Hungarian foresight experiences and their utilisation in Hungary’s

science and technology policy

Dr. Tamás BaloghDepartment for R&D Strategy

Ministry of EducationBudapest, Hungary

tamas.balogh@om.hu

Methods Delphi + panels : “visions”

both at panel & macro

levels

Product/process product & process

Policy

recommendations

direct

TEP = “Technológiai Előretekintési Program” = Technology Foresight Programme

Time horizon

15-25 years

Scope

national

Issues Macro + 7 panels

THE SEVEN FORESIGHT PANELS (and the topics of the seven specific reports)

Human resources (education, employment)

Health (life sciences, pharmaceuticals, medical instruments, health care)

IT, telecommunications, media

Natural and built environment

Manufacturing and business processes (new materials, supplier networks, globalisation ...)

Agribusiness and food

Transport

Hungary’s strategy

activedrifting (no strategy)

glob

al s

tru

ctu

ral

chan

ges

fund

amen

tal

no

I

III

II

MACRO SCENARIOS: STRUCTURE

THREE MACRO SCENARIOS: SUMMARY

„Mutually favourableco-operation”

„Drifting”„Alternative

development”

Time horizon 20 years 20 years 40-50 years

Knowledgeintensity high at best medium high

Strategy definite none creative

Human resources highly qualified different “classes” creative, top in Europe

Health improved deteriorating fundamentally improved

Cohesion stronger weaker significantly stronger

Environment improved deteriorating substantially improved

Infrastructure balanced developmentpolarised

developmentreduced mobility

Economy robust growth slower growth new rationale

Politicsenabling state, active

civil societypassive

government policy intense govt. policy,strong civil society

Healthy + educated society

Strong economy

En

viro

nm

ent

Com

mu

nic

atio

ns

infr

astr

uct

ure

Org

anis

atio

nal

sy

stem

of

R&

D

Fu

nd

ing

and

m

anag

emen

t of

in

nov

atio

n

S&

T p

rior

itie

s

(lif

e sc

ien

ces

+ I

CT

)

Hu

man

re

sou

r ces

Regulation & Policy

Compe-titiveness

+ Quality of life

GENERIC PRIORITIES

TEP Steering Committee:22 policy recommendations

(#1) General recommendation: a development path is necessary, based on knowledge and health, providing dynamic and sustainable development, high quality of life, but the catching-up may not lead to extreme gaps between social groups and regions.

(#2-9): Education+Health: Skilled, healthy learning society

(#10-12): Clean environment

(#13-22): Development of the National Innovation System

TEP S&T policy recommendations (1)(#13-14) Development of the NIS along 3 priorities:

1. Fostering science-business co-operation and mobility.

2. Higher education: not only knowledge generation but also knowledge transfer, stronger business co-operation.

3. Development of implementation institutes (information centres, industrial competence centres, co-operative organisations, incubation)

Consortium forming obligation in NRDP (2001), granting soft loans if outsourced to science base (since 1996), support of co-operative research centres (since 2000), new tax rules for extramural orders (2001), preparation of a new university-industry and industry-university mobility programme (2002).

(#15a) Incentives for increasing business R&D expenditures.

Obligatory own investment in projects (35-50%, depending on the nature of research). Company R&D expenditures may be deducted twice since 01.Jan, 2001.

(#15b) Quick development of the physical R&D infra-structure (measuring equipment and ICT infrastructure).

R&D measuring equipment Programme by Ministry of Education, National Informatics Infrastructure Programme (NIIF), participation in GEANT, New Secretariat of State in Prime Minister’s Office for Information Society with large budget and several programmes.

TEP S&T policy recommendations (2)

TEP S&T policy recommendations (3)(#16) The government should prepare a report to the Parliament on the state of innovation market incentives, compared to the best practice of the OECD countries.

No government report has been prepared, but a large background study has been completed by November 2001 on the best practices of

the OECD countries. It is being now a discussion topic.

(#17) The government should analyse the impact of the Venture Capital Act (1998) and take measures for fostering the innovation related capital market and investments.

The supervision is under discussion; it is a widely shared opinion that the VCA does not contain enough incentives and that is why only one (!) company has declared up to now its operation under this Act.

TEP S&T policy recommendations (4)(#18) The demand for technology intensive products and services should be enhanced by a well established public procurement policy.

There are large government PC and Internet access programmes for teachers and civil servants, but it is still an important task.

(#19) Long-term research priorities may not prefer narrow interests. A wide range of science fields should be covered, establishing the research of the future.

Strong basic science (30-32% of GERD). Infrastructure development and efforts to increase R&D personnel are initiatives promising long-term impact. Programs with no thematic limitation give chance for multidisciplinary and “small” fields.

TEP S&T policy recommendations (5)(#20) In medium term, special attention has to be devoted to life sciences, biotechnology and ICT.

These are 3 of the 5 priorities in the new, large National R&D Programmes (#1, #4 and #2, respectively).

(#21) The vertical structure of government decision preparation and decision making should be restructured, to be able to treat problems being more and more horizontal.

Dialogue with chambers, entrepreneur organisations, trade unions, professional associations. There are joint actions with other

ministries (GM), but the government decision making process is still vertical.

TEP S&T policy recommendations (6)

(#22) The government should implement the best existing methods and institutions being successful abroad:

- establishing an institution for technology assessment, in co-operation with the Parliament (not yet),

- establishing a S&T observatory to monitor the state and trends of Hungarian R&D and innovation (not yet),

- establishing a central evaluation institution, following the utilisation of public money, dealing with programme and institution evaluation as well (not yet).

Major TEP discussion events and presentations (1997)

In Hungary: 12

Major TEP discussion events and presentations (1998)

+Lisbon

In Hungary: 37, abroad: 1

Major TEP discussion events and presentations (1999)

+ Trieste, Vienna, Helsinki, Brussels, Manchester, Graz, Salzburg, Hamburg, Berlin, Mannheim

In Hungary: 22, abroad: 10

Major TEP discussion events and presentations (2000)

+Bratislava, Brussels, Praha, Wien, Tallin, Planica, Warsawa, Cyprus

In Hungary: 26, abroad: 8

Major TEP discussion events and presentations (2001)

+ Stockholm, Roma, Barcelona

In Hungary: 7, abroad: 3

Parliament Committees where the policy recommendations of the Hungarian Foresight

Programme were discussed up to now

• Environment Committee, 22. November, 2000 (Natural and built environment)

• Health and Social Committee, 7. February, 2001 (Health and life sciences)

• Education and Science Committee, 21. March, 2001 (Human resources)

• Employment and Work Committee, 30. October 2001 (Health and life sciences).

To be continued...