PRO INNO Europe® paper N°8

INNO-LEARNING PLATFORM
ANNUAL REPORT 2007-2008
Key lessons in fostering
transnational cooperation
in support for innovation
in Europe

European Commission
DIR EC T ORAT E -G ENER AL F OR ENT ERP R IS E AN D IND USTR Y
 PRO INNO Europe® paper N°8

INNO-LEARNING PLATFORM
ANNUAL REPORT 2007-2008
Key lessons in fostering
transnational cooperation
in support for innovation
in Europe
September 2008
02

PRO INNO Europe® is an initiative of the Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry of
the European Commission that combines analysis and benchmarking of national and regional
innovation policy performance with support for cooperation of national and regional innovation
programmes and incentives for innovation agencies and other innovation support organisations
to  develop joint actions. The initiative aspires to become the main European reference for
innovation policy analysis and development throughout Europe and brings together over 200
innovation policy makers and stakeholders from 33 countries.
Additional information on PRO INNO Europe® is available on the Internet
(www.proinno-europe.eu).

Legal Notice
This report has been produced by INNO-Learning Platform as part of the PRO INNO Europe®
initiative. The views expressed in this report, as well as the information included in it, do not
necessary reflect the opinion or position of the European Commission and in no way commit
the institution.
 03

Contents

Main le s s ons learned

Introduction 5

Main lessons learned 7

1. Identifying complementarities between different levels of public

intervention is necessary 8

2. Mutual policy learning mechanisms need to be developed 8

3. For effective cooperation, personal contact matters 9

4. Stronger incentives are needed to stimulate partnerships 10

5. A more flexible approach to cooperation must be pursued 10

6. The current form of grant agreement should be opened up 12

7. Institutional partners are critical in projects to address EU policy priorities 12

8. Strategic partnerships should be broadened 13

9. Better cooperation between PRO INNO Europe®, Europe INNOVA

and the Enterprise Europe Network is desired 13

10. Leave room for open discussions on future priorities and trends 14

Conclusions and outlook 15

I ntroduction

04
 05

Introduction

I ntroduction
The aim of the INNO-Learning Platform (ILP) is to improve the effectiveness

© Shutterstock
of innovation support in Europe by stimulating more and better transnational
cooperation among innovation agencies across Member States and regions. In
order to effectively exploit the European innovation potential, the ILP explores the
added value of targeted transnational cooperation at programme level between
Member States and regions.

As such, the Platform aims to tackle problems faced by individual public funding
agencies that support innovation, notably through nurturing synergy effects across
Europe between authorities and agencies working in this area. To this end, the
ILP identifies and exchanges successful practices thus fostering a more receptive
transnational innovation cooperation culture in Europe.

The Platform has been conceived as an ‘incubator’ for innovation support ideas
and partnerships, exploring the scope for transnational cooperation in the field
of innovation. It has an experimental nature and aims to provide insights for
the formulation of future INNO-Nets and possible other forms of cooperation
in preparation of upcoming calls to be launched under the PRO INNO Europe®
initiative of the European Commission. The ILP delineates and analyses barriers
and opportunities in selected fields of innovation resulting in the identification of
suitable forms of transnational collaboration at European level. In this sense, the
Platform can be perceived as an instrument to carry out ex ante impact assessments
for future areas of joint European transnational innovation cooperation activities,
while also testing the interest of stakeholders in participating in these activities.

