Complex Challenges – Innovative Cities (CCIC)

Complex Challenges – Innovative Cities (CCIC) Methodology GuidelinesPrepared by ARC Fund, Bulgaria Aberdeen, 10-11 May 2012

Methodology Objectives • Present basic review of scholarly and practitioners sources on innovation in the public sector. • Establish a common theoretical framework applicable to all partners' contexts for the understanding of innovation in and by the public sector. • Set the grounds for the elaboration of a model of public sector innovation, and explore all contingencies and supporting factors in the adoption of this model by each project partner. • Provide detailed guidance and instructions about inquiring into public sector innovation through the specific instruments provided in the CCIC proposal. • Detail recommendations for the implementation of each core task of Component 3 of CCIC, and ensure partners' commitment to the timely implementation of all activities. • Innovation policy recommendations to different levels of governance

Methodology – scope • Stakeholder mapping • Online survey - state-of-the-art questionnaire • Stakeholder interviews • Regional correspondents • Mapping of good practices – good practice template • Thematic groups • Study visits • Deep delegations • Transfer of good practices – transferability guide • Regional innovation plans • Report – policy recommendations

Methodology – timeline Dec’12 • May’12 – Finalisation of CCIC methodology, PP14 • May’12 - Stakeholder mapping, all PPs except PP14 • May’12 – Mapping of good practices, good practice template, all except PP14, PP14 • May - Aug’12 – Filling in the template of good practices, 5 GPs per region, all PPs except PP14 • Jul’12 - Online survey (state-of-the-art questionnaire), ~100 respondents per region, all PPs except PP14 • Jul’12 - Stakeholder interviews, 10 per region, all PPs except PP14 • Aug’12 - Regional correspondents produce reports on public innovation, LP • Sept’12 – Analytical report on state-of-art innovation in the public sector, PP14 • Sept’12 – DB with good practices, CP3 Leader • Sept’12 - Thematic group 1 on financial instruments, TG leaders and the TG members • Sept’12 – 13 local meetings, all except PP14 • Nov’12 – First study visit and reports - • Dec’12 – Finalisation of all outputs due by the end of the second period

Methodology – timeline Dec’12

Topics for Discussion within C3 • Stakeholder mapping • Mapping of good practices, good practice template • State-of-the-art questionnaire • Stakeholder interviews • Thematic groups

Stakeholder Mapping • the process of identifying ALL relevant institutions and officials, who would have an interest related to innovation in the public sector: • the role they have due to their position in advancing public sector innovation, • the way they are affected by the introduction of a public sector innovation; • the identification of each stakeholder's “interest” in the above terms, and in particular their interest in/from public sector innovation; • will allow each partner to prioritise the stakeholders which it will target in its communication and policy planning efforts within the CCIC lifetime and beyond.

Stakeholder Interviews • Approach stakeholders who have a particularly important and relevant role within the public domain. They need not be specialists in innovation as such, but their decisions (or environment) may depend on/benefit from innovations in the public sector; • input and opinion might be of particular value to the CCIC objectives, • Could contribute to the elaboration and more informed policy design with regard to innovation adoption and diffusion; • Interviews are based on a semistructured template of questions to be asked; • Each partner needs to conduct at least 10 interviews.

State-of-the-art Questionnaire • present as complete and as thorough an overview of innovation across all participating partners' institutions and their environment; • define the state-of-the-art in public sector innovation, outlining the current state of development in: • innovation understanding, planning, policy design and implementation, and • Organisational and environmental support factors and constraints; • conducted as an online survey whereby each respondent receives an electronic link via email to a dedicated web site, designed and monitored by ARC Fund; • Each partner should aim at sending the link to at least 400 potential respondents, leading to about 100 completed questionnaires.

Analytical Work • Questionnaire will be accessible till the first week of July 2012; • Stakeholder interviews need to be completed by end of June 2012; • All questionnaire responses will be analysed by ARC Fund, and shared with all partners; • Initial results from the questionnaire will be presented in September 2012 during CM3 in Gävle; • Stakeholder interviews will be analysed by ARC Fund.

Thematic Groups • Innovative Financial Instruments • Public Procurement for Innovation • Innovation in/by publicly owned enterprises • Civil society inclusion • Horizontal area - Innovation in regional blind-spots (unequal distribution of opportunities)

Thematic Groups - Tasks • To review all best practices identified during the mapping process, relevant to the thematic area; consider examples of innovation not entirely successful • Review contributions from the 6 correspondents from non-partner countries • Discuss possible barriers to innovation adoption and sustainability in the thematic area under scrutiny • Outcomes: thematic reports, with lessons learned and focusing on successful policies encouraging innovation; consider possible policy recommendations – input to the partners’ work when developing the Regional Innovation Plans

Thematic Groups’ Leaders • City of Birmingham – Innovative Financial Instruments; • Region of Lazio – Public Procurement for Innovation; • Sabadell Development Agency – Innovation in publicly-owned enterprises; • City of Aberdeen – Civil society inclusion; • City of Warsaw – Blindspots.

