. Position of STI policy 4. National capabilties for innovation governance

  5. Irish STI Performance

  6. STI Profile Strong • Employment in med/high tech manuf./services, inward FDI, S&E graduates, share innovative firms in services and manuf., labour productivity; value added Weak Patents, BERD, government funding of bus. R&D, publications, basic research, share of R&D in overall budget, business funded R&D at labs and HEI, tertiary education, participation in life long learning, knowledge investments, Profile: Strong company system, good overall performance, weak on knowledge system

  7. Historical Context 1990 largest per capita national debt in the world unemployment and emigration; stagnation  late industrialiser  stimulate the development of an NIS 1990s unprecedented growth, convergence 1993 GNP/capita = 74% of EU average 2000 GNP/capita = 97% of EU average

  8. Problems of Convergence • 4th in WEF Growth Competitiveness Rankings 2003 30th in Growth Competitiveness Rankings 2000 40% of trade = research intensive RTI generated abroad  technology taker

  9. Technology Balance of Payments (as percentage of GDP), 2001

  10. Profile of Industry and Innovation 330 firms research performers 300-400 firms minimum capability 4000 firms low technology SMEs BERD: 73% of EU and 57% of OECD average 100 firms account for 80% of total R&D spend by business Continuous R&D performers: 20% of MNCs 10% of indigenous

  11. Policy Challenges  persistent challenges since 1982 • competitiveness of indigenous industry • embed MNC industry  sharpened focus develop a knowledge driven economy • R&D based MNC activity • high tech clustered indigenous industry

  12. Challenges  STI Policy  capacity of research institutions to conduct relevant research  attractiveness to mobile MNC R&D  research capacity of Irish firms  pool of high-quality, technical graduates

  13. Policy Mix: National Development Plan 2000-2006

  14. Is there coherence in the Irish NIS? 1996 White Paper proposed STI coordination mechanisms 2002 Commission to examine develop proposals for innovation policy coordination mechanisms 2000- Largest investment in STI in history 2006 of the state lacks coordination

  15. 1996 White Paper on Science and Technology need for (i) strong elements in NIS (ii) interactions between elements • Cabinet committee to consider STI supra-departmental STI budget junior minister linking two key departments proposals never implemented • no common commitment to STI investment • culture of departmental autonomy too strong

  16. 2002 ICSTI Commission on Policy Framework • Report under review by Government • Findings unpublished • chief scientific advisor independent of any department • cabinet committee to set priorities • disagreement about location/’control’ • 2004 proposals finally implemented

  17. PRTLI Education & Science funding of universities’ own research strategies collaboration between universities infrastructure-focus SFI Enterprise Trade & Employment funding of excellent research in nationally strategic areas collaboration with industry research based Ireland’s €1.3b STI Investment

  18. Implications • initiated as 2 unconnected policies PRTLI  private donor aiding 3rd level SFI  strategic identification of ICT/BioT • timing  infrastructure decisions preceded research teams awards • differing budget commitments SFI maintained budget when PRTLI ‘paused’

  19. Why does the Irish system lack coherence? • maturity? • political culture? • commitment to the innovation agenda?

  20. Maturity  newly evolving NIS • first STI policy – 1996 • first significant investments in 2000 STI for 2000-2006 €2.5b STI for 1994-1999 €0.5b

  21. Political Culture? ‘everyone in Ireland believes in coordination, but nobody wants to be coordinated’ • Department of Finance - strong formal/actual control • Departmental Autonomy • Limited use of cross-cutting approach to policy  only in response to high-profile priorities (crisis?) eg: infrastructure; drugs

  22. Commitment? • Narrow commitment to the innovation agenda:  Enterprise Trade and Employment Ministry = the innovation champion  logic of NIS approach has limited acceptance  failure to persuade wider polity of (i) priority; (ii) potential gains; (iii) costs of failure

  23. Any evidence of good coordination? • Around specific external/common issues  Bottom-up work on STI framework conditions: contracts; IP terms; researcher career paths  implications of the Lisbon Agenda  European Research Area • 2004 1. Chief Scientific Advisor 2. Knowledge Society Foresight

  24. Conclusions • Administrative culture • Political imperative for innovation agenda • Late industrialiser – emerging NIS • Future developments?

More Related