List...

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under the grant agreement no. 609453.

DELIVERABLE Project Acronym: MAGHRENOV Grant Agreement number: 609453 Project Title: Convergence between EU and MAGHREB MPC innovation systems

in the field of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (RE&EE) – A test-bed for fostering Euro Mediterranean Innovation Space (EMIS)

D3.5 LIST OF PRIORITIES TO BE SUPPORTED JOINTLY AS WELL AS INDIVIDUALLY BY THE

PARTNERS OR OTHER INSTITUTIONS

Version: 1.0 Authors: AmenAllah GUIZANI (Independent Expert) Helene BEN KHEMIS (ANME) Internal Reviewers: Olga MACKIEWICZ (KIC) Claude AYACHE (KIC) Nadia ZEDDOU (IRESEN) Abdelhak CHAIBI (R&D Maroc)

Dissemination Level

P Public X

C Confidential, only for members of the consortium and the Commission Services

D3.5 List of Priorities to be Supported Jointly as well as Individually by the Partners or other Institutions

© MAGHRENOV Consortium Version 1.0 - 15/09/2014 2

Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................. 2!List of Tables .................................................................................................................. 3!List of Figures ................................................................................................................. 3!Revision History ............................................................................................................... 4!Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 5!1! Introduction ............................................................................................................... 6!2! Objectives of the Deliverable .......................................................................................... 6!3! Methodology Adopted ................................................................................................... 7!4! Current Situation and Analysis of the Results Obtained ........................................................... 9!

4.1! Current Situation ................................................................................................. 10!4.2! Analysis of the Results Obtained ............................................................................... 10!4.3! Analysis of the Open Question .................................................................................. 17!

5! Recommendations – List of Priorities ............................................................................... 21!6! Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 24!7! References .............................................................................................................. 25!Annex 1: Database of Interviewees ...................................................................................... 26!Annex 2: Questionnaire on the Prioritisation of Joint Objectives for Research & Development (R&D) and Support to Innovation [Concerning Renewable Energy & Energy Efficiency (RE&EE)] ........................... 28!



List of Tables Table 1: Stakeholders participating in the questionnaire from Tunisia .............................................. 9!Table 2: Stakeholders participating in the questionnaire from Morocco ............................................ 9!Table 3: Classification of interviewees’ answers on the bottlenecks interfering the R&D activities .......... 20!

List of Figures Figure 1: Methodology adopted ............................................................................................ 8 Figure 2: Gender of those who responded the questionnaire ....................................................... 10 Figure 3: Countries of the interviewees ................................................................................ 10 Figure 4: Kind of institutions answering the questionnaire .......................................................... 11 Figure 5: Position of those who responded the questionnaire ....................................................... 11 Figure 6: Field of activity of institutions answering the questionnaire ............................................ 11 Figure 7: Main thematics on which interviewees are working on/will work on in the future .................. 12 Figure 8: The methodology adopted to define R&D activities/priorities .......................................... 12 Figure 9: Body in charge of the assessment of the R&D activities .................................................. 12 Figure 10: Relevance of projects in the R&D infrastructure ......................................................... 12 Figure 11: Relevance of Research Platforms in the R&D infrastructure ........................................... 12 Figure 12: Relevance of Research centres in the R&D infrastructure .............................................. 13 Figure 13: Relevance of Shared database in the R&D infrastructure ............................................... 13 Figure 14: Relevance of Competence and expertise network in the R&D infrastructure ....................... 13 Figure 15: Relevance of Exchange platform (online) in the R&D infrastructure .................................. 13 Figure 16: Relevance of Websites in the R&D infrastructure ........................................................ 13 Figure 17: Relevance of Laboratories in the R&D infrastructure .................................................... 13 Figure 18: Relevance of Shared archives in the R&D infrastructure ................................................ 13 Figure 19: Kind of networks in which interviewees are involved in ................................................ 14 Figure 20: Opportunities offered by networks ......................................................................... 14 Figure 21: Participation of the Industries (SMEs) involved in RE&EE in the R&D activities ..................... 14 Figure 22: Participation of the Industries (Mid & Big Companies) involved in RE&EE in the R&D activities .. 14 Figure 23: Relevance of the existing industrial funding schemes related to R&D activities in RE&EE ........ 14 Figure 24: Involvement of Industries (SMEs) in the national/international funding schemes allocated to R&D activities ..................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 25: Involvement of Industries (Mid & Big Companies) in the national/international funding schemes allocated to R&D activities ................................................................................................ 15 Figure 26: Online platforms used which provide information/links to available funding schemes, financial bodies ........................................................................................................................ 15 Figure 27: Kind of EU Programs in which institutions, answering the questionnaire, participated ............ 15 Figure 28: Main expected benefits of collaboration with foreign partners in the R&D EU projects ........... 15 Figure 29: Kind of support needed to improve the Innovation in the R&D activities ............................ 16 Figure 30: Relevance of the relatedNational Innovation System (NIS) ............................................. 16 Figure 31: Relevance of the support of the interface structures (Incubator, Technology Parks, Technology Transfer Office, etc.) in the National Innovation System ............................................................ 16 Figure 32: Relevance of the existing regulations (laws, decrees, patent, etc.) for Innovation ................ 16 Figure 33: Relevance of the funding schemes allocated to Innovation ............................................ 17 Figure 34: Relevance of the level of entrepreneurial education – Competence Management ................. 17 Figure 35: Institutions desiring receive of the results of this questionnaire ...................................... 17 Figure 36: Summary of the recommendations ......................................................................... 23



