+

Experiences and expectations from an improved policy monitoring platformPer M. Koch, Inno Policy Trendchart/ERAWATCH Workshop, Oslo, August 30 2011

+What policy makers want is not necessarily what they need

+The benchmarking malaise

Policy makers need benchmarking data to legitimize increased spending (“We are lagging

behind”) to document success (“We are best in the world”) to make an extremely complicated case as simple as

possible (3 percent of GDP) We are number fetishists

The prestige of the natural sciences The power of macro economics and the ministries

of finance

A necessary evil Trendchart/ERAWATCH need to contextualize popular

indicators and help policy makers understand the unique properties of their own innovation system

Disencourage copy paste politics

+The philosophy of evidence based policy development

“…helps people make well informed decisions about policies, programmes and projects by putting the best available evidence from research at the heart of policy development and implementation” (P Davies, 1999)

Vs. “opinion-based policy, which relies heavily on either the selective use of evidence … or on the untested views of individuals or groups, often inspired by ideological standpoints, prejudices, or speculative conjecture.” (P Davies 2004)

+The myth of evidence based policy-development “…policy making must be soundly based on evidence

of what works” Professional Policy Making for the Twenty-First Century (UK Cabinet Office, 1999)

But how to you prove what works?

Any social and economic phenomena is a result of interaction between a limitless number of factors

Society is constantly changing, a moving target

Any interpretation of the reality underlying policy-development will be only that: an interpretation

Researchers are as fallible as other experts, anchored in their own belief systems and prejudices. The expert should not be a disembodied “objective” voice.

You risk basing your analysis on the indicators that exist, not the ones you need.

+Balance between facts and experience based analysis

The narrative is as important as the facts.

The Innovation Union scoreboard in isolation does more damage than good.

The expert should be visible.

+The two cultures

The research and innovation policy arena continues to be divided into at least two cultures in most countries: The science culture, with focus on:

Universities Basic science, alternatively “free” science Academic input and output (No. of researchers,

funding, publishing) The innovation culture, with focus on:

Manufacturing (and to a lesser degree: services) Applied research, innovation and entrepreneurship Industrial input and output (funding of R&D,

innovative capabilities, patents)

+ERAWATCH vs. Trendchart

The ERAWATCH vs. Trendchart dichotomy mirrors this cultural divide Makes it harder to avoid black boxing

science Makes it harder to understand research

as a tool for learning in companies Makes it harder to understand industry as

part of the science system May leave out areas that are normally not

considered by the two cultures: Public sector innovation and the

interactions between the corners of the knowledge triangle

Public and private services The role of culture, art, design

+Steps forward

A common database of policy instruments is a huge step forward.

Ending the production of critical and analytic country reports on innovation policy is not.

There should be one common ERAWATCH/Trenchart gateway online.

+Country reports vs. cross-country analysis

The country reports are mainly used by policy makers in the relevant nations, if at all.

A need to make them more visible in the national policy landscape.

Make use of national reports in regional conferences and workshops Example: Nordforsk and NICE.

An even stronger focus on thematic reports and reviews on the innovation side

+The European Inventory of Research and Innovation Policy Measures Some suggestions.

1. Governance & horizontal research and innovation policies Access to policy relevant research institutes, think tanks and knowledgeable

NGOs/associations

2. Research and Technologies Use of foreign research institutions (globalization)

3. Human Resources (education and skills) Encouragement of trans-disciplinary research and learning, including the

humanities, design and art

4. Promote and sustain the creation and growth of innovative enterprises and public and civil sector organizations Support to innovation in the public sector (including the interaction between

private and public institutions)

5. Markets and innovation culture Measures to establish inter-/multinational collaboration for STI for global/grand

challenges (globalization)