The ILP working process comprises three annual learning cycles. Throughout the
2007 learning cycle, the following key activities were performed:

• Exploring key innovation areas relevant to Europe and identifying those

particularly suitable for transnational cooperation;

• Identifying areas that could form the basis of the next generation of
transnational cooperation projects (i.e. INNO-Nets and INNO-Actions);

• Working alongside the existing INNO-Net and INNO-Action communities

to facilitate exchanges and cooperation beyond the scope of the current
activities;

• Working with key innovation support actors in Europe, notably via the INNO-
Learning Steering Group (ILSG), to ensure that national and regional publicly-
funded innovation agencies are mobilised and that they actively contribute to
this learning exercise.
Main le s s on s learned

06
 07

Main lessons learned

Main le s s ons learned

Support for innovation is a policy field that is of great importance
for the competitiveness of the European economy. According to the
INNO-Policy TrendChart database, the Member States are currently
implementing more than 400 horizontal and specific policy measures
in support of innovation. There are measures implemented at regional
and national levels and there are also a number of transnational and
EU-wide innovation support actions.

Such a comprehensive and diverse patchwork of innovation support

measures spread all over Europe and across different levels of
government poses a challenge, but also offers opportunities.
Fragmentation can limit transparency and may lead to inefficiencies,
so it is a challenge to attain a high level of horizontal and vertical
alignment and to ensure coherence among diverse public innovation
support programmes. Only then can individual measures as well as collaboration
between public innovation support programmes be effective and be able to
cope with the new competitiveness challenges facing European SMEs. Especially
where market failures are evident, the role of innovation policy support measures
is highly relevant, and so is good coordination and compatibility among them to
provide effective support. Such coordination and coherence calls for systematic
learning from mutual experiences in order to foster cross-fertilisation and avoid
redundancies.

Diversity in innovation support measures also offers opportunities. Scope for

differentiation allows every Member State to develop the support mechanisms
that are best fitted to its particular characteristics and stage of development. It
also makes innovation support a field for policy competition between Member
States and thereby provides incentives to optimise its policy design process.
In addition, diversity makes Europe a vast laboratory for policy learning in this
field. To exploit the benefits of such a natural laboratory is a challenge for the
European Commission and for the INNO-Learning Platform in particular.

A key part of the ILP activities is to demonstrate the mutual benefits of

cooperation in order to overcome resistance and to effectively exploit the
European innovation potential wherever a strong case can be built. To support
these discussions, dedicated expert groups composed of national experts and
innovation funding agencies have been set up. In total, over 60 experts from
different Member States and regions have been mobilised in the first learning
cycle. In particular, with the establishment of the INNO-Learning Steering
Group1 which consists of 15 representatives from different national and regional
funding agencies, an important step has been taken to initiate a dialogue and
to enhance practical cooperation among innovation funding agencies. Together
these institutions manage a vast amount of funds by implementing large national
or regional programmes in support of innovation. Through these dialogues, the
ILP has contributed to creating a new space promoting mutual learning and
exchanges between innovation practitioners who face the same challenges in
support for innovation across Europe.

To enhance efficiency and coherence in innovation support, the following lessons

are important to consider.

1
For further information on the INNO-Learning Steering Group, see:
http://www.proinno-europe.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&topicID=257&parentID=57
 08
1. Identifying complementarities between different
levels of public intervention is necessary
Main le s s on s learned

Innovation support is organised at different levels of government: at the regional,

national and European levels. It is necessary to find the right balance between
these different levels of intervention and to find scope for complementarities (e.g.
horizontal and vertical alignment) to assess the scope for transnational cooperation.
Each level has its own legitimacy and no hierarchical relations exist between them.
They all play their own role in support for innovation, whether they act at local,
regional, national or European level. Therefore, there is a natural interest in learning
from each other and sharing experience, in particular in new fields that require
further conceptual work.

The INNO-Net on the “Innovation Policy Project in Services” (IPPS project)2 has
helped demonstrate that great scope for complementarities and added value at
European level exists in the field of innovation in services. The IPPS project conducted
a mapping of existing innovation policies in support of service innovations and
identified a number of areas for transnational cooperation activities at programme
level. This project was then followed up by the signature of a “European Services
Innovation Memorandum” by nine national and regional ministries and innovation
agencies from Finland, Estonia, Ireland, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway,
Slovenia, Sweden and Greece in December 2007. This Memorandum represents
a joint statement of intent by the signatories to continue their support for the
development of services innovation and it demonstrates their readiness and
willingness to commit to future transnational cooperation in this field.

