Per Eriksson Director General VINNOVA – Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems

1. Policy learning in programmanagement, and program management in policy learning – THE CASE OF THE “VINNVÄXT”-PROGRAM Per Eriksson Director General VINNOVA – Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems

2. VINNOVA’s Mission • VINNOVA integrates research and development in technology, transport and working life. • VINNOVA´s mission is to promote sustainable growth by financing RTD and developing effective innovation systems. • The VINNVÄXT-program (”Winning growth”) is one important measure for supporting regional growth through dynamic innovation systems.

3. Aim of the presentation • An outline of the VINNVÄXT-programme • Designing the program • Implementing the program • Policy learning and potential for policy transfer – some reflections

4. What is VINNVÄXT? • A competition (3 calls, 8 winners so far) • The winners receive up to 1 MEUR per year for 10 years • Regional co-funding of at least 50% • A Triple Helix-based approach

5. 2001 2003 2006 2004 2002 2005 The VINNVÄXT timeline • PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT • International knowledge transfer • International benchmark • 5 Pilots • Process-support • Triple Helix management training • CALL 1 • Competition, € 30 million • 159 initial proposals • 25 development initiatives • 3 winners/7 runner-ups • The Dahmén Institute • - A process-support • organisation • -The national facilitators’ • Network • -Triple Helix management • training • CALL 2 • Competition, • € 30 million • 23 proposals • 5 winners 8 WINNERS On-going process support: networking, knowledge transfer, coaching, evaluation, etc • CALL 3 • Innovation systems in early stages • Competition, € 5 million • Process support for formation • 86 initial proposals • 10 development initiatives, 3 mo preparation • Triple Helix management training • 26 Final proposals • 5 potential winners 2006-8 • 1-2 full-scale winners 2008

6. ROBOTICS VALLEY Kiruna Pajala G ä llivare Jokkmokk Ö å vertorne Arjeplog verkalix Ö Kalix å Lule Sorsele Arvidsjaur Storuman Skellefte å Lycksele Vilhelmina Str ö msund Ume å Å re Ö rnsk ö ldsvik Kramfors Ö stersund Sundsvall H ä rjedalen Hudiksvall Ljusdal Bolln ä s Mora derhamn S ö Malung G ä vle Falun Vansbro Avesta Ludvika Uppsala Fagersta ster V ä å s K ö ping Eskilstuna Stockholm Ö rebro Katrineholm Nyk ö ping Lidk ping ö ö Norrk ping Link ö ping Sk vde ö Tran å s stervik V ä Bor å s nk ping J ö ö Vimmerby Gotland N ä ö ssj V ä rnamo Oskarshamn V ä ö xj Ljungby Kalmar Ä lmhult Karlshamn Karlskrona Kristianstad 8 winners, so far…

7. Most important activities today (for winners/non-winners) • Creating a structural platform in the region (changing R&D strategies, restructuring incubators, facilitating for commercialisation etc.) • Organisational development (new organisation, leadership, change management, strategy etc.) • Trying to mobilise actors internally (in the region) and externally (in the functional innovation system) to strengthen the initiative • Facilitating for new projects (demo- and commercialisation)

8. Politicians Politicians Academia Academia Industry Industry VINNOVA IS PICKING THE WINNERSWhat are we looking for? • Existence of a regional partnership and strong leadership with a shared vision and with an ability to prioritise resources/activities/efforts. • Universities, which profile their education and research, and the existence of researchers who are prepared to exploit their knowledge. • An industry with an ability to identify future growth areas and markets.

9. Why is VINNVÄXT a good example? • VINNVÄXT is a strong brand (useful for the initiatives for co-branding) • VINNVÄXT has attracted new types of applicants/competencies outside the ”traditional” network of applicants • VINNVÄXT demonstrates that relatively low funding can generate high return • Many of the initiatives that didn’t win still exists. Some of them are very ”well off” when it comes to financing from other sources – still with an high development potential. • Many of the initiatives are evolving as important hubs in their region/area of competence/innovation system • VINNVÄXT demonstrates the need for creating policy initiatives that are long term

10. General driving forces on a national level • A growing interest in new theories explaining growth, competitiveness and innovation (e.g. Nelson & Winter, Rosenberg, Lundvall, Porter) • Long-term economic growth in Sweden continued to be weak despite large investments in R&D (i.e. an increasing awareness that returns from Swedish R&D investments must be higher) • A growing awareness on the need for policy coherence and co-ordination (a systems perspective)

11. General driving forces on a public authority level • VINNOVA was a new public authority with a ”freedom” for testing new programs etc. • A Director-General with experience from different Triple Helix spheres as well as from a successful regional change process (Blekinge/Karlskrona and ”Telecom City”). • A number of competent, embedded individuals (staff) interested in developing new methods for supporting regional innovation systems for growth.

