1 / 0

Assessment of the implementation of the Small Business Act for Europe

Assessment of the implementation of the Small Business Act for Europe. Preliminary results 22 May 2013. Agenda. Background Methodology and process Overview of preliminary results Key issues for discussion. Background. Euromed -Charter/SBA Assessment.

thor
Download Presentation

Assessment of the implementation of the Small Business Act for Europe

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. Assessment of the implementation of the Small Business Act for Europe

    Preliminary results 22 May 2013
  2. Agenda Background Methodology and process Overview of preliminary results Key issues for discussion
  3. Background
  4. Euromed-Charter/SBA Assessment Objective: To assess the level of implementation of key principles for SME and entrepreneurship policy Framework based on the Small Business Act for Europe; Focus on policy design and implementation; Comparison across countries and time; Performance benchmarked against EU and OECD good practices Analytical tool: the SME Policy Index; already applied to: In the Western Balkans and Turkey (2007, 2009, 2012) In the Eastern Partnership countries (2012) In the Southern Mediterranean (MED countries) (2008, ongoing) In the ASEAN (ongoing)
  5. Euromed-Charter/SBA Partners Regional Scope: ALG, EGY, LEB, MOR, ISR, JOR, PA, TUN International partner organisations: Assessment and coordination by the European Commission, the European Training Foundation and the OECD; in consultation with the EIB Med partners: National coordinators are the main contact point and facilitator in each country; Government agencies and bodies facilitate information and perform self-assessments; Private sector representative organisations provides substantial input throughout the process Local expertssupport assessment and collect data and information;
  6. Methodology
  7. The “assessment grid” The Index is built on a number of dimensions organised according to the principles of the Small Business Act; Policy dimensions are subdivided into sub-dimensions and those in turn include a number of analytical indicators; Progress is assessed on the basis of a five-step policy development path at the level of individual indicator;
  8. The SME Policy Index methodology
  9. Evolution First Assessment in 2008, based on the Euromed Charter for Enterprise Current (2013) assessment based on the SBA for Europe Good level of comparability between the two assessments, as the majority of the indicators have remained unchanged
  10. Time-frame January-March: Launching of the assessment process. Country team established, local advisors selected March- May: Country assessments conducted 21 May to 18 June: Presentation of preliminary country results at bilateral meetings 25 June: Presentation Meeting of national coordinators and review of results at regional level Mid- October: Finalisation of the results First quarter 2014: Publication and launch of the regional report
  11. Objective The objective of this meeting is to discuss specific indicators and to compare the evaluation of the country and the independent assessment according to four criteria: Scores that are very different from 2008 Scores that vary between the country and the independent assessment Low scores Scores where more information is required
  12. Israeli SBA assessment partners National Coordinator: Dr. Nir Ben-Aharon, Ministry of Economy OECD advisors and key advisors: Dr. Dan Kauffman and his team; ETF key advisors Process launched on 5 March 2013
  13. Overview of preliminary results
  14. Highlights of the SME sector in Israel Over 380.000 enterprise active, 99% SMEs; Enterprise class structure similar to the EU, but lower M-Es representation; Healthy churning rate, 50% survival rate at the 4th year;
  15. Preliminary overall performance
  16. Key strengths and challenges
  17. Areas for improvements highlighted in the 2008 report Institutional framework: lack of strategy, limited coordination and fragmented implementation No systematic tackling of administrative burden
  18. Main policy improvements since 2008 Institutional framework: SME development strategy introduced, implementation under way Transformation of the SME Authority into the Small Business Agency, with clear mandate on policy coordination, advocacy and programme implementation
  19. Main policy improvements since 2008 Regulatory simplification: Work started on priority areas: business licence requirements, expedited business licence; Amendment to the VAT Act Steps to introduce systematic application of RIA
  20. Issues for Discussion
  21. Key challenges in SME policy Israel has developed a well structured and innovative SME policy framework; We observed an increased convergence towards the EU SBA framework, with Israel more advanced than the EU in areas such as support to innovative enterprises and access to finance for high-tech and high growth enterprises; Israel has still to catch-up on regulatory reform and administrative simplification
  22. Key challenges in SME policy Point of strength of the Israeli policy framework: Intense dialogue with the private sector and constructive public-private cooperation; Government action can focus on areas where its actions benefit most (i.e. promoting entrepreneurship in marginalised communities) Extensive network system supporting dynamic enterprises;
  23. Key challenges in SME policy Downside risks: Two speed enterprise sector: high-tech versus low tech, centre versus periphery, export oriented enterprises versus enterprises serving the domestic market. Growing missing middle syndrome: limited domestic market force company to choose between going international or staying small.
  24. Principle 2: ensure that honest entrepreneurs who have faced bankruptcy quickly get a second chance Key issues: Bankruptcy procedures: low score for “cost (% of the estate)” Second chance: low score for “Promoting positive attitude towards giving entrepreneurs a fresh start”
  25. Principle 3: Design rules according to the “think small first” principle Key issues: Low score for “Cost-benefit analysis of new enterprise legislation and regulation” (RIA)
  26. Principle 4: Streamlining public administration to be responsive to SME needs Key issues: Low score for “Official cost of obtaining the company registration certificate”, “Silence-is-consent” principle and “On-line registration” One-stop-shop, not really in place? divergence between the two assessments. Different current configuration of the registration/notification/compliance process, divergence between the two assessments.
  27. Principle 5: Adapting public policy tools to SME needs Key issues: Ensuring that payments are made on time –an issue that quite often SMEs are complying on, mainly on payments of municipals and public, non-governmental entities.   Availability of information on business service providers, what is provided by public or by private sector? divergence between the two assessments. Business incubators: Hi-tech oriented incubators versus non-hi-tech incubators. divergence between the two assessments. Online information for enterprises: what is the status of the AMBA portal? divergence between the two assessments.
  28. Principle 6: Facilitate SMEs’ Access to Finance and develop a legal and business environment supportive to timely payments in commercial transactions Key issues: Micro-finance: Unclear how the Micro-finance sector looks like. More information is needed on key players to determine the score. divergence between the two assessments. Private equity: Strong bias towards high-technology start-ups Financial literacy: where we stand by today? General legal framework versus specific law: leasing, risk capital, and capital market
  29. Principle 7: Help SMEs to benefit more from the opportunities offered by the single market Key issues: Low score for “Level of computerisation of procedures for foreign trade” Low score for “ Virtual one-stop-shop to deal with the formalities of foreign trade” Low score for “ Euro-Med inter-firm clusters and partnerships” Low score for “ Euro-Med networks of business support services” Enterprise Europe Network
  30. Principle 8: Promote the upgrading of skills and all forms of innovation Key issues: Budget provision for SME innovation–most innovation funds are spent by the Chief Science Office of the Ministry of Economy for technological innovation. For these funds, there are almost no distinctions between small and big companies Good performance of “Incubators serving innovative start-ups which are linked to technology content” What about supporting non technological innovation?
  31. Principle 9: Enable SMEs to turn environmental changes into opportunities Key issues: Low score for: “Promoting the use of environmental management systems and standards”
  32. Principle 10: Encourage and support SMEs to benefit from growth markets Key issues: Export promotion strategy: divergence between the two assessments
More Related