2. Mutual policy learning mechanisms need to be

developed
In view of assessing scope for complementarities and subsequent transnational
cooperation in the field of innovation, partners willing to engage into transnational
cooperation share the interest to actively participate in mutual policy learning
schemes, by mapping initiatives, exchanging information and good practices,
and by analysing common strategic issues. To make real progress in this respect,
partners must have a self-interest in exchanging information and feel at ease in an
environment where people who know and trust each other are willing to share
their experiences.

The INNO-Nets have been an efficient tool for mapping existing innovation support
initiatives and for providing a comprehensive picture of innovation activities in
their respective fields of interest. By bringing together a number of policy actors,
the INNO-Net projects have also contributed to highlight the success factors for
developing a common understanding of strategic issues and for designing possible
joint initiatives. An important success factor is that this cooperation is voluntary,
based on the interests of the participating parties and not imposed “top down”.
The scope for transnational cooperation is clearly defined by the self-interest of the
regional and national innovation funding agencies to engage in a mutual learning
process, with a view to improving their own tools and instruments.

Following the launch of four INNO-Nets in the field of clustering, the projects
decided to form the European Cluster Alliance3 in order to facilitate synergies,
to share aspects of common interest and to maximize their political impact. The
European Cluster Alliance has thus become the focal point for future discussion
on cluster policies in Europe. The Alliance has so far managed to bring together
a large number of policy actors and currently involves 60 cluster regions in 22
Member States, Candidate and Associated Countries. To associate other countries

2
For further information on “The Innovation Policy Project in Services” INNO-Net project (IPPS INNO-Net) and
“The European Service Innovation Memorandum”, see:
http://www.proinno-europe.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&topicID=73&parentID=55#
Further information on the European Cluster Alliance is available at:
3

http://www.proinno-europe.eu/eca
 09

Main le s s ons learned

and regions to this work, the European Cluster Alliance has developed a partnership
agreement for associated members, allowing them to be involved in parts of the
work packages without funding.

This shows that through the concept of INNO-Nets, the PRO INNO Europe®
initiative has been successful in facilitating partnerships and in creating a strong
community of public innovation actors in Europe. INNO-Nets bring together
partners from different Member States and regions who feel there is something to
be gained through trans-national cooperation. This European spirit is, however, not
prevalent in all Member States and regions in the same way; this is a challenge to
be addressed by future actions.

3. For effective cooperation, personal contact matters

To get the most out of a learning process that brings together practitioners from
different backgrounds and with diverse experiences across borders, personal
contacts remain vital. In the view of David Robson, former Director at Scottish
Enterprise and Chairman of the INNO-Learning Steering Group “collaboration
occurs between people not organisations, and therefore mindsets are as important
as mechanisms. Collaboration between people must be based on trust which
requires time and place to grow.”

Under PRO INNO Europe®, personal interaction is important for four reasons:

• First of all, effective cooperation requires mutual trust. To be receptive to the

experiences of others, there must be a basic trust that the information and
the experiences of the other are true and valuable, and that they will be used
in a correct way.

• Secondly, effective cooperation requires true, practical understanding.

Practical learning and cooperation processes tend to rely heavily on sharing
tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is valuable to others, but often people are
not aware of possessing it. Effective transfer of tacit knowledge generally
requires extensive dialogue and getting acquainted with somebody else’s
experiences.

• Thirdly, effective cooperation, especially if it is to result in new ideas and

insights, requires bridging a cognitive gap. Different practitioners interpret
information using different frames of reference. Cooperation in support for
© Shutterstock

innovation stands more chances if different mindsets are brought together

and diverse experiences and ideas shared openly.

• Fourthly, effective cooperation requires curiosity and openness to new ideas.

