Analysis of the Supply of Services and Diffusion of Knowledge to Firms in the Caribbean

1

ANALYSIS OF THE SUPPLY OF SERVICES AND DIFFUSION OF KNOWLEDGE TO FIRMS IN THE CARIBBEAN

EU/ACP FUNDED CARIBBEAN WELCOME PROJECT

Vanessa ClarkeSenior Expert, Caribbean WELCOME Project Scientific Research Council3rd International ConferenceJamaica November 7, 2012

2

FocusR&D Budget ConsiderationsClient Relations and NeedsIndustry-Science RelationsCooperation Perceptions

3

ServicesSupporting institutions are organisations

who aim to cater to the needs of MSME’sClients – agro-processors, farmers

Businees/Private Sector

(Innovation)

Research Organisations

(Research)

Educational Institutions (Education)

Entrepreneurship, enabling

sustainable development

4

57%

7%

36%

Percentage of respondents from each country that participated in the survey.

Jamaica

Saint Lucia

Trinidad & Tobago

Countries

5

Directly36%

Indirectly29%

Not in-

volved29%

No response7%

Involvement in Science and Technology

Policies•Inform policies •Provide technological assistance, analytical testing services and Research and Development.• Aid in developing National Policies for Science and Technology.

6

R&D BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS

7

Budget from Research, Technological Development and Innovation

Less than 10% 10-25% 25-50% Greater than 75% No response0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

14%

7% 7%

14%

57%

Percentage of Budget generated by RTDI (2009)

8

Budget for Research, Technological Development and Innovation

Less than 10% 10-25% 25-50% Greater than 75%

No response0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

43%

7%

21%

7%

21%

Percentage of Budget involved in RTDI (2009)

9

CLIENT RELATIONS AND NEEDS

10

Classification of CompaniesResearch Performers

- research department or equivalent- able to take long run view of technological capabilities

Technological Competence

- multiple engineers/technicians- Outsourced R & D activities- some budgetary discretion- able to participate in technology networks

Minimum-Capability Companies

- one engineer- able to adopt/ adapt to packaged solutions

-Quality Assurance Lab in place

- may need implementation help

Low-Technology SMEs

- no meaningful technological capability

- no perceived need for this- may be no actual need

11

Client Base

Less than 10%

10-25% 25-50% 50-75% Greater than 75%

No response0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

7% 7% 7%

14%

7%

57%

14% 14%

7%7% 7%

50%

29%

14%

7%

50%

21%

7% 7%

64%

Percentage of Current Client Base of Supporting Institutions

Low Technology FirmsMinimum ca-pability firmsTechnological competent firmsResearch Per-formers

12

Methods Used to Promote Services Locally

Printed materials

Local Media

Internet

Conferences and presentations to groups of firms

Fairs or other trade events

Visits to individual firms

Other

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

7%

29%

21%

43%

21%

57%

14%

13

Methods Used to Promote Services Regionally

Printed materials

Local Media

Internet

Conferences and presentations to groups of firms

Fairs or other trade events

Visits to individual firms

Other

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

14%

14%

29%

43%

7%

29%

7%

14

Understanding and Experience with Innovative Activities of Local Firms

We do not have real understanding of the needs of firms with respect to innovation