Revision History

Revision Date Author Organization Description

0.1 15/09/2014 AmenAllah GUIZANI

Independent Expert

Initial draft

0.2 20/09/2014 Olga MACKIEWICZ

KIC Coordinator review

1.0 22/09/2014 AmenAllah GUIZANI

Independent Expert

Final Version

Statement of originality:

This deliverable contains original unpublished work except where clearly indicated otherwise. Acknowledgement of previously published material and of the work of others has been made through appropriate citation, quotation or both.



Executive Summary The present document is part of the Work Package 3’s deliverables of MAGHRENOV Project; it highlights a list of priorities to be supported jointly as well as individually by the partners or other institutions. The task leader is the Tunisian National Agency for Energy Conservation (ANME).

The obtained results of this report match well with the objectives of the Work Package 3 – Task 3.C: Prioritisation of joint objectives for Research and Development (R&D) and support to innovation. In fact, the elaborated questionnaire within the frame of this task was divided into two main parts:

• The first part was dedicated to collect several points of view of the prioritisation of joint objectives for R&D.

• The second one was devoted to the current status of the support to innovation in the EuroMed context, focusing on Maghreb.

This questionnaire was a useful tool to achieve the aim of task 3.C and then to propose some priorities to be supported jointly as well as individually by the partners or other institutions in the Maghreb (especially Tunisia and Morocco).



1 Introduction The purpose of this deliverable is to establish priorities for supporting Research & Development (R&D) activities as well as innovation programmes in the field of Renewable Energy & Energy Efficiency (RE&EE) in the EuroMed context with a focus on the Maghreb. The output of this report would also serve as a referential for future support activities with higher expected impact on business activity.

This deliverable D3.5 is structured as follow:

Section 2: A short introduction is given.

Section 3-4: The objectives of the deliverable as well as the objectives of the related Work Package are detailed; these objectives are followed by an explanation of the adopted methodology in the elaboration of this report.

Section 5: The current situation is presented accompanied by the analysis of the collected results of the questionnaire designed to achieve the aim of the task.

Section 6: A list of recommendations is proposed including the main priorities to be supported jointly as well as individually by the partners of the MAGHRENOV project or other institutions.

2 Objectives of the Deliverable The deliverable D3.5 entitled ‘List of priorities to be supported jointly as well as individually by the partners or other institutions’ is related to task 3.C which targets the establishment of common priorities for supporting R&D activities as well incremental or break-through-innovation programs. This can serve as a referential for future support activities (as indicated in the exploratory phase addressed in Work Package 4 (WP4) and Work Package 5 (WP5) and an expected sustainable version) with higher expected impact on business activity. Activities under WP4 and possibly WP5, also can serve as a feedback to consolidate market intelligence especially through specific market studies.

In addition to that, the related Work Package to this task aims at increasing a shared knowledge on the conditions of innovation for RE&EE in the EuroMed context, focusing on Maghreb to start with.

Three lines of action were identified in order to help fulfil this objective:

• Develop innovative RE&EE market intelligence in the concerned area and create capacity for foresight modelling.