New initiatives and innovations, in business as well as in policy making, are
often born from combining ideas and experiences from diverse sources, both
internal and external, and from working together in open networks (also
referred to as “Open Innovation”). To function well, these open networks
benefit from personal meetings and face-to-face encounters, especially if they
can take place on a continuous and frequent basis.

PRO INNO Europe® helps to build personal contacts between innovation policy
practitioners. It has, for the first time, established a European community between
innovation policy makers and programme managers, by mobilising over 200
innovation policy practitioners from 33 countries across Europe. PRO INNO Europe®
offers direct benefits for those who are actively participating in this initiative and
 10
Main le s s on s learned
Going beyond
information exchange:
Two INNO-Net examples
To strengthen the activities
of SMEs in wide technology
clusters and to facilitate cross-
border cooperation for SMEs in
technology clusters, the INNET
project4 is promoting interaction
and cooperation between
regional, national and European
funding schemes. These are the
project’s strategic objectives, but
from an operational viewpoint,
the aim of INNET is to design
a cross-border innovation/
technology transfer and funding
scheme in favour of SMEs and
to test it through joint pilot calls
for proposals. The first pilot call
for proposals has been launched
under the name of “Innovation
Express”, and it will fund a set
of innovation support activities
to initiate, develop or enhance
technological cooperation
between European clusters
for the benefit of their SME
members.
The objective of the VALOR
project5 is to coordinate and
network key players in innovation
policy to develop a common
agenda and a joint action plan
for the knowledge valorisation
process across Europe, enabling
innovations with high potential
to be identified and supported
at an earlier stage. This will
allow the appropriate support
measures to be put in place and
it will maximise the effectiveness
and scope of the programmes
that are currently undertaken
at national or regional levels.
VALOR has also launched a pilot
call aimed at supporting and
funding a set of activities and
services targeted at optimising
cooperation and stimulating the
commercialisation of knowledge
acquired by national SMEs from
foreign laboratories, technical
centres, and other SMEs.
helps to create long-term relationships. Beyond that it also facilitates cooperation
with other innovation policy actors and intermediaries that have a strong interest
in learning from others. Mutual learning may help to better manage innovation
programmes and support actions, thus contributing to the creation of stronger
regional and national innovation systems in Europe.
4. Stronger incentives are needed to stimulate
partnerships
The ultimate aim of transnational cooperation projects is neither the identification
of good practice examples across Europe nor the facilitation of networking between
stakeholders. Transnational cooperation is about engaging in concrete partnerships
across borders, provided that the added value of cooperation for the partners has
been assessed and demonstrated.
The higher the commitment of the partners involved and the more resources they
are prepared to put into the process, the more effective transnational cooperation
is. Many cooperation projects tend to dedicate a lot of resources and time to
exploring and assessing the scope for transnational cooperation. However, the
process then often stalls due to an over-emphasis on the analytical process and a
lack of resources to enter into concrete transnational cooperation. Consequently,
it is difficult to engage all the necessary actors in the implementation of a joint
initiative and to obtain the commitment of all required partners.
This is a challenge that the current INNO-Nets have faced. To address this situation,
it is important to be aware of the requirements from the outset, to manage
expectations, to be clear about the intention to work towards joint policy initiatives
and to develop incentives for strategic partners to commit themselves and to invest
in the process. Furthermore, the commitment of the partners’ political hierarchy
and the existence of appropriate communication channels are critical for the
success.
In preparation of the next generation of INNO-Nets, the European Commission
should, therefore, encourage participants to go in this direction by better
identifying the objectives for transnational cooperation to be achieved and by
better assessing the added value of transnational cooperation at European level.
This would require more ex ante exploration of areas that could be successfully
addressed at European level. The INNO-Learning Platform has already contributed
substantially to this process, but further efforts should be pursued.
5. A more flexible approach to cooperation must be
pursued
The INNO-Nets have provided an interesting opportunity for a variety of stakeholders
from different institutional backgrounds to meet and work together on common
policy themes. The feedback from the questionnaire survey addressed to the INNO-
Net community has shown that the institutional partners appreciate the networking
and learning process as well as the visits to good practice projects. However, they
find it more difficult to gather the resources to deliver specific methodological or
research and study outputs, or to undertake detailed surveys. There are also clear
differences between the efforts needed to organise and manage workshops within
the partner regions as compared with the gathering of results from all partners
undertaking similar activities or the drawing up of key strategic lessons.
For further information on the INNET project, see:
4
http://www.proinno-europe.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&topicID=71&parentID=55
5
For further information on the VALOR project, see:
http://www.proinno-europe.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&topicID=74&parentID=74
 11

