Incentives and Monitoring the AKIS in The Netherlands

1. Incentives and Monitoring the AKIS in The Netherlands KrijnPoppe & PETER KEET

2. the AKiS in the Netherlands Innovation Network (ministry), Transforum: innovation experiments and Networks (e.g. Milkacadmey) Commodity boards: co-finance Wageningen University and Research centre: university, innovation driven applied research and 2 experimental stations University Utrecht – Veterinary science TNO (-Applied Food Research) Extension service (privatised), agribusiness – advise and accounting offices Green Knowledge Coop for innovation Several Institutes to support policy making (RIVM – Public Health and Environmental issues; PBL (Research on Environment and Nature management); Amsterdam University-SOW (World food system) and comparable international organisations (OECD, FAO, IFPRI etc) EU: SCAR, FP7, ERA-networks, JPI Agricultural Schools (managed by Ministry of Agriculture) Highly educated farmers

3. Incentives for Universities • Incentives for academic science at university level (how are they evaluated, what makes them happy) • Funded by number of students (enrolled and graduated) • Evaluated by scientific quality (especially number of papers in peer reviewed journals) • Recent change: evaluation now includes the issue of valorisation • How and on which criteria is money allocated to agricultural departments of universities? • Historical money flow • Number of students enrolled and graduated • Within the university: based on the ‘chair group plan’ by the rector, guided by the strategic planning (to be checked for details –PK)

4. Incentives for Applied research • Incentives for applied research, e.g. state research institutes (how are they evaluated, what makes them happy) • strategic research: government funding at program-level • Innovation research programs, statutory tasks, policy oriented research: project funding • Funding from other funds (commodity boards, other governments, EU, private companies) • Content of research: innovation driven research questions (innovation linked to public issues). On which criteria is money allocated to these institutes? • Based on content (which research is needed), in the form of a subsidy for a project; hardly any open tendering / competitive bidding.

5. Incentives for experimental stations • Incentives for experimental stations (how are they evaluated, what makes them happy) • Same as and integrated with strategic / applied research

6. Incentives for Extension • Incentives for the extension service (how are they evaluated, what makes them happy) • No state influence: these are private companies • Execution of Farm Advisory System CAP via vouchers? • Some extension programs on public issues (like environmental programs) have in the past been paid by the Ministry (current status to be checked –PK ?) • For extension organisations and accounting organisations the driver is profit from advice. Trust with the client plays an important role • For agri-business companies extension is linked with the supply or buying of products. Often implicit in the product price On which criteria is money allocated to agricultural extension? • Not relevant

7. Incentives for Ag. Education • Incentives for the agricultural schools (how are they evaluated, what makes them happy) • Number of students enrolled / intake • Number of students graduated • And as a consequence: • new types of studies (must be accredited) On which criteria is money allocated to agricultural schools? • Historical money flows • Number of students entering the schools • Number of students that graduate

8. ARE Incentives Coherent? • Are there incentives for cooperation between the subsystems mentioned in previous slides? • Research projects in applied research can spent 10% of the budget on dissemination and communication. • Some innovation driven research is managed / coordinated with independent taskforces (like on Organics, Multifunctional agriculture) • The Green Knowledge Cooperative has a budget to link education institutes and to link with research • Innovation Network (and Transform) link innovative ideas, entrepreneurs and knowledge institutes in specific innovation projects

9. ARE Incentives Coherent? • Could you reflect on the coherence of the incentive system in the AKIS for the different players – are incentives contributing to innovation? • to cooperation between the different players? • There is no clear incentive system for cooperation in the innovation-network. That it happens is due to: • Management of content / topics: the national agenda • Proximity and mutual benefits of cooperation • Special institutional coordination initiatives (Taskforces, Innovation Network, Green Knowledge Cooperative) and knowledge networks (like Milk Academy, Fisheries Innovation Platform) in coordination with applied /experimental research

10. ARE Incentives Coherent? • Has your country made changes in the incentive system in recent years, and why? • Have these changes been evaluated? • There have been no institutional changes in the AKIS since the forming of WUR in 1998 • Some (temporary) coordination mechanisms and incentives like Green Knowledge Cooperative, Transforum, Taskforces have been added • New incentives via innovation schemes like SBIR (Small Business Innovative Research), “Frontrunners-window” (for complaints on innovation-blocking regulation) • Some changes (like creation of Wageningen UR) have been evaluated (positively)

11. Monitoring and evaluation of AKIS Policy • Which indicators are used to monitor the AKIS ?• provide the indicators and statistics that were included in policy documents in the last years dealing with AKIS • Compared to other policy domains, there is relatively little monitoring and evaluation of the knowledge and innovation policy (Twijnstra & Gudde, 2010) • Usage of the knowledge generated is measured yearly • Main indicators: • Budgets • Evaluation reports university / institutes • Innovation monitoring at farm level (included in FADN) • Innovation food industry: R&D input, Doing business, Foreign Direct Investment, % new products, patents, labour productivity, sustainability monitoring

12. Monitoring and evaluation of AKIS Policy • Do you report to your parliament the performance of your AKIS ? • There is no special reporting on the state of the AKIS in a (bi-)annual report, as is done for some other policy domains to provide basic information to parliament • From time to time there are policy reviews or evaluations that are provided to parliament • Of course there is information on the AKIS and its cost in the yearly budget.

13. Monitoring and evaluation of AKIS Policy at EU Level • Any ideas for an outline of an AKIS monitoring system at EU level? • There is a European role, but limited – there is not a European AKIS, it are regional ones. • Objective of EU monitoring system should be clear: benchmarking for MS or social learning in transition at EU level for policy development or ??? • We should not go into obliged reporting but towards a common understanding and learning – link with research projects >> do we need a SCAR cwg or ERA network “Knowledge management for innovation policies”? • With attention to R&D input, AKIS organisation, smart specialisation in topics of innovation and benchmark innovation performance • Should include the food industry and rural development/social innovation