We occasionally work with firms to assist them with their innovation projects

We work with firms on a continuous basis to develop their innovation capacity

Other

No response

0% 5% 10%15%20%25%30%35%40%

7%

29%

36%

14%

14%

15

We become aware of the needs of firms via third parties or the media

We occasionally work with firms to assist them with their innovation projects

We work with firms on a continuous basis to develop their innovation capacity

Other

No response

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

36%

7%

7%

36%

.Understanding and Experience with Innovative Activities of Regional Firms

Delete last option from Master file

16

Barriers Preventing Local Firms to Launch Innovative Projects

Hight cost of innovation

Large time span for return on investment

High Risk

Lack of the appropriate expertise and knowledge inside the company

Lack of specialized personnel

Lack of technological information

Non-existence of technology support services

Lack of financial resources

0%10%

20%30%

40%50%

60%70%

80%90%

100%

93%

50%

43%

57%

50%

43%

50%

79%

17

Hight cost of innovation

Large time span for return on investment

High Risk

Lack of the appropriate expertise and knowledge inside the company

Lack of specialized personnel

Lack of financial resources

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

64%

43%

36%

36%

36%

50%

Barriers Preventing Regional Firms to Launch Innovative Projects

18

INDUSTRY – SCIENCE RELATIONS

LOCALLY AND REGIONALLY

19

Major Obstacles for Establishing Relations Between Science and Industry Locally

Shortage of qualified personnel in industry

Shortage of qualified personnel in science

Shortage of capital in industry

Shortage of capital in science

Lack of technical capacities/resources

Lack of entrepreneurial thinking in science

Lack of trust

Fear of disseminating private info to com-petitors

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

57%

57%

86%

86%

57%

64%

64%

57%

20

Major Obstacles for Establishing Relations Between Science and Industry Regionally

Shortage of qualified personnel in science

Shortage of capital in industry

Shortage of capital in science

Lack of administrative support

Lack of technical capacities/resources

Lack of entrepreneurial thinking in science

Lack of trust

Uncertainty on outcomes of joint R&D

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

43%

50%

71%

43%

36%

36%

43%

36%

21

Public Intervention Initiatives to Promote Industry-Science Relations Regionally

Public financial support for joint R&D projects between industry and science

Operating joint research labs

Programmes for researcher mobility be-tween science and industry

Graduate's education programme

Support for intermediary structures

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

57%

50%

36%

36%

64%

22

COOPERATION PERCEPTION

23

Satisfaction with Current Level of Cooperation

No86%

No response14%

24

Limited range of support institutions in the region

Limited number of support institutions in the region

High costs of consulting/services

Mistrust of potential partners towards cooperation

Lack of funding resources

Difficulties with the management of financial support

Low confidence in local expertise

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

21%

21%

57%

21%

29%

36%

36%

Obstacles to the Lack of Cooperation between Firms and Supporting Organizations

25

Factors That Can Improve Cooperation Levels Between Supporting Institutions and Local Firms

The creation of financial incentives

The creation of an information database

The promotion of activities

The fostering of greater relationships

The diversification and improve-mentsof products offered by support

institutions

Active involvement of all stake-holders

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

64%

71%

79%

79%

57%

79%

26

Main Barriers to Cooperation with Organizations from Other Countries

Priorities of my organization

Fear of loss of intellectual property/lack of trust

High monetary costs associated with collaborations

Funding (search for or lack of)

Travel costs

Availability of intermediaries assisting my organization to locate partners

Knowledge about other regional partners which could participate in a regional cooperation network or project

% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

36%

55%

73%

64%

45%

55%

36%

27

Main Drivers for Supporting Institutions to Cooperate with Other Organizations

Priorities of my organization

Need to acquire new know-how

Awareness of opportunities(R&D and Innovation support)

Technical skills of staff

Language skills of staff

Funding (search for/lack of)

Travel costs

Cultural barriers(different approaches to business practices)

Knowledge about other regional partners which could participate in a regional cooperation network/project

67%

33%

67%

33%

33%

100%

33%

33%

67%

28

Summary36% of supporting institutions are directly

involved in policy making with 28% more indirectly

14% of supporting institutions had greater than 75% of their budget generated by RTDI. Conversely, 43% used less than 10% of their budget in RTDI

Current client base of supporting institutions is diverse 36% of worked on a continuous basis with local firms whilst 36% worked occasionally with regional firms.

29

The main barriers for MSME’s to launching innovative projects; establishing of Industry science relations and obstacles to cooperation. ◦ Money

capacity building travel costs

◦ Trust◦ Priorities◦ Access to information◦ Lack of entrepreneurial thinking

Suggested public intervention strategies were to create better capacity building programmes.

No one is satisfied with current cooperation levels

Summary

30

THANK YOU

The End