Main le s s ons learned

In some cases, the careful selection of experienced work package leaders at the
outset of the project can overcome some of these problems. Often these leaders
have found it more practical to form teams including outside consultants and
academics. For example, in the CLUNET project6, the cluster policy mapping project
was organised by the Tuscany region as leader and they associated the services of
regional academics and an international consultancy to prepare the policy report
and identify strategic issues and best practice recommendations. Reports produced
in this way are generally of good quality and can be disseminated outside the
consortium and be shared with the wider innovation community, rather than
remain an internal project document.

Managing partnerships to carry out tasks and work packages is a key factor in
the success of projects and therefore needs to be given careful consideration. The
identification of a strong project consortium leader should be a key criterion when
selecting projects. For example, the VALOR project is coordinated by a private law
entity which was appropriately mandated by the UK authorities to manage and
oversee the entire project. Such specialised support can often help to leverage
governmental resources in a more targeted and flexible manner.

Another important area identified in the questionnaire survey concerns the

development of pilot projects or joint calls. These lie at the heart of the collaboration
process between stakeholders, yet it can sometimes be difficult to ensure adequate
coordination and a standard methodological approach. In these circumstances
outside expertise may also help manage the process.

There are areas, however, where external advisors should not be used, such as
regional or national networking at policy level. External expertise should not replace
the work that needs to be done at an institutional level to ensure the integration
of new policies into a regional or national programme. While consultants can help
facilitate meetings and workshops, the direct commitment of the institutional
partners is essential for the long term success of the action. In fact, a number of
INNO-Nets have successfully brought together consultants and policy makers in
strategic workshops with regional decision makers or between cluster managers.

The external support required can be very varied. Typically, the support could take
the form of professional and credible process facilitators, consultancy and research
organisations. Such organisations have experience in organising consultations,
running workshops, producing research papers and providing process guidance,
as well as expertise in designing and developing initiatives.

It is important that the role of these organisations is acknowledged and can be

integrated in cooperation projects via (flexible) sub-contracting arrangements.
That way, the primary stakeholders can concentrate on the development of
content and cooperation in an efficient way. However, it should be noted that it is
not always possible to identify very precisely the tasks to be sub-contracted at the
project outset. Therefore, some flexibility or contingency funds could be built into
the budget and be managed by the lead partner.