• Develop a common vision of RE&EE infrastructures needs in the area and articulate it with the ESFRI (European Strategy Forum for Research Infrastructures) vision for European Union (EU) (next ESFRI roadmap to be delivered in 2015).



3 Methodology Adopted In order to achieve the objectives of this deliverable, a questionnaire on the Prioritisation of joint objectives for Research & Development (R&D) and support to innovation [concerning Renewable Energy & Energy Efficiency (RE&EE) was elaborated. It was composed of two parts: one for the collection of several points of view on the prioritisation of joint objectives for R&D and one for the current status of the support to innovation.

This questionnaire was then addressed to selected stakeholders, located in Tunisia and Morocco, involved in the RE&EE value chain (from R&D to industry).

Well-qualified and experienced interviewees in these stakeholders were asked to answer the survey, which was opened only for them. This choice was made since it is important to have the best and the most significant answers which will allow to draw up the fruitful recommendations for the European Commission as well as for the Policy level in both countries.

Moreover, the addressed stakeholders were classified into three levels:

• Macro-level (Policy Level)

Public authorities, policy-makers: Governing and setting up framework conditions.

• Meso-level (Institutional Support Level)

Institutional innovation support organisations or publicly funded initiatives / programmes: Institutions and initiatives are tools to put R&D and innovation policies into practice.

• Micro-level (Innovation Capacity Level)

Firms, R&D centres, academia, educational institutions, etc.: Main beneficiaries of support measures and main producers of knowledge, innovation, technologies, and products.

Furthermore, previous experiences with online questionnaires showed that actors and stakeholders don't believe anymore in this kind of surveys, because they didn't receive any feedback later and they didn't see any touchable or concrete actions related to the objectives of the questionnaires. To this purpose, they don't accept anymore to allocate even just 5 minutes to answer. That's why this questionnaire was conceived to be concise, precise and easy to answer.

The model used draws on a wide range of data from the Experts Opinions. The answers meet the need for up-to-date and far-reaching data, providing valuable qualitative information for which hard data sources are scarce or non-existent.

Among the persons approached, 40 national experts (27 from Tunisia - 13 from Morocco) completed the survey. These experts were asked to provide freely their opinions in only one question on 'What are in your opinion the existing bottlenecks in the R&D sector in your country and the main barriers preventing the exploitation and the valorisation of the research results?’

The data gathered thus provide a unique source of insight and a qualitative portrait of each nation’s innovation concept. The questions in the study follow a structure asking the interviewees to evaluate, on a scale of 1 to 5 and also from Poor to Excellent, the current conditions of their particular innovation environment they are operating in. At one end of the scale, value 1 represents the worst possible operating condition or situation and at the other end of the scale, value 5represents the best conditions.



The figure below summarizes the methodology adopted:

Figure 1: Methodology adopted

The questionnaire was spread by using the mailing lists of stakeholders and many efforts were also done to advertise via social networks and via the website of the project:

Links

LinkedIn of MAGHRENOV Project www.linkedin.com/groups/Maghrenov-7424021

Facebook page of MAGHRENOV Project www.facebook.com/Maghrenov

Facebook page of the TUnisian National Innovation System (TUNISY)

www.facebook.com/groups/549524458392650/

Facebook page of the Technology Transfer Office (TTO) of CRTEn (Research and Technology Centre of Energy))

www.facebook.com/BuTT.CRTEn

MAGHRENOV Project Website www.maghrenov.eu/blog/view/2522/prioritisation-of-joint-objectives-for-research-development



4 Current Situation and Analysis of the Results Obtained

40 experts answered the survey (27 from Tunisia and 13 from Morocco); they belong to different levels mentioned above (abbreviation could be found in the first annex):

Tunisian case

Macro level (2 experts) Meso level (12 experts) Micro level (13 experts)

MIEM

MHESR-ICT

ANME

ANPR

TTO.CRTEn

GIZ Tunisia

DUN

MCEBC

QUALIMEX

BSI

AES

CLIMA-CONSEIL

Sagemcom

ElgazalaTechnopark

ENIM

IPT

ENIT (3)

ENSIT (3)

CRTEn (4)

ISSTEG

Table 1: Stakeholders participating in the questionnaire from Tunisia

Moroccan case

Macro level Meso level (5) Micro level (8)

R&D Maroc (2)

CE3M

Incubateur MaroBtikar

IRESEN

ENIM

FSSM-UCA (2)

MENARES

University IbnZohr

IbnTofail University

University of Mohammed 1

CNEREE

Table 2: Stakeholders participating in the questionnaire from Morocco



4.1 Current Situation The current situation is analysed in terms of RE&EE thematic on which R&D activities are focused, which organism defines and finances these activities and finally which organism evaluates the work achieved. The results show that:

• The majority of the interviewees' institutions are interested in Solar Energy and Energy Efficiency, Smart Grids, Wind Energy and Biomass represent a lower field of activities whereas Geothermal Energy is subject of minor interest.

