IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa05p109.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A concept for evaluating innovation related actions under the EU Structural Funds

Author

Listed:
  • Tanja Fleischhauer

Abstract

Beginning with 1 January 2007 a new programming period of the European Structural Funds is going to start (2007-2013). The negotiations about the contents and the re-gional structure of the funds are still in progress, but the European Commission has al-ready published her thoughts in the Third Cohesion Report and in some draft regulations (KOM 2004/492; KOM 2004/493; KOM 2004/494; KOM 2004/495). Main elements of the Commission’s proposal are the concentration of funding for the least developed regions and Member States, the thematic concentration on the strategies of Lisbon and Gothenburg as well as institutional capacity building (KOM 2004: XXXVI). The Commission is willing to introduce a new priority (‘Regional Competitiveness and Employment’) as a successor of Objective 2 to strengthen the regional competitiveness and the employment. The new priority is following the Lisbon Strategy and therefore mainly promoting innovation and the knowledge society (ERDMENGER; ZIEGLER 2004: 327). Besides the textual change of the funding the Commission’s proposal is making clear, that the evaluation of structural funding is – as it has been in the past programming pe-riods – a necessary condition to achieve the quality standards of funding. This means that ex-ante-, mid-term- as well as ex-post-Evaluations remain obligatory (KOM 2004: XXXVII). At present a complete and consistent evaluation of the funding-effects can not necessar-ily take place, because of a lack of statistical information on the regional level as well as difficulties in comparing the regions’ funding achievements (z.B. TOEPEL 2000: 400; BEYWL; TAUT 2000: 359). These problems are especially true for the evaluation of innova-tion related actions, because the general problems are accumulated with problems of the measurability of innovation (PERRIN 2000: 5ff; DIEZ 2001: 912ff; AUTIO 1998: 132). If the plans of the commission happen to turn into law on 1 January 2007, the importance of Innovation related actions will increase as well as the political requirement to measure and value their effects. The goal of this paper is to contribute to an alternative concept to evaluate innovation related actions under the EU Structural Funds. Main differences between the present evaluation concept and the paper’s proposal point to problems, which were identified by two case studies of existing evaluations of innovation related actions.

Suggested Citation

  • Tanja Fleischhauer, 2005. "A concept for evaluating innovation related actions under the EU Structural Funds," ERSA conference papers ersa05p109, European Regional Science Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa05p109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa05/papers/109.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. S. Hacker & Börje Johansson & Charlie Karlsson (ed.), 2004. "Emerging Market Economies and European Economic Integration," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3332.
    2. Freeman, C., 1991. "Networks of innovators: A synthesis of research issues," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 499-514, October.
    3. Kathleen Toepel, 2000. "Evaluation in der Regionalpolitik," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 69(3), pages 395-405.
    4. Roberto P. Camagni, 1995. "The Concept Of Innovative Milieu And Its Relevance For Public Policies In European Lagging Regions," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(4), pages 317-340, October.
    5. Wolfgang Beywl & Sandy Taut, 2000. "Standards: aktuelle Strategie zur Qualitätsentwicklung in der Evaluation," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 69(3), pages 358-370.
    6. Chris Freeman & Luc Soete, 1997. "The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 3, volume 1, number 0262061953, December.
    7. Maria Angeles Diez, 2001. "The Evaluation of Regional Innovation and Cluster Policies: Towards a Participatory Approach," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(7), pages 907-923, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Attila Havas, 2016. "Social and Business Innovations: Are Common Measurement Approaches Possible?," Foresight-Russia Форсайт, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 10(2 (eng)), pages 58-80.
    2. Giuliani, Elisa & Pietrobelli, Carlo, 2014. "Social Network Analysis Methodologies for the Evaluation of Cluster Development Programs," Papers in Innovation Studies 2014/11, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    3. Alan D. MacPherson, 1998. "Academic-industry linkages and small firm innovation: evidence from the scientific instruments sector," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 261-276, January.
    4. Frieder Mayer–Krahmer & Marianne Kulicke, 2002. "Gründungen an der Schnittstelle zwischen Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft – die Rolle der Hochschulen," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 3(3), pages 257-277, August.
    5. Gachino, Geoffrey, 2007. "Technological spillovers from multinational presence - Towards a conceptual framework," MERIT Working Papers 2007-017, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    6. Havas, Attila, 2016. "Recent economic theorising on innovation: Lessons for analysing social innovation," MPRA Paper 77385, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Havas, Attila, 2014. "Types of knowledge and diversity of business-academia collaborations: Implications for measurement and policy," MPRA Paper 65908, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 23 May 2015.
    8. Rossi, Federica, 2002. "An introductory overview of innovation studies," MPRA Paper 9106, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Jun 2008.
    9. A.A. Egbetokun & W.O. Siyanbola & A.A. Adeniyi, 2010. "Learning to innovate in Nigeria's cable and wire manufacturing subsector: inferences from a firm-level case study," International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(1), pages 55-74.
    10. Röhl, Klaus-Heiner, 2000. "Die Eignung der sächsischen Agglomerationsräume als Innovations- und Wachstumspole für die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung des Landes," Discussion Papers 1/2000, Technische Universität Dresden, "Friedrich List" Faculty of Transport and Traffic Sciences, Institute of Transport and Economics.
    11. Attila Havas, 2015. "The persistent high-tech myth in the EC policy circles - Implications for the EU10 countries," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1517, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    12. Joana Almodovar & Aurora A.C. Teixeira, 2014. "Assessing the Importance of Local Supporting Organizations in the Automotive Industry: A Hybrid Dynamic Framework of Innovation Networks," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(4), pages 841-865, April.
    13. Rooij, Arjan van, 2005. "Why do firms acquire technology?: The example of DSM's ammonia plants, 1925-1970," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 836-851, August.
    14. Havas, Attila, 2011. "Governing policy processes and foresight," MPRA Paper 38119, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Attila Havas, 2015. "Various approaches to measuring business innovation: their relevance for capturing social innovation," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1554, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    16. Pier Paolo Saviotti, 2012. "R&D and the Firm," Chapters, in: Michael Dietrich & Jackie Krafft (ed.), Handbook on the Economics and Theory of the Firm, chapter 29, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Foxon, T. J. & Gross, R. & Chase, A. & Howes, J. & Arnall, A. & Anderson, D., 2005. "UK innovation systems for new and renewable energy technologies: drivers, barriers and systems failures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(16), pages 2123-2137, November.
    18. Marcel Bednarz & Tom Broekel, 2020. "Pulled or pushed? The spatial diffusion of wind energy between local demand and supply [Constructing regional advantage: platform policies based on related variety and differentiated knowledge base," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(4), pages 893-916.
    19. Ziad Rotaba & Catherine Beaudry, 2012. "How Do High, Medium, And Low Tech Firms Innovate? A System Of Innovation (Si) Approach," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(05), pages 1-23.
    20. Lex Borghans & Bas ter Weel, 2011. "Computers, skills and wages," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(29), pages 4607-4622.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa05p109. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.