6
For further information on the CLUNET project, see:
http://www.proinno-europe.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&topicID=67&parentID=67
 12
Aiming for spill-over
effects of innovation
Main le s s on s learned
support beyond duration
and incumbents
The bottom line is to determine
how a project can create spill-
over effects by extending its
benefits beyond its duration, and
thereby guaranteeing its survival
after EU-support has ended.
An example of an innovation
stimulating project that stands a
good chance of surviving without
EU-support, while still providing
innovation stimuli to SMEs and
policy learning possibilities
to innovation agencies, is the
ADMIRE project7 (Award for
Design Management Innovating
and Reinforcing Enterprises). It
is plausible that there will be
private companies interested in
sponsoring the Award event, as
well as regional or city agencies
interested in hosting the event
in an effort to underline the
creative and innovative character
of the region or city in question.
© Shutterstock
6. The current form of grant agreement should be
opened up
Relying only on calls for proposal and calls for tender unduly limits the number of
partners that will reap the benefits of the action to an inner circle of beneficiaries.
Especially when the outcomes of a cooperation project are in the public interest,
the fruits should be free for all to harvest. This implies that organisations, Member
States or regions that were not among the initiators of a well-functioning
partnership or other kind of good practice, should have the opportunity to join
in and benefit from valuable lessons later on. That way, positive outcomes can be
disseminated more widely.
A related issue is that one should be able to build upon a successful project or a
well-functioning network. If a good initiative has reached cruising speed, the end
of the initial funding period should not necessarily mean the end of the initiative. It
takes a lot of effort to get good practice off the ground. Consequently, to dismantle
a network at the end of a funding period or to replace it with something new by
starting from scratch, often amounts to unintended and unproductive destruction of
social capital and a loss of knowledge exchange. Creating a new network consumes
a lot of energy, has high costs and may not be equally successful. To avoid high
and unnecessary transaction costs, a decent exit or follow-up strategy should be
put in place, either by leaving it to the market or by providing possibilities for an
extension of the funding.
Both these issues call for more flexibility in terms of the possibility to add
members to an established network and of the possibilities for continuation of
well-functioning or promising networks. Modalities to valorise such projects
and networks to the fullest are therefore needed. Enhancing the continuation
of better practices can, for example, be achieved via “negotiated procedures”.
Similarly, one can consider including specific selection criteria that would allow the
selection of preferred service providers for a specific project and/or to enhance the
continuation of good and better practices and include this provision in the contract
with the Commission. At present, these possibilities exist under the 7th Framework
Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7), but not under the
Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme.
7. Institutional partners are critical in projects to
address EU policy priorities
The first generation of INNO-Nets has confirmed that innovation cooperation projects
should preferably be launched in areas that are being addressed and supported at EU
policy level to have a leverage effect. For this reason, the commitment of institutional
partners is essential in the development and the long-term success of the projects.
For instance, the active involvement of members of the European Cluster Alliance
in the policy discussions on clusters proved to be an efficient feedback mechanism
for the preparation of the European Cluster Memorandum as well as the Ministerial
Conference on Clusters in Stockholm of January 2008. This confirms that it is
important to closely associate INNO-Net stakeholders to EU policy development
priorities with a view to provide feedback and create mechanisms for possible
synergies between different levels of intervention. This also implies that INNO-Net
stakeholders are able to enter into a policy dialogue with the Commission and
to share ideas on strategic issues beyond their direct interest. At the same time,
institutional partners need to learn for themselves and should be able to interact
together for their mutual benefit on operational matters.
For further information on the ADMIRE project, see:
7
http://www.proinno-europe.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&topicID=59&parentID=59
 13
8. Strategic partnerships should be broadened

Main le s s ons learned

© Shutterstock
Institutional partners are crucial for projects to have a leverage effect. However,
if membership is restricted to institutional partners, this may limit the types of
themes to be followed up, given the difficulty of finding partners with the right
competences. The need to broaden strategic partnerships and to open projects up
to non-conventional partners has been felt on several occasions. One may think,
for instance, of non-government actors like NGOs, third sector intermediaries and
citizen groups, who may have better links with specific communities.

One of the actions explored by the INNO-Learning Platform was “Innovation for all”
attempting to create a community of innovation policy makers and agencies ready
to launch joint initiatives to promote innovation for all. This could have been done
through, for example, exhibitions in museums, quiz programmes on TV, projects
developed jointly with companies to support innovation in schools, the creation
of an on-line platform for students and young people, etc. In reality, it proved to
be difficult to find institutional partners to drive such an initiative. It would have
required broadening the strategic partnership to include e.g. design studios and
business organisations. In this case, specialised partners are not to be considered as
mere professional executors but as substantial contributors to the project and their
absence would present a serious constraint to project implementation.