12. Policy learning – designing VINNVÄXT (1) The importance of: • having a strategy for communication (i.e. the importance of branding); • using a unifying concept and a common value-system (Triple Helix); • long term activities (10 years) for attracting ”new” types of applicants (actor constellations) and new types of competences (e.g. experts and middle management from industry); • the partnership approach – VINNOVA not only act as a program evaluator, also as a supportive partner; • internal workshops (and an initial ”open” climate for discussion); • international benchlearning rather than ”mechanical benchmarking”; • pilots (i.e. testing a model by interactive learning between the public authority and the initiatives).

13. Policy learning – designing VINNVÄXT (2) • Policy learning from international benchlearning and the pilots: • The importance of using calls (”If regions are to be competitive, why not let them compete”?); • The importance of promoting regional leadership; • The importance of using panels (consisting of actors from all parts of Triple Helix ) when selecting prospects and winners; • The importance of providing extensive support to potential applicants and the winners.

14. Policy learning – on the RIS-initiative level • Learning by writing • The ability to use different types of analyses, forecasts, indicators etc. as strategic tools and means for communication internally, within the initiative, and externally (i.e. ”learning by writing”) • Learning by fighting • The ability to define roles, areas of activity and special interests and in that process not shy away from conflicts but rather trying to solve them by creating new solutions etc. (i.e. ”learning by fighting”)

15. Policy learning – implementing VINNVÄXT The importance of • creating a structural platform for learning (e.g. by initiating interactive research, workshops); • continuous process support (e.g. courses in Triple Helix management, coaching and tools for self-evaluation); • follow-ups and assessment in dialogue; • using independent international evaluators not embedded in the regional or national milieu; • having the ability to re-engineer the program (i.e. to learn and ”un-learn”).

16. The most important lessons to learn from the VINNVÄXT-experience • The existence of a strong regional leadership promoting renewal • A shared vision (strategic concept) within a specific area of growth • A functional definition of the region • The development of robust research and innovation environments • The development of strategies and resources for learning • Knowledge and insight into business and development logic within the specific area of growth • Strong commitment on the part of the companies • The importance of a long term approach

17. Policy learning – challenges • Changing mindset takes time • Personal mobility within Triple Helix must increase since VINNVÄXT indicates that it facilitates double-loop policy learning and the use of policy learning as an integrating mechanism? • Policy learning by ”fighting” (the existing resistance) must be facilitated. A prerequisite for renewal. • Methods for finding and measures for supporting embryonic innovation systems must be developed • Successful policy learning is lesson-drawing across (1) time (i.e. own experience) (2) space (other regions) and (3) system (i.e. policy transfer to other sectors). (1) seems by far the easiest and the most common

18. County Council • Municipalities • Policy networks WHO • New Triple helix formations for collective action • Ministry of Industry • Low level of policy transfer to other ministries • VINNOVA and other growth or innovation orientated authorities (e.g ISA, NUTEK) • Collective action for innovation and economic growth • Distinctpolicylearning within certain departments • No or fragmented learning in the entire authority • Systemic policy • learning • Anecdotal and fragmentated policy learning WHAT • No visible effects • Positive image of VINNOVA • Distorted view of VINNOVA’s core business • EFFECTS • Focus on growth, in-novation and compe-titveness. • Asystemicperspective • Long-term perspective – from project to process • See above • The formation of strategic and systemic Regional Innovation System’s Initiatives. • Strong vertical policy learning (up and down) • Strong horisontal policy learning • No vertical policy learning (up) • Strong vertical policy learning (down) • Some horisontal policy learning • POLICY LEARNING • No vertical policy learning • No horisontal policy learning • Strong vertical policy learning (up and down) • Strong horisontal policy learning Government Public Authority Regional Government Regional innovation systems Policy learning – Conclusions