Renewing the Governance of innovation in Zuid Holland

Renewing the Governance of Innovation

Ine NevenProvince of Zuid- Holland

Rachida FtachiAnteaGroup

Energy and Water WorksAction Group

Renewing the Governance of Innovation

Ine NevenProvince of Zuid- Holland

Rachida FtachiAnteaGroup


Content1. Evaluation: What can we learn from

the 2 way process to achieve the goals of EIP-water AG EWW?

2. Confronting practice with theory What we can learn from theory?

3. Reflection: AG’s added value to the renewal of the governance of innovation?

4. Dispute: RoundTableTalk with audience: exchange of ideas and arguments for the renewal of the governance of innovation


Goals & Ambitionsevaluation and reflection on a two–way - process

1. Process of dealing with the issues of the governance of Innovation

2. Process of Communication & Coordination: knowledge valorization & dissemmiation

Energy and Water WorksAction Group Lessons learned

Process of dealing with the issues of the governance of Innovation

20

13In

vent

ory B

&B’s

/ ph

ase

2014

Advic

e Va

lley o

f

Deat

h to

H20

20EU

-Test

case

Regu

lator

y B&B

s

2015

B&Bs

& So

lutio

ns

Lian:

new

go

vern

ance

for

ZWD

2016

Expe

rtmee

ting

EC

natu

re, l

egal

, wa

ter

Rene

win

g Go

vern

ance

of

inno

vatio

n

Pavel Misiga (EC-DG Envi HoWU)“The European Commission aims to develop laws and regulations that stimulate innovation, in order to promote systemic change and wants to improve the governance of

innovation to be appropriate to sustain change and not to excite extra barriers and bottlenecks” (Milan, 2015).

Energy and Water WorksAction Group Lessons learned

Process of dealing with the issues of the governance of Innovation

1. to apply new governance models in practise

2. to co-create better (integrated) regulations for better results in line with improved communication and coordination

3. to involve a (duo) ambassador / governmental leader, who is policy-& market oriented ass well

4. to raise a joint, cooperative and all-inclusive multi–level governance platform with representatives from all AG-involved MSs PM said: the EC cannot attend platforms of the individual MSs

To be successful in the implementation processes of cross-over innovations depends on our ability

EC officials were involved in al 7 AG-partner meetings

They showed their interest, commitment and loyalty

to our work

Energy and Water WorksAction Group What can we learn from theory?

About AG meetings dealing with the issues of the governance of innovation

• Confrontation with theory

• Proceeding actions for renewal the governance of of innovation

• Experiences shared in direct interaction between EIP-Water AG EWW & & EC

• Lessons learned in AG-meetings

Action Groups practice

Tales from the

field

reflectionDecide to renew


Sayings made in direct interaction between EIP-Water AG EWW & EC-officials

(PM) “The EC aims to develop laws and regulations that stimulate innovation, in order to promote systemic change and wants to improve the governance of innovation to be appropriate to sustain

change and not to excite extra barriers and bottlenecks” The barriers that still hamper the implementation of water innovations are not impossible to take away. The knowledge is there, but how

to address these barriers systematically is still the problem (Milan, 2015)

(PM) “ we need an integral (holistic) approach to EIA-assessments of energy from water (demonstration) projects, whereby the positive effects are weight appropriately against the negative impacts, such as generation of clean and sustainable energy, avoided CO2 emissions, clean water, protection against

flooding, combatting sea water level rise etc.”


Sayings made in direct interaction between EIP-Water AG EWW & EC-officials

(PM, 25 Jan’16 ) ” to generate data for the different DG’s streamlining to EIA can help. The methodology for potential significant negative impacts of a project is to find alternatives and to

mitigate the potential negative impacts. However, offsetting negative impacts with positive impacts (at EU level) is very complicated, because this becomes a political or even ethical

discussion. It is up to Member states to find the balance, not the EU

(PM, 25 Jan ‘16) “Mind that relevance of dealing with the issues of the governance of innovation, differ between the different EC-DG’s. For DG Environment rules and procedures are relevant;

Within the rules you can talk about: what is flexibility; what is early innovation PCP/ PPP; under what conditions can risks be controlled? Relevant for EC DG research is: What can be done to

speed up innovation implementation?


2a. What can we learn from theory?

Consensus about relevant norms and values

low high

(lack off) certainty about relevant Knowledge for judging and tackling problems

low

Ill-structured or ‘wicked’ problems

Administrative sollutionPolicy as learning

Moderate structured problem

Administrative solutionPolicy as negotiation

high

Moderate structured problem

Administrative solution is depolitisation of the problemPolicy as pacification (ethical

issues)

Structured problem

Administrative sollution is formal and informal

regulationPolicy as a rugulating

strategy


What can we learn from theory?

Operational level

Tactical level

Strategic officiallevel

Strategic political, steering level

• Instrumental accomodation, within existing frames

• Adjustments in goals• Discussion about norms

• Ideological adjustments of policy

• paradigm shifts

• Adjustments of policy strategies

• Rules of the game


Reflex theory <> practiceQ

uesti

ons? How to accommodate roles to new

governance practices?

Addressing barriers systematically is still the problem. Is relating them to

the different levels of policy – learning a way out?

Should we aim a position in special EU-working groups and / or REFIT

Platform?


lessons learned on communication

Multipurpose process strategy 1. Influencing (lobby) European Environmental Policy

2. Influencing European Common Strategic Framework > working program(s) Horizon 2020

3. Improving networking and cooperation

4. Improving visibility and exposure


Lessons learned 1

Influencing (lobby) European Environmental Policy requires a multilevel approach

• Policy-making responsibility is shared among a variety of actors at European, national and subnational levels. As an AG we need to target all three levels. So far we have succeeded to address the barriers encountered in projects at the EU and and MS level.


Lessons learned 2

Influencing European Common Strategic Framework and the working programmes of H2020

• Influencing the content of the WP can be done at different stages in the drafting process. The further you get in the process, the more difficult it is to influence the content. So far we have influenced the WP2016-2017 to a limited extent.


Lessons learned 3

Improving networking and cooperation

• There is strength in numbers: by cooperating as an EU AG we can create a shared vision and joint strategies to address concerns that go beyond the MS level (e.g. EU environmental legislation).

• We need to look more into alignment or formal cooperation with other groups and networks (e.g. Ocean Energy Forum).


Lessons learned 4

Improving visibility and exposure

• Communicate on our results and achievements through different channels and mediums is essential to increase the AG visibility. However, it remains difficult to fully engage the wider AG network, especially across Europe.


Conclusion

In order to effectively contribute to EU-policy making we need to anchor our joint AG vision and ensure that we act as one common AG to pursue

common goals and objectives on a European level.


Discussion

Should we go for a green deal experiment or a real life learning process in policymaking?


Discussion

Who should take the lead in the development of a joint, cooperative and all-inclusive multi–level governance platform including public-private-partnerships, non-governmental organisations and the general public (AG in the lead and/or align / incorporation in OEF (DG Mare?)

Government & Nonprofit

Renewing the Governance of innovation in Zuid Holland