9. Better cooperation between PRO INNO Europe®,

Europe INNOVA and the Enterprise Europe Network
is desired
PRO INNO Europe® aims to become the focal point for transnational cooperation
between public funding innovation agencies in Europe. Europe INNOVA8 is
oriented towards the development and testing of new practical innovation support
services for SMEs, notably start-ups, delivered in the field by platforms of public-
private partnerships between European innovation support service providers. The
Enterprise Europe Network9 is a network of public support organisations that may
provide a good leverage effect to the experimental activities developed under
Europe INNOVA. The need for good cooperation between these three initiatives is
obvious and initiatives to this effect are being taken.

Under PRO INNO Europe® and Europe INNOVA, a number of novel tools and service
concepts have proven to have a high potential for supporting fast-growing SMEs
at the European level. As these tools have been developed with public support,
innovation support providers should be able to use them in a non-discriminatory
manner. For instance, and taking into account that services in support of innovation
management for SMEs are not widely available in most Member States, the
Enterprise Europe Network could be instrumental in closing this gap. This will, at
the same time, valorise the investments already made into these tools and ensure
the widest possible impact. However, in each and every case it should be carefully
assessed which strategy is the most appropriate to further leverage the results of
PRO INNO Europe® and Europe INNOVA projects. Here, the subsidiarity principle
must be strictly applied with a view to identifying the best suited level to further
implement the solutions explored and tested in European pilot actions.

Generally, there should be no a-priori preference on how to most effectively

leverage the results of PRO INNO Europe® and Europe INNOVA projects. In order to
have a real impact, new policy approaches in support of innovation, as developed
and tested through transnational cooperation, must find the widest possible
audience and political support.

www.europe-innova.org
8

www.enterprise-europe-network.ec.europa.eu
9
 14

In some cases, this may happen autonomously, based on the appropriate

Main le s s on s learned

dissemination of the results and strong self-interest of innovation funding agencies

to improve their tools and instruments by taking into account the mutual learning
supported by PRO INNO Europe® and Europe INNOVA. This is the ideal case.

In other cases, incentives may have to be provided to further use the results of
PRO INNO Europe® and Europe INNOVA projects, due to a lack of information
or financial and human resources. In this respect, Art 13b of the CIP Decision10
should be more widely used in the future, allowing for a Community contribution
to support the implementation of regional and national innovation programmes.
This instrument should be used more strategically to promote the further
implementation of “premium services” (i.e. services with a demonstrated European
added value) developed under PRO INNO Europe® and Europe INNOVA.

Finally, the Enterprise Europe Network should be more directly linked with other
innovation programmes and activities launched by the European Commission
in order to enhance the number of opportunities and to ensure a Europe-wide
take-up of the results developed and tested by them. However, in this case the
European added value needs to be clearly demonstrated, taking full account of the
subsidiarity principle. Crowding-out effects with market-driven services as well as
duplication of Member States’ efforts should be carefully avoided.

PRO INNO Europe® is an important instrument for improving the effectiveness

and impact of innovation support in Europe. However, in order to maximise its
impact, a more strategic approach must be followed to leverage its results into a
sustainable provision of new or better innovation support mechanisms. This is the
main challenge for the years ahead.

10. Leave room for open discussions on future

priorities and trends
The INNO-Learning Platform 2007 learning cycle has illustrated
the importance of creating ample room and stimulating conditions
for open discussions on future transnational cooperation activities
in support of innovation in Europe. There is a pressing need to
understand new trends, to identify emerging issues, and to analyse
their consequences for innovation support.

The ambition of the ILP is to create optimal conditions for generating

better foresight and visions. That requires maximum openness, not
only to new ideas and fresh insights, but also creating the right
momentum among wider circles of stakeholders, going beyond
involvement of the customary actors in innovation policy debates.