• The Ministry in charge of Higher Education and Scientific Research, in Tunisia and Morocco, defines the research priorities and subsequently orientates the financing of the activities.

• According to the interviewees', The Ministry in charge of Higher Education and Scientific Research insures the evaluation of research activities.

4.2 Analysis of the Results Obtained All the figures below represent the results obtained from the interviewees' responses.

Indeed, Figure 2 shows that approximately a quarter of answers were given by women. Figure 3 reflects the relatively weak participation of Moroccan stakeholders compared to the Tunisian ones (only one third of answers come from Morocco).

Figure 2: Gender of those who responded the questionnaire

Figure 3: Countries of the interviewees



Figure 4 deals with the kind of the institutions participating in this survey. We remark that we have roughly all types of organizations with some differences in the participation percentage.

Figure 4: Kind of institutions answering the questionnaire

Figure 5 shows that a half of received answers were from high management position of the targeted institutions, which is a bit strange because usually General Managers don’t have enough time to fill in these surveys. Anyway, it is a good thing for us because we need highly their responses since High Management level always defines the priorities of R&D activities and innovation policy which will enable us to have clear idea regarding their priorities for Tunisia and Morocco. Figure 6 indicates that roughly all participating institutions in the questionnaire are working on RE&EE. Figure 7 proves that two third of experts are working/will work on Solar Energy (PV, Thermal, Solar Electricity) and Energy Efficiency in Buildings/Industry, and we note a good balance between the remaining topics proposed (Energy Policy, Smart Grids, Wind Energy, Biomass).

Figure 5: Position of those who responded the questionnaire

Figure 6: Field of activity of institutions answering the questionnaire



Figure 7: Main thematic on which interviewees are working on/will work on in the future

Figure 8 confirms that R&D activities/priorities are not defined mostly according to specific needs of companies but answers show that, essentially, R&D activities/priorities are defined according to national priorities that have been identified through policies and to Scientific and technological watch in a national and international level. And Figure 9 points out that the assessment of R&D is allocated to the Ministry in charge of Scientific Research activities instead of attributing it to the National body in charge of the assessment of R&D activities in each country or at least to the National Agency/Foundation for Science, Technology and Innovation or also the Scientific Council of the organisation.

Figure 8: The methodology adopted to define R&D activities/priorities

Figure 9: Body in charge of the assessment of the R&D activities

Figures 10 to 18, ESFRI (European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures) classification is adopted to rate the R&D infrastructure. Figures 11, 13, 15 and 18 indicate that Research Platforms, Shared database, Exchange platform (online) and Shared archives are not well rated, but the Projects, Research centres, Competence and expertise network, Websites and Laboratories related respectively to Figures 10, 12, 14, 16 and 17, are quite well rated.

Figure 10: Relevance of projects in the R&D infrastructure

Figure 11: Relevance of Research Platforms in the R&D infrastructure



Figure 12: Relevance of Research centres in the R&D infrastructure

Figure 13: Relevance of Shared database in the R&D infrastructure

Figure 14: Relevance of Competence and expertise network in the R&D infrastructure

Figure 15: Relevance of Exchange platform (online)in the R&D infrastructure

Figure 16: Relevance of Websites in the R&D infrastructure

Figure 17: Relevance of Laboratories in the R&D infrastructure

Figure 18: Relevance of Shared archives in the R&D infrastructure

Figure 19 reflects that a half of participating institutions are involved in networks, but most of them prefer be involved in Network with Multiple Professional Profiles. Figure 20 shows that those institutions gain some opportunities thanks to their participation in these networks especially: Participation in Collaborative Projects, Conferences, Seminars, Trainings; Access to information and improvement of the institution’s Visibility.



