S&T Priorities:Towards a Taxonomy of Policy Models

Manuel Mira Godinho (ISEG/UTLIsbon)

João Caraça (Gulbenkian Foundation)

Presentation to the

Tampere 6 June 2008

Structure of the Presentation

Part 1 “Priority Setting in S&T”

Part 2 Analysis of different national priorities in S&T

Objectives

• What are and how are S&T priorities defined by different countries?

What “Priority-setting in S&T” is?

A process of strategic nature that aims at: • increasing the returns on public investments in

research • increasing the relevance of research for economic

objectives (competitiveness, growth, welfare…)• linking research with a society’s long-term aims

Examples of past S&T priorities

• Nuclear bomb (Manhattan project)

• Jet aircraft (Germany 2nd WW Luftwaffe)

• Reach the moon before 1970 (Kennedy ad.)

• Cancer Cure (Nixon administration)

• Nuclear power for energy production

• TGV

Priority Areas

• Military

• Health

• Energy

• Transportation

• …

• Food

Technological (practical) priorities…

• All previous examples (bombs, planes, trains…) are “practical priorities”

• They relate to “needs” or “practical objectives” (such as furthering technological competitivess of a country)

…versus Research (scientific) priorities

Research Priorities

• Governments in many countries most of the R&D is carried out with government funds

• Two questions: How much to allocate to R&D? How to allocate those funds?

Allocation of public resources to research

1. What are the priorities of public spending in research?

2. How are they set?

3. What sort of mechanims are used for that purpose?

4. How is the decision-making process shaped?

5. Who are the intervenients?

1. What are the priorities of public investment in research?

• Qualitative Priorities (Excellency, Internationalization…) versus “areas”

• Balance Basic versus Apllied R&D(balance “technological” versus “scientific” priorities)

• Define prioritary areas:– Which disciplines to prioriatise?– Which “end-products” to favour?– Seeking shorter-term or longer-term impacts?

2. How are research priorities set?

• Priorities can be implicit (stemming from past decisions, no formalisation…)

• Priorities can be explicit (formal mechanims to formulate them exist and the process of priority setting is recognised as such)

3. What sort of mechanims are used for priority setting?

• Government (with the help of civil service);

• Consultative and advisory bodies (higher S&T council; research councils…);

• Other participatory mechanisms (conferences; clustering initiatives; foresight initiatives)

“Top down” versus “bottom-up”

4. How is the decision-making process shaped?

Institutional setting

• Is there a national “vision” about the future? Does that vision comprehends research?

• Do business firms know what they want out of the research? Do they have the capacity to influence the national research agenda?

• Do the military have similar capacity?• Does civil society (NGOs…) has mechanisms to

affect the research agenda?

5. Who are the stakeholders?

• Government, Business, Military, NGOs+

• Parliament• Media• International organisations

+ • Scientists (Big research institutes;

disciplines; influential individuals…)

Is priority setting in S&T on the policy agenda?

• Interest on “priority setting” has changed over time• It used to be an important issue• For some time dominated the view that

governments had no capacity to define “priorities” and that they should limite to provide conditions for an “excellent research”

• More recently: Renewed interest• Foresight exercises etc

Part 2 (WIP)

• Publication and R&D Patterns

• Cluster Analysis

• Results coherent

3 steps

• 1st step: Analysis of Scientific Publications

• 2nd step: Analysis of SP + Socio-Economic objectives of Public Spending in

R&D

• 3rd step: Analysis of SP + SEO + Weight of government financed R&D on GERD

1st step: Analysis of Scientific Publications

• “Health Papers” Medicine, Biomedical Sciences,

Other Health Sciences, Biology

• “E&T Papers” Engineering & Technology Papers,

Physics, Chemistry, Mathmatics

H I E R A R C H I C A L C L U S T E R A N A L Y S I S Dendrogram using Ward Method Rescaled Distance Cluster Combine C A S E 0 5 10 15 20 25 Label Num +---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+ Greece 10 Spain 23 Germany 9 Italy 13 Belgium 3 Switzerland 25 France 8 Mexico 16 Japan 14 Czech Republic 5 Portugal 20 Slovak Republic 22 Korea 15 Russian Federation 21 Australia 1 United Kingdom 26 United States 27 Canada 4 Netherlands 17 Austria 2 Ireland 12 Finland 7 Sweden 24 Iceland 11 New Zealand 18 Norway 19 Denmark 6

CLUSTER 1

CLUSTER 2

Countries Health Eng. & Tec. Cluster

Australia 56 35 1

United Kingdom 55 34 1

United States 57 33 1

Ireland 59 33 1

Austria 61 33 1

Canada 60 32 1

Netherlands 61 32 1

Finland 62 32 1

Sweden 62 32 1

Iceland 63 32 1

New Zealand 60 30 1

Norway 62 29 1

Denmark 67 28 1

STEP 1

CLUSTER 1

Countries Health Eng. & Tec. Cluster

Russian Federation 15 80 2

Korea 34 63 2

Slovak Republic 36 54 2

Portugal 40 55 2

Czech Republic 41 54 2

Japan 47 51 2

Mexico 47 48 2

France 47 46 2

Greece 50 44 2

Spain 50 44 2

Germany 51 44 2

Italy 52 43 2

Switzerland 54 41 2

Belgium 55 39 2

Australia 56 35 1

United Kingdom 55 34 1

United States 57 33 1

Ireland 59 33 1

Austria 61 33 1

Canada 60 32 1

Netherlands 61 32 1

Finland 62 32 1

Sweden 62 32 1

Iceland 63 32 1

New Zealand 60 30 1

Norway 62 29 1

Denmark 67 28 1

CLUSTER 2

2nd step: Analysis of SP + Socio-Economic Objectives of Public Spending in R&D

• SEO?