Therefore, a principal challenge for INNO-Nets and INNO-Actions is to establish

the circumstances that allow new phenomena to be seen as opportunities rather
than threats, and that allow unconventional solutions to mature. David Robson has
used the metaphor of gardening to illustrate this: “…(we) need to have a place
where new ideas can grow and flourish…”. Following on from this metaphor the
ILP should, therefore, be a nursery garden where new ideas are seeded and the best
seedlings selected to be planted.

“Action in relation to innovation may include supporting national and regional programmes for business innovation”,
10

Art 13b, Decision N° 1639/2006/EC of 24.10.2006 establishing the CIP framework programme, see:
http://ec.europa.eu/cip/ciplegalbase_en.htm
 15
Conclusions and outlook

Conclus ions and outlook

The first learning cycle of the INNO-Learning Platform has shown that transnational
cooperation and policy learning can contribute to more effective and more efficient
innovation support. For this to work out, it is crucial to identify complementarities
between support mechanisms at different levels of government and to get the right
cooperation and learning mechanisms in place. The latter requires, in particular,
availability of and access to relevant information, and mechanisms for informa-
tion exchange. Experiences in the first learning cycle have also shown that more is
needed to go beyond networking and exchange of information. True transnational
policy cooperation requires personal contacts and face-to-face dialogue for policy
learning, as well as sufficiently strong incentives and the involvement of moderators
and experts for hands-on project work. Finally, to embed and safeguard transnational
policy learning and to secure the results thereof, it appears important to safeguard
the continuation of (the financing of) successful networks, to broaden partnerships
beyond public agencies, to facilitate cooperation between complementary policy
initiatives at EU-level such as PRO INNO Europe®, Europe INNOVA and the Enterprise
Europe Network, and to further promote the large scale roll-out of “premium ser-
vices” developed, tested and validated in European pilot actions.

The second and third ILP learning cycles will build upon these insights and carry
policy learning and transnational policy cooperation further. Consultation of the
INNO-Learning Steering Group (ILSG) during the second and third learning cycle will
remain of essential importance to the building-up of knowledge and development of
ideas on how to improve the effectiveness of innovation policy support.

The second cycle will, in particular, be devoted to analytical work on a number of

policy issues related to improving cooperation in support for innovation in Europe.
The aim of this work is to contribute to: i) better understanding of the concept and
scope of existing innovation support in Europe; ii) better understanding of the role
of the Community in support of innovation, including how to apply the subsidiarity
principle to innovation support; and iii) identifying future options for more effective
Community support for innovation.

The analytical work in this learning cycle will support the preparation of a public
consultation on ‘more effective innovation support in Europe’, to be launched by
DG Enterprise and Industry at the beginning of 2009. To support this consultation, a
web-based questionnaire will be developed and promotional activities will be under-
taken to enhance the response rate from target audiences.

The third ILP learning cycle is foreseen to assist the European Commission in the
preparation of the future INNO-Partnering Forum to be launched as part of the
second phase of PRO INNO Europe®11. This will notably entail supporting prepara-
tions for peer reviews between innovation agencies to search for better practices in
providing innovation support services, and supporting preparations for setting up a
transnational good practice exchange scheme between innovation agencies based
on a twinning concept.

Throughout these learning cycles, an online Partner Search Tool12 will be developed,
maintained, and updated on a continuous basis to support and facilitate cooperation
and partnering between different potential participants. This online tool aims, in par-
ticular, to shape new cooperation initiatives (e.g. to act as a partner search facility in
support of future PRO INNO Europe® and Europe INNOVA calls for proposals to indi-
cate interest in leading possible activities). It will also serve to facilitate the association
of other actors with INNO-Nets by promoting possibilities to become involved in
already established partnerships, such as the European Cluster Alliance and to indi-
cate interest in being associated with future activities of the new INNO-Nets.

See further information on the second phase of PRO INNO Europe®, see:
11

http://www.proinno-europe.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&topicID=426&parentID=50

http://www.proinno-europe.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&topicID=434&parentID=0
12