Figure 19: Kind of networks in which interviewees are involved in

Figure 20: Opportunities offered by networks

Figures 21 to 25 are very interesting because they give an overview of the involvement of industries in the R&D activities. In fact, Figures 21 and 22 show that this involvement is poor and in Figure 23, we note that the existing industrial funding schemes related to R&D activities in RE&EE are quite well rated but Figures 24 and 25 indicate that even there are some funding schemes for industries, they are not well exploited.

Figure 21: Participation of the Industries (SMEs) involved in RE&EE in the R&D activities

Figure 22: Participation of the Industries (Mid & Big Companies) involved in RE&EE in the R&D activities

Figure 23: Relevance of the existing industrial funding schemes related to R&D activities in RE&EE



Figure 24: Involvement of Industries (SMEs) in the national/international funding schemes

allocated to R&D activities

Figure 25: Involvement of Industries (Mid & Big Companies) in the national/international funding

schemes allocated to R&D activities

According to Figure 26, Websites of ongoing national/international projects are the most visited websites by the interviewees, which proves the importance of such projects. But the Websites of National Research Authority/Council, National Research Funding Agencies and of course the institution website are also usually consulted.

Figure 26: Online platforms used which provide information/links to available funding schemes, financial bodies

Figure 27 shows that the majority of the institutions participated mainly in Framework Programs and took profit of other mechanisms in lower occasions. The aim of their participation in these programs is access to knowledge and market, according to Figure 28.

Figure 27: Kind of EU Programs in which institutions, answering the questionnaire, participated

Figure 28: Main expected benefits of collaboration with foreign partners in the R&D EU projects



Figure 29 shows that the main measures that have to be taken to improve the Innovation in the R&D activities are: Implementation of Technology Transfer and Innovation Body, Reinforcement of R&D infrastructure and Capacity Building. And the majority of interviewees, according Figure 30, didn’t rate well their National Innovation System (NIS).

Figure 29: Kind of support needed to improve the Innovation in the R&D activities

Figure 30: Relevance of the related National Innovation System (NIS)

Figures 31 to 34 give an idea on the weaknesses (low rate given by interviewees) of the National Innovation Systems in both countries:

• Poor support of the interface structures (Incubator, Technology Parks, Technology Transfer Office, etc.).

• Inadequate existing regulations (laws, decrees, patent, etc.) for Innovation.

• Lack of funding schemes allocated to Innovation.

• Medium level of entrepreneurial education – Competence Management.

Figure 31: Relevance of the support of the interface structures (Incubator, Technology Parks, Technology Transfer Office, etc.) in the National Innovation System

Figure 32: Relevance of the existing regulations (laws, decrees, patent, etc.) for Innovation



Figure 33: Relevance of the funding schemes allocated to Innovation

Figure 34: Relevance of the level of entrepreneurial education – Competence Management

Figure 35 shows that only 5% of the interviewees don’t like to receive the results of this questionnaire, so there is a big interest in the expected results.

Figure 35: Institutions desiring receive of the results of this questionnaire

4.3 Analysis of the Open Question As mentioned above, we included in the questionnaire an open question on [The existing bottlenecks in the R&D sector in your country and the main barriers preventing the exploitation and the valorisation of the research results]. The bottlenecks are classified according to the Governance Barriers, the Communication / Networking barriers, the Resources / Programme barriers and finally the actors (researchers and Industrialists) related barriers.

All the responses of the interviewees are then inserted in the corresponding “rows” and the following chart is obtained:

Governance barriers

− The actual mode of governance of universities, research centres and the public sector in general.

− The lack of long-term strategic vision for R&DI and related activities.

− Lack of innovation strategy in industry.

− Lack of transparency within the work of the agencies funding research projects.



− Lack of best governance practices within the agencies funding research projects.

− Lack of strategy for research activities.

− Lack of clear procedures and orientation guides for valorisation of the research results.

− Non-existence of visible programs.

− No appropriate strategic vision, which aims to promote R&D.

− Absence of a clear R&D strategy oriented to the needs of Industries.

− Heaviness administrative procedures related to exploitation of some Research Results.

− Lack of a global strategy inciting industry to collaborate with research entities.

− Lack of strategies to reduce administrative formalities.

− Lack of leading authorities.

− IP policy/legal aspects.

Communication / Networking barriers

− The lack of communication/exchange and cooperative projects between industrial representatives and research institutions.

− Lack of coordination among the actors involved in funding, conducting and capitalizing of research projects.

