1. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 1 The articulation of the Spanish Food Innovation System: measurement of the impacts fostered by the Spanish Food Technology Programme. Fernando Jiménez Sáez Dr. Elena Castro Martínez Montreal 2004 Measuring the Impacts of Science

2. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 2 What do we mean by articulation?  Articulation reflects the relationships between the different elements of the Innovation System (National/Regional/Sectoral)  Why is this interesting? –It is an objective of both the National R&D Plan and the National Technology Food Programme –Relationships are a key element for the existence and of any Sectoral (National/Regional) Innovation System –There is a need for new indicators in the Economics of Technical Change

3. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 3 Main Research Question  How can we measure the capacity of a nationwide R&D Public Policy to promote relationships among the Innovation System agents?  This means:  Reproducible  Based on both qualitative and quantitative information  Dynamic explanation  Impact evaluation

4. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 4 The lack of coherence: where and why  Policy design: it follows a linear model approach, technology push approach.  Policy objectives: some follow a neoclassical approach (market failure) some others a structuralist-evolutionary approach (institutions)  Policy implementation: tools are used again in a neoclassical fashion  Impact evaluation of the policy: so far, it is non existent  Hence: we find several problems in assessing the articulation fostered with this policy

5. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 5 The analytical framework for articulation Public Research Institutions Firms in the FBS R&D ProjectsPETRI ActionsConcerted Projects The SFTP Bilateral Contracts

6. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 6 Approaches to the topic Callon’s Techno-economic approach: observation between and within units of analysis –Advantages: characterisation of interactions among units of analysis useful to structurally characterise economic sectors and networks –Drawbacks: not easily reproducible Network Analysis: quantitative observation of units of analysis before and after –Advantages: indicator based on relationship variables –Drawbacks: not dynamic measure

7. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 7 Our approach Economic evaluation of outputs –Statistical descriptive analysis: input and output variables –Bibliometric analysis of publications: scientific results Structural analysis of relationships –Monitor and trace trajectories: analysis of relationship tools –Characterisation of interactions: role of interface structures Programme’s Management Evaluation –Personal interview to the Programme’s managers: role of the main interface structure managing the NFTP

8. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 8 The data  Quantitative data from the Programme’s tools  Quantitative data from publications (FSTA Database)  Quantitative data from bilateral contracts between CSIC research groups and firms from the Spanish Food and Beverage Sector  Qualitative data from interviews with researchers participating in the SFTP

9. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 9 Some results so far (1) Regarding the Economic Evaluation of outputs

10. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 10 Some results so far (2) Regarding the Economic Evaluation of outputs

11. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 11 Analysis of relationships: articulation (1) Factor analysis

12. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 12 Analysis of relationships: articulation (2) Factor analysis

13. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 13 Analysis of relationships: articulation (4) Cluster analysis

14. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 14 Some results so far (4) Regarding the Evaluation of Articulation –Few articulation has been found. Mismatch between industry needs and research groups interests. Only specific cases under specific circumstances –Few continuity in collaborations between firms and research groups after having collaborated in the NFTP –No trace of research results transfer in the medium run Regarding the Evaluation of the Management Structure –Lack of both human and financial resources –Lack of co-ordination among three different management structures –Same managerial style applied to the heterogeneous scientific community

15. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 15 Some conclusions In the specific case of the SFTP very little articulation has been found, despite the initial and promising expectations of researchers. WHY? Funding has been one of the barriers (Relationship tools) … BUT There are other barriers: communication, bureaucracy, etc. The role of the Interface Structure is key to overcome these barriers. The lack of coherence between policy formulation and policy implementation make difficult the analysis of articulation. The methodology to structurally evaluate a R&D Public Policy of a peripheral region, like Spain, must count on both the assessment of the “Relationship Tools” and the role of the “Interface Structures”.

16. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento 16 INGENIO - UPV Camino de Vera s/n 46022 Valencia España fjimenez@ingenio.upv.es Montreal, 17th-18th June 2004