1) Military R&D (Defence)

2) Civil R&D: Economic Development

Health

Space

Non-Oriented Funds

General University Funds

(NOF + GUF)

H I E R A R C H I C A L C L U S T E R A N A L Y S I S Dendrogram using Ward Method Rescaled Distance Cluster Combine C A S E 0 5 10 15 20 25 Label Num +---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+ Germany 9 Italy 13 Greece 10 Mexico 16 Austria 2 Switzerland 25 Iceland 11 Netherlands 17 Denmark 6 Norway 19 Sweden 24 Australia 1 Canada 4 Finland 7 Ireland 12 Belgium 3 New Zealand 18 Czech Republic 5 Slovak Republic 22 Japan 14 Portugal 20 Korea 15 Spain 23 United Kingdom 26 France 8 United States 27 Russian Federation 21

E1

E2

E3

E4

E5

E6E7

E8

C1

C2

C3

3 big clusters 8 smaller clusters

Hea

lth

Targeted Research Academic ResearchE

ng

ine

erin

g &

T

ech

no

log

y

Hea

lth

Targeted Research Academic ResearchE

ng

ine

erin

g &

T

ech

no

log

y

Hea

lth

Targeted Research

Russia

Korea

US

E6 UK, France, Sp E3 Australia, Can,NZ,Finl, Ir, Be,

E2 NL, Dk, No, Sweden, Iceland

E1 Germany, It, Austria, Switz., Greece, Mex,

E4 Czech R, Slovak R, J, PT

Defence + Space

7%

Defence + Space

45%

Defence + Space

6%

Academic ResearchE

ng

ine

erin

g &

T

ech

no

log

y

3rd step: Analysis of SP + SEO + Weight of government financed R&D on GERD

• Government financed R&D / GERD ?

[ 1 – (Government Financed R&D/GERD) ] ≈ Private financing of GERD

The lower… the higher innovation propensity (Y? N?) The higher … the higher academic R&D (Y? N?) The higher…the higher military innovation (Y? N?)

H I E R A R C H I C A L C L U S T E R A N A L Y S I S * * * * * * Dendrogram using Ward Method Rescaled Distance Cluster Combine C A S E 0 5 10 15 20 25 Label Num +---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+ Iceland 11 Netherlands 17 Norway 19 Austria 2 Denmark 6 Switzerland 25 Sweden 24 Portugal 20 Slovak Republic 22 Greece 10 Italy 13 Czech Republic 5 Germany 9 Mexico 16 Australia 1 Canada 4 New Zealand 18 Finland 7 Ireland 12 Belgium 3 Japan 14 Korea 15 Spain 23 United Kingdom 26 France 8 United States 27 Russian Federation 21

G2

G1

G3

G4G5

Targeted ResearchH

ealt

hAcademic Research

En

gin

eer

ing

&

Te

chn

olo

gy

Targeted ResearchH

ealt

h

67%

39%

51%

69%64%

Private financing of R&D

R > 55% ; B < 55%

Academic ResearchE

ng

ine

erin

g &

T

ech

no

log

y

Targeted ResearchH

ealt

hE

ng

ine

erin

g &

T

ech

no

log

y

67%

39%

51%

69%64%

G4 US, Fr, UK, Sp

G1 PT, Sl R, Greece, It, Cz R, G, Mex

G3 Australia, Canada, NZ, Finl, Irel, BE, J, K

G5 Russia

G2 Icel, NL, No, Austria, DK, Switz, Sweden

Academic Research

Private financing of R&D

R > 55% ; B < 55%

Next Steps

• Include more variables (?)

• Include more countries (?)

• Develop quantitative analysis

• Survey of Experts

• What questions to ask the experts?

ENDThank you!

Countries Health_Papers_B_A Engineer_papers_B_A GFGERD_GERD Defence Health Space Econ_Dev NOF_GUF

Russian Fede 15 80 61 44 07 10 24 14

Korea 34 63 23 14 17 03 45 22

Slovak Republic 36 54 57 07 10 00 21 49

Portugal 40 55 60 02 17 01 35 43

Czech Republic 41 54 42 03 17 01 20 53

Japan 47 51 18 05 07 07 32 50

Mexico 47 48 56 00 13 00 34 74

France 47 46 39 24 10 09 12 43

Greece 50 44 47 01 19 00 18 62

Spain 50 44 41 37 10 02 23 28

Germany 51 44 30 07 14 05 19 56

Italy 52 43 53 04 16 07 16 57

Switzerland 54 41 23 01 02 00 05 61

Belgium 55 39 24 00 10 09 37 41

Australia 56 35 42 06 20 00 34 40

United Kingdom 55 34 31 34 20 02 10 34

United States 57 33 31 54 26 08 06 06

Ireland 59 33 32 00 13 04 41 46

Austria 61 33 36 00 09 00 13 79

Canada 60 32 34 04 24 06 32 33

Netherlands 61 32 36 02 09 03 25 57

Finland 62 32 26 03 15 02 39 41

Sweden 62 32 24 22 09 01 14 55

Iceland 63 32 40 00 10 00 33 56

New Zealand 60 30 45 02 25 00 47 25

Norway 62 29 42 07 19 02 21 51

Denmark 67 28 27 01 17 02 17 63