− There is a gap between University R&D organizations and business.

− Research does not come from the business needs and do not meet their expectations and cover topics far from being operated immediately.

− Poor communication and tools for linking and matchmaking between the world of research and the industry.

− Need to improve communication methods to let the researchers know what is exactly the real national need in terms of R&D.

− Small number of networking events and meetings grouping Researchers and Industrials.

− Absence of on-line platforms providing useful Research Results able to interest the Industrials.

− Lack of well qualified structures in charge of dissemination of good research results.



− Lack of matching between research activities and industry targets.

− Lack of shared information.

Resources / Programme Barriers

− The lack of updated database with the different research results.

− The lack of applied research frameworks, centres and national collaborations between university and industries in the field of Renewable Energy & Energy Efficiency represents the most important barrier preventing the exploitation and the valorisation of the research results.

− Share database between partners (Ministries, Research centres, Universities & Industries).

− Financial problems Collaboration with industrial.

− The most important problem is the funding of R&D.

− Not-well maintenance of R&D infrastructure.

− Poor R&D infrastructure and absence of real initiatives to launch big and daring R&D Projects.

− Low budget and poor financial support.

− The lack of financial resources in research laboratories and structures.

− The limited industrial contribution either in the financial plan or in the design plan.

Actors barriers

− Weakness of support bodies.

− The lack of specialists, competencies and professional profiles that can valorise the research results.

− The structures of the university are sclerotic and the company has no confidence in the university. Requires that the university creates its own ecosystem to enhance its research through incubators for start-ups In the USA, MIT University created 4000 SMEs in the last fifteen years and tens of thousands of jobs.

− The poor involvement of the state owned big companies in R&DI activities.

− Lack of trust.

− Weakness of industrial foundation.

− Lack of involvement of our chiefs of concerned institutions.



− Lack of motivation of our researchers.

− The unawareness of the Researchers of the importance of the valorisation of their Research Results.

− Lack of well qualified professionals (for patent, marketing...) able to exploit the Research Results and make them transferable to the Industry side.

− No confidence in the competence of Tunisian scientists.

− Lack of interest of most industries to R&D activities.

− Lack of incentives at both research entities and industry.

− Non-existence of SMEs, which express their need for R&D.

− Salaries.

Table 3: Classification of interviewees’ answers on the bottlenecks interfering the R&D activities



5 Recommendations – List of Priorities The gathered answers to the questionnaire are used to propose some priorities related to R&D activities as well as support to innovation, to be supported jointly as well as individually by the project’s partners or other institutions established in both addressed countries. Below, the main recommendations / priorities are given:

RECOMMENDATION 1: IMPROVING THE IMPLEMENTATION AND MANAGEMENT OF CURRENT R&D ACTIVITIES AND STI (SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND INNOVATION) SUPPORT PROGRAMMES

According to the Experts’ Opinions, there are many determinants that can be improved with relatively small effort and high impact, which are:

• Applied R&D Programmes • Entrepreneurial Support • International Cooperation Support • R&D Funding Schemes • Joint Funding Schemes

RECOMMENDATION 2: SUPPORT TO INNOVATION GOVERNANCE BY CLEAR DEFINITION OF PROGRAMMES AND GOOD EVALUATION

OF R&D ACTIVITIES

It is very important to focus on R&D activities clear programmes with evaluation and impact measuring of R&D activities and support to innovation. These important tools justify public investments in R&D and innovation and adopting programme designs and objectives. Such activities help to identify success stories as well as areas for sectorial improvement.

RECOMMENDATION 3: IMPROVING THE IMPACT OF TUNISIAN/MOROCCAN TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER OFFICES/CENTRES

[INTERFACES BODIES/STRUCTURES]

The impact of Tunisian/Moroccan Technology Transfer Offices/Centres [Interfaces bodies/structures] could also be improved with manageable efforts. Technology Transfer Offices/Centres [Interfaces bodies/structures] are a very popular tool to bring together industry and academia, and enable more sustainable innovations. Provided they are adequately staffed with researchers and fully technologically equipped, they can offer innovation-related services according to their clients’ needs. These bodies are internationally recognized as effective tools in the R&DI systems.