Thematic Groups’ Leaders’ Responsibilities • Conduct all preparatory work for the organization of their respective thematic group meeting; prepare an agenda with specific items to be addressed and discussed during the actual meeting; • Provide thematic expertise to other partners if and when necessary with regard to good practice identification; • Communicate with all partners who are members of their respective thematic group (as well as with country correspondents) to ensure partners’ progress in identifying the necessary number of good practices, and ask for additional information when needed; • Identify local/regional/national experts who would be willing to participate and contribute to a CCIC meeting, if the latter takes place in the same place where the TG leader is situated; negotiate with potential contributors the range and scope of their input, and brief them on the objectives and content of CCIC; • Summariseall identified good practices, which fall within their respective thematic area, and prepare detailed analysis based on both best practice descriptions and partners’ contributions and comments during the actual meeting; • Elaborate recommendations for innovation policy planning based on good practice descriptions, and thematic group discussions; • Identify the supporting factors and the gaps related to innovation policy planning, programming, measures and instruments within the thematic area.

Innovative Financial Instruments • How was the financial instrument (FI) or policy set up? Who initiated it, and what was the key motivation? Was that instrument meant to address a specific gap in policy implementation, or was it meant to introduce new possibilities? • Who (and what) are the beneficiaries of the FI? What are their respective benefits? • What kind of public (financial) “transactions” are covered by the FI? Has there been a change, and what, in how these transactions are monitored and “controlled”? If yes, how has this change influenced the effectiveness of the FI? • How is that instrument structured? What are the responsible management bodies and lines of accountability? • What are the key (social, political, economic, technological, managerial, etc.) issues the FI is addressing? • How is this instrument representing a significantly new approach to tackling the target problem? • How is the financial instrument being evaluated (if at all necessary)? What are specific indicators to judge the FI's success or failure? What measures are being taken in either case? Has the instrument been redesigned since its inception?

Public Procurement • Have procuring procedures evolved over the past five years? How do they fit in the national / EU legislative framework? Could these be considered innovative in themselves? How is procurement being managed (i.e. through what internal structure, according to what laws and executive orders, etc.)? • Are you aware of the EU directives on public procurement and the proposed new directive on public procurement – end of 2011? • What public policies are being implemented through procured services? Why were these policies chosen? • What are the kind of services/supplies/public goods that are procured? Of those, which involve providing a public service (that is, a service of benefit to citizens) from the outside (private) entity? • Are there particular economic sectors (or clusters of firms) dependent (in terms of market opportunities) on public procurement? • Are there services, which are only partly procured to external vendors, but continue to be offered by the municipal authority or a related public enterprise? If yes, how is that sustainable? • What is the current share of budget that is paid to private vendors as a result of approved tenders? How has that share changed over the past five years? • Which procurement notices over the past five years apply to services or products that the procuring authority considers innovative? Which (and how many in general) resulted in the adoption of an innovation? • What are examples of public-private partnerships formed on the basis of (or initiated through) public procurement? What time period do such partnerships typically cover?

Publicly Owned Enterprises • What is considered a publicly owned enterprise? How is it structured in relation to the local or regional authority? • What is the role of publicly owned enterprises in each partner’s region? What are the most common economic sectors where they operate? • What are the kinds of services or goods that are offered by a publicly owned (e.g. municipal) enterprise? • How does the size (in terms of both personnel and revenue) of all public enterprises compare to the rest of the local/regional economy? • What are the specific relationships between owners of the enterprise, assuming the public authority is not the sole owner? Are there any principle differences where co-owners are from the private sector? • How is profit realised and distributed? Are the profits of such enterprises used to offset other public expenditure, and why? Is revenue from usual operations sufficient to keep the enterprise financially healthy? What are the principal differences with the private enterprises? • Does the principle owner invest in the enterprise, that is how is taxpayer revenue used in/by publicly owned enterprises? Is innovating in the public enterprise dependent on public funds allocation? • How do publicly owned enterprises innovate and/or support innovation? Are they subject or target to specific policies on the local level? What is the focus of innovations in publicly owned enterprises - i.e. enterprise management, service delivery, technology transfer and embedding, etc.? • How are social enterprises positioned within each partner’s region? How are social enterprises capable (if at all) of innovation? How do public authorities support them and internalize their outputs?

Civil Society Inclusion • What are the mechanisms in place to solicit public feedback? • What partnerships are present between the authority entity and civil society organisations? What kind of services or products are concerned? • What is the involvement of civil society organisations in policy deliberations on innovation, or on products/services considered to be innovative? • How are civil society organisations relied upon in the diffusion of innovations? • How are civil society organisations relied upon (or involved in) the evaluation/recognition of innovations? (for example, distributing awards for most innovative city) • Which social issues have the greatest relevance to public sector innovation? (such as environmental degradation, garbage recycling and waste management, transport efficiency and reliability, etc.) How is civil society involved in addressing them? What is the role of public sector organisations?

Regional Blind-spots • CCIC recognises that certain cities and regions concentrate more resources than others, thus resulting in an unequal distribution of opportunities from one region to another; • It is important to analyse thoroughly the national contexts in each country and to identify if and how country specifics facilitate the persistence of blind-spots. Therefore, this thematic area is concerned with: • how to identify regional blind-spots; • elaboration of obstacles to innovation diffusion; • outlining policy options for the elimination of diffusion obstacles. • Particular attention would be paid to specific systemic innovations that could enable opportunity creation in regional blind-spots, thus facilitating future (regional) policy development.

Questions and comments are welcome! ZoyaDamianovazoya.damianova@online.bg VentseslavKozarevventseslav.kozarev@online.bg

Complex Challenges – Innovative Cities (CCIC)