Country RIS3 Pilot Strategy Summaries

1. RIS3 objectives (measurable goals):

All four participating countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania and Poland) that have submitted the Country Action Plans as a final part of the workshop – have unanimously proclaimed an increase of STI programs and R&D investment in setting the objectives and measurable goals. In addition:

Bulgaria emphasized a strengthened coordination of policy mix among implementing agencies and ministries, as well as increased funding allocation (both budgetary and from structural funds) to STI programs based on agreed policy mix

Croatia added an objective of increasing commercialization of public research by private companies

Romania specified their target in increasing a private investment in RI by 6 times in 2014 – 2020 and identified main sources for R&D spending growth (established enterprises, multinationals, startups)

Poland specifically mentioned an increase of target for business R&D (1.7% target from 0.74%, 25% business share to 50%) to add value, and generate growth through globalization.

2. Problem/bottleneck identification:

While doing a risk analysis all countries have identified an issue of ineffective coordination of policies to strengthen R&D and public spending, lack of private sector entrepreneurial culture and awareness about importance of innovation and R&D, as well as insufficient competition in local markets.

Bulgaria also highlighted a coordination failure in designing and administering the financial instruments for R&D among different bodies (including Competitiveness and OP Human Resources), as well as their main national funding instruments for research and innovation (NIF, NSF) do not operate as efficiently as they could.

Croatia additionally stressed a lack of incentives for commercialization, lack of knowledge about technology transfer, and a scarcity of sophisticated users (demand-driven innovation)

Poland furthermore emphasized a high cost of patenting, piggy backing on German R&D and tax treatment

Romania also underlined specific obstacles for three types of organizations: 1- established enterprises (mismatch between private investment in R&D and public finding, as well as between skills training and market needs), 2 - multinationals (vulnerabilities in the IP protection framework), and 3 - startups (slow take-off in “high-tech” entrepreneurship, lack of high-risk angel investors and VC funds)

3. Solutions/Instruments to be tested:

All countries have pragmatically analyzed and suggested specific solutions in the local context and ways to test these ideas:

Bulgaria proposed a new organization structure of the ministries involved in innovation – to have a National Innovation Board (NIB) and NIB Advisory Council with functions such as priority setting, policy and budgetary coordination, and evaluation role – that would oversee four ministries (1-Economy, Energy and Tourism; 2-Education, Youth and Science; 3-Health and 4-Agriculture/Food) that would be in charge for a policy coordination in the areas of R&D and Innovation which is implemented by National Innovation Fund, National Science Fund, Managing Authority for OP – Competitiveness and Human Resources, Agricultural Academy and National Centre of Public Health Protection, and Science Parks.

Croatia suggested nurturing commercialization “talent” (in public and private sector through information, mentoring, training, as well as to clarify the legislation about IPR of publicly based research (e.g. Bayh-Dole act-like reform). And with the following ideas to test - contests for innovative solutions to “public good” issues (open to international competition vs national, conditional on private/public partnership vs unconditional, grant vs co-financing (if co-f which proportion), and in the services to innovators (firms vs researchers, intensive support vs general information, publicly vs privately provided)

Poland proposed to strengthen the following areas: 1- awareness, knowledge (Communication campaign (Saatchi & Saatchi, soap opera, Business services), 2 -Addressing coordination failure (Supporting cooperation, demand-led procurement, flagship projects for strategic areas such as energy), 3 - Lowering the costs of R&D and innovation, 4 - Increase pressure to innovate (competition in services--liberalization of services market, 5 - globalization (English language, foreign assessors)

• Romania underlined specific solutions for three types of organizations: 1- established enterprises (targeted matching grant (RI-based enterprises with proven successful track history, Internship vouchers for RI-based enterprises to recruit highly qualified personnel, eg. post doctoral internships), 2 – multinationals (finalizing the service patent law), and 3 -startups (support S&T universities students start-ups with financing and mentoring services vouchers, Build GoToMarket* capacity with all the students/PhD stage in top S&T faculties and matching grants for high-tech focused accelerator/investment funds)

4. Outcomes:

All countries strongly endorsed an increase of R&D investments as a potential outcome.

Bulgaria also specified the following– increase of private investments in R&D to reach a total of 1.5% of GDP by 2020, selection committee (composition) and participation in the National Innovation Board

Romania highlighted specific outcomes for three types of organizations: 1- established enterprises (•growth of the recipient revenues in a 3 years frame; RI investment; diversification of their portfolio; Patents files submitted in developed markets, Increase of R&I capacity in firms), 2 - multinationals (Boost the foreign investment in RI in Romania, Annual volume of R&D funds spent by multinationals), and 3 - startups (increase in RI firm entry, Improved success rate of startups, Stronger link between Academia and market needs, Enhanced investments in RI-based enterprises)