RECOMMENDATION 4: STRENGTHENING REGIONAL NETWORKS AND CLUSTERS

The support of clusters and the implementation of a sound cluster policy could have a major positive impact for the RE&EE sector in Tunisia/Morocco. The development of a nationwide cluster policy focusing on the RE&EE sector would support the process of cooperation between industry and academia. In this context, some international donors are achieving support activities for networking.

RECOMMENDATION 5: STRENGTHENING THE EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL INNOVATION SUPPORT PROVIDERS

Many institutional innovation support entities are poorly implemented. Thus, it is strongly recommended to have a more detailed look at these institutions and to support the Tunisian/Moroccan governments in better implementing such entities. This support may be achieved taking into account the policy dimension as well as the management dimension.



OTHER USEFUL RECOMMENDATIONS / PRIORITIES

• Support R&D projects of enterprises or cooperative projects in Renewable Technologies as well as the development of services in relation to renewables.

• Deploy an information system to better share and exchange knowledge. • Strengthen coordination between concerned ministries in Tunisia and Morocco in charge of R&D

activities and support to innovation. • Offer infrastructure for start-up. • Enhance motivation of inventors/entrepreneurs/industrials. • Organize capacity building sessions for scientists, engineers and entrepreneurs in RE&EE.

These recommendations are summarized in the figure on the next page:



Figure 36: Summary of the recommendations



6 Conclusion

In conclusion, this report was written thanks to:

• The analysis of existing references regarding the specific R&D activities and support to innovation system in the targeting countries (Tunisia and Morocco).

• The interviews conducted (via the online questionnaire) with well-qualified and experimented experts representing the selected stakeholders in both countries.

• The evaluation and measuring of the questionnaire outcomes. • The formulation of recommendations on the prioritisation of joint objectives for Research &

Development (R&D) and support to innovation.

The questionnaire established for this deliverable allowed to identify the main treated topics of RE&EE, the weaknesses and the status of the Innovation System in both countries. Some recommendations are proposed to overcome these difficulties and to strengthen R&D activities and support to innovation.



7 References

[1] Chaabouni, Refaat (2008) - Progress towards the Implementation of the National Innovation System in Tunisia. In: Communications of the IBIMA, Volume 2, 2008, p. 188 – 191. Norristown: IBIMA Publishing

[2] OECD (1997), National Innovation Systems, Paris, OECD Publishing

[3] World Bank (2010), Innovation Policy: A Guide for Developing Countries. Washington, D.C.: The Workd Bank

[4] Cluster RE&EE in Tunisia (in EcoparkBorj-Cedria)

Link: www.lol-arabic.com/technopole//files/files/cluster.pdf

[5] www.pasri.tn/activites?axe=21

[6] www.pasri.tn/giz/

[7] www.giz.de/de/downloads/giz2013-fr-Programme-Appui-Entrepreneuriat.pdf

[8] www.anpr.tn/index.php?id=103

[9] www.innorpi.tn:8080/web/guest/normes?p_p_id=EXT_2&p_p_action=0&p_p_state=maximized&p_p_mode=view&p_p_col_id=&p_p_col_pos=0&p_p_col_count=0&_EXT_2_struts_action=%2Fext%2Fcatalogue_normes%2Fview&_EXT_2_tabs1=normes-tunisiennes&_EXT_2_group=&group=&normetn=NT%20110.332(2012)&normeet=&tabs1=normes-tunisiennes

[10] www.idnet.org.tn/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=90:naissance-de-idnet&catid=38:slideshow&Itemid=102

[11] ec.europa.eu/research/infrastructures/index_en.cfm?pg=what

[12] ec.europa.eu/research/infrastructures/pdf/esfri-strategy_report_and_roadmap.pdf

[13] Med-Spring deliverable D2.3:Stocktaking of Research Results

Link: www.medspring.eu/sites/default/files/D2.3%20-%20StocktakingResearchResults_M10.pdf

[14] ETRERA_2020 (Empowering Trans-Mediterranean Renewable Energy Research Alliance for Europe 2020 challenges) deliverable D.2.2: Catalogue of Competencies

Link: www.etrera2020.eu/project/public-deriverables.html



Annex 1: Database of Interviewees

Tunisian Stakeholders answering the questionnaire

Family & First Name Institution Website

BENYAICHE Mohamed Mongi MIEM - Ministry of Industry, Energy and Mining www.tunisieindustrie.gov.tn

CHTOUROU Radhouane MHESR-ICT - Ministry of Higher Education, Scientific Research and Information and Communication Technologies www.mes.tn

