1. WP5 SEE Cluster Policy Learning MechanismsSEE Cluster Policy Learning Mechanisms Study Visit Sofia, 06 June 2013 Mando Karvelli International Collaborations – Corallia Clusters Initiative

2. 5.1 Development of 7 new policy learning mechanisms END OF JULY 5.1 Reflective policy making mechanism - END OF AUGUST 5.1 SET of policy measures - MID SEPT 5.2 Guidelines for pilots - MID SEPT WP5 activities launched - Planning

3. Act. 5.1 Development of new policy learning mechanisms in SEE 7 5.1 Development of 7 new policy learning mechanisms All stakeholders will work on the development of policy incentives and practical tools to support cluster development in SEE. WGs discuss best practices on cluster policies, policy instruments, practical tools and incentives for each specific area as resulted from WP4. Each WG drives regional policy makers and experts to share their insights and experiences and to debate on issues of interest and concern. WGs work, share documents, position and perspectives through the learning platform instruments already available. 5.1 Reflective policy making mechanism All groups touch upon the horizontal issue of multiple-level and cross-department cluster policies. 6 (+1) area policy learning mechanisms / The 7th one on multi level cross- department approach. The policy should be implementable at national and regional level in SEE.

4. Suggested template for the development of new policy learning mechanism for cluster development

5. Main concerns for 2.3 section of 5.1 New policy learning mechanism reports - 2 alternatives On the 3rd of June WG leaders held an on-line conference and after extended dialogue and discussion concluded to discuss with all PPs 2 alternatives for the development of 2.3 section : 1.Analysis on national level* for all participating countries giving emphasis and providing in depth information for the pilot regions, 2.Analysis on regional level with requested input from all 19 regions per thematic area. All regions will be equally analysed in each report. * It was mentioned that the national approach does not exclude the regional one since the alternative (a) may combine and consist of both, obligatory of a short description of the national situation of all countries with details for the pilot regions, as well as optional of more detailed information for certain participating regions (other than the pilot), eg regions of Italy/Emilia Romagna etc. This alternative will give more flexibility for the development of the learning mechanisms.

6. Main Concerns for the input required for each of the two alternatives finally agreed 1.Who will deliver the input if done on national level? Coordination among partners from the same country will be necessary. 2.If done on regional level, all participating regions need to work for the timely delivery of the respective input required, otherwise WP5 progress will be at risk.

7. Thank you! Nektaria Berikou n.berikou@corallia.org Mando Karvelli m.karvelli@corallia.org