Hélène Ben Khemis ANME - Agence Nationale pour la Maîtrise de l'Energie www.anme.nat.tn

JAOUADI Mariem ANPR - Agence Nationale de Promotion de la Recherche Scientifique www.anpr.tn

KBAIER Zied TTO.CRTEn – Bureau de Transfert de Technologie du Centre de Recherches et des Technologies de l'Energie www.crten.rnrt.tn

MSELMI Fatma GIZ Tunisia - GesellschaftfürInternationaleZusammenarbeit www.giz.de

MILED Mouldi DUN - Desertec University Network www.dun-eumena.com

BEN ALI Elaid MCEBC - Management Company of EcoparkBorj-Cedria www.ecopark.tn

BEN CHARFEDDINE Adnene QUALIMEX Ongoing

ERNEZ Ahmed BSI - Biome Solar Industry www.biomesolar.com

BABA Abdallah AES - Alternative Energy Systems www.aes-tunisie.com

JELLOULI Yacine CLIMA-CONSEIL www.climaconseil@com

TOUMI Khaled Sagemcom Software & Technologies Tunisia www.sagemcom.com

JENDOUBI Monia ElgazalaTechnopark www.elgazala.tn

El ALIMI Souheil ENIM - Ecole Nationale d'Ingénieurs de Monastir www.enim.tn

BEN FADHEL Oussama IPT - Institut Pasteur de Tunis www.pasteur.tn

CHAABOUNI Refaat ENIT - Ecole Nationale d'Ingénieurs de Tunis www.enit.rnu.tn

SOUSSI Meriem ENIT - Ecole Nationale d'Ingénieurs de Tunis www.enit.rnu.tn

ZNOUDA Essia ENIT - Ecole Nationale d'Ingénieurs de Tunis www.enit.rnu.tn

BELHADJ Jamel ENSIT - Ecole Nationale Supérieure d'Ingénieurs de Tunis www.ensit.tn

MEZNI Taoufik ENSIT - Ecole Nationale Supérieure d'Ingénieurs de Tunis www.ensit.tn

BESSAÏS Brahim CRTEn - Centre de Recherches et des Technologies de l'Energie www.crten.rnrt.tn

GUIZANI AmenAllah CRTEn - Centre de Recherches et des Technologies de l'Energie www.crten.rnrt.tn

CHOUIKH Ridha CRTEn - Centre de Recherches et des Technologies de l'Energie crten.rnrt.tn

MAATALLAH Taher ISSTEG - Institut Supérieur des Sciences et des Technologies de l'Energie de Gafsa www.issteg.rnu.tn



Moroccan Stakeholders answering the questionnaire

Family Name and First Name Institution Website

BOUYAAKOUBNourdine CE3M - Cluster Electronique, Mécatronique et Mécanique www.ce3m.ma

SMANI Mohamed R&D Morocco rdmaroc.com

CHAIBI Abdelhak R&D Morocco rdmaroc.com

AROUCH Moha Incubator MaroBtikar - University Hassan 1er www.uh1.ac.ma

ZEDDOU Nadia IRESEN - Institut de Recherche en Energie Solaire et Energies Nouvelles www.iresen.org

JAMEA El Mostafa MENA Renewables and Sustainability - MENARES www.mena-renewables.com

IHLAL Ahmed University IbnZohr www.uiz.ac.ma

EL BARI Hassan IbnTofail University www.univ-ibntofail.ac.ma

HAMDI Hassan University Cadi Ayyad www.uca.ma

BENNOUNA Amin FSSM - Faculté des Sciences Semlalia de Marrakech www.fssm.ucam.ac.ma

MEZRHAB Ahmed University of Mohammed 1, Oujda, Morocco www.univ-oujda.ac.ma

MAALMIMostafa ENIM - École Nationale de l'Industrie Minérale www.enim.ac.ma

AIT NOUH Fatima CNEREE - Centre National d'Etudes et de Recherches sur l'Eau et l'Energie - Université Cadi Ayyad – Marrakech - Morocco www.ucam.ac.ma/cneree



Annex 2: Questionnaire on the Prioritisation of Joint Objectives for Research & Development (R&D) and Support to Innovation [Concerning Renewable Energy & Energy Efficiency (RE&EE)]

List...

Environment

Transcript of List...