Stairway to Excellence Cohesion Policy and the Synergies with the Research and Innovation Funds Warmińsko-Mazurskie (PL62) Facts & Figures

Transcription

1 Stairway to Excellence Cohesion Policy and the Synergies with the Research and Innovation Funds Warmińsko-Mazurskie (PL62) Facts & Figures June 2015

2 Table of Contents 1. KEY MESSAGES MAIN REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS GENERAL MACRO-ECONOMIC INDICATORS MAIN EU FUNDING TARGETING RESEARCH AND INNOVATION RECEIVED BY THE REGION Breakdown of the main EU funding received by Regions The region in the FP Structural funds dedicated to Research and innovation in the region REGIONAL SPECIALISATION AREAS SPECIALISATION AREAS CHOSEN IN THE SMART SPECIALISATION STRATEGY FOR THE PERIOD REGIONAL & NATIONAL SPECIALISATION INDICATION THROUGH THE PARTICIPATION IN FP7 FOR THE PERIOD EU FUNDING USERS PROFILE FP7 BENEFICIARIES PROFILE Participation profile by type of activity FP7 MAIN REGIONAL COLLABORATION AXIS AND STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS From a territorial perspective From a stakeholder perspective ANNEXES PARTICIPATION IN FP7 COOPERATION PROGRAMME SUCCESS RATES: COMPARISON BETWEEN NATIONAL AND OVERALL FP7 IN FP7 THEMES AND ACTIVITIES LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Please include the following information to reference this report: European Commission, JRC-IPTS (2015), Stairway to Excellence Facts and Figures: Warmińsko-Mazurskie. For further information contact: Mathieu Doussineau: Mathieu.DOUSSINEAU@ec.europa.eu Nicholas Harrap: Nicholas.HARRAP@ec.europa.eu 1

3 Introduction Background of Stairway to excellence project European Commission Framework Programmes (FP) for research and technology development has been vital in the development of European knowledge generation. However, there is considerable disparity across EU countries and regions in terms of FP participation and innovation performance. Horizon 2020 will continue to provide funding on the basis of excellence, regardless of geographical location. However, it will also introduce novel measures for "spreading excellence and widening participation" by targeting low Research & Innovation (R&I) performing countries - most of whom are eligible for innovation funding under Cohesion Policy for the period In addition, the new regulations for ESIF aim to use funds more effectively to build regional/national excellence and capacities. By doing so, the two funding sources (ESIF and Horizon 2020) can complement one another along the entire innovation process. Objectives of S2E The Stairway to Excellence (S2E) project is centred on the provision of support to enhance the value of two key European Union (EU) funding sources for research, development and innovation (ESIF and H2020) by actively promoting their combination. The project has two main objectives, namely: Providing of assistance to regions and countries that joined the EU since 2004 in closing the innovation gap, in order to promote excellence in all regions and EU countries; Stimulating the early and effective implementation of national and regional Smart Specialisation Strategies. Main purpose of the document The main aim of this document is to draw the European profile of a region with statistical and financial information coming from the EU 7 th framework programme and Structural funds dedicated to Research and innovation during the previous financial period ( ). Other information is used in support of this aim. The document is guided by the following questions: What the overall position of the Region within the country in terms of FP7 budget captured and Structural funds dedicated to R&I managed at regional level? What are the specialisation areas emerging from FP7 participation? Are they corresponding with areas chosen in the smart specialisation strategy (S3)? What are the main R&I stakeholders involved in EU programmes? Is there a regional specificity compared to national and European level? What are the main European collaboration axes of the Region in the EU framework programme? The document provides regional (or national) authorities and the European Commission withrelevant and useful information to facilitate the creation of synergies between structural funds dedicated to research and innovation and the Horizon 2020 programme. The document is divided in four sections: (1) the keys messages coming from the direct interpretation of tables and figures provided in the following sections, (2) the main regional characteristics, (3) the regional specialisation areas, and (4) the Characterization of regional organisations participating in the FP with the identification of the key regional players and the main European organisations collaborating with the region. Complementarity with other analysis This document contains key messages only based on the presented quantitative indicators. This "facts and figures" document provides as full a picture as possible of how and where European funding dedicated to R&I is spent in EU13 territories. Within the wider context of the Stairway to excellence project this work complements other analyses to give further insights into R&I funding in EU13 and related issues. Such complementary work includes: 2

4 National profiles based on the input of country experts giving an updated picture of the strategy and governance at the national level. Knowledge flow analysis including the use of various types of indicators such as patents, bibliometrics, and FP/H2020 participations. Case studies giving examples of success stories of existing synergies between ESIF and other types of funding from across Europe. The document will also provide background and context to workshops and meetings organised at the national and regional levels. Source of information The regional macro-economic indicators are provided by Eurostat. Regional specialisation areas and structural closeness are extracted from the S3 platform. The FP7 related information comes from the last updated FP7 contracts database (June 2014) provided by DG RTD J5. The information about Structural Funds is provided by DG REGIO database. Disclaimer This document aims to give an instantaneous picture about the expenditure of EU funding at NUTS 2 level but it is NOT a monitoring report. Some gaps may occur in indicators without calling into account the key messages provided at the beginning of the document 3

5 1. Key messages Overall economic performance of the region by comparing macro-economic indicators, FP7 and ESIFs indicators The R&D expenditure is low as the proportion of GDP for Warmińsko-Mazurskie (0.48%) is about three fifths that of Poland (0.87%) (Table 1: General macro-economic indicators of the region). Warmińsko-Mazurskie is the eleventh region in terms of FP7 funding in Poland and the tenth region in terms of Structural Funds allocated to projects. However, a large proportion of the Structural Funds in Poland are managed at the national level (Table 2: Regional breakdown of FP7 EU contribution received by the country). The FP7 financial contribution per inhabitant in Warmińsko-Mazurskie substantially less than the overall level for Poland and for EU13. Furthermore, the share of EU contribution to EU13 is low and the EU13 countries are even outperformed by the countries associated to FP7 (Table 3: General FP7 indicators). EU funding allocation The largest FP7 financial contribution to Warmińsko-Mazurskie is from the Capacities specific programme accounting for around 76% of the contribution but it only accounts for 27.4% for Poland and 8.5% of FP7 (Table 4: Breakdown of the FP7 EU contribution among specific programmes & Figure 2: Comparison of the EU contribution breakdown among FP7). A large proportion of Warmińsko-Mazurskie Structural Funds ( ) in research and technological development, innovation and entrepreneurship are aimed at support to firms. This includes ''Other investment in firms'' (47.3%), ''Investment in firms directly linked to research and innovation'' (23.5%) and ''Other measures to stimulate research and innovation and entrepreneurship in SMEs'' (11.6%) (Table 6: Estimated funding dedicated to Research and innovation and funding allocated to projects for the Warmińsko-Mazurskie regional OP for ). With regard to the Structural Funds, absorption in this document is defined as the percentage of funding adopted in an OP that has been allocated to projects by the regional/national managing authority. For the Warmińsko- Mazurskie regional OP the overall rate is 90.3% and for RTDI activities if is slightly higher at 91.1% (Table 6). Of the RTDI activities in the Infrastructure and Environment OP there is no funding allocated to projects in Warmińsko-Mazurskie, however, the region receives 43.9M form the Eastern Polish Regions OP (Table 7: Funding allocated to projects in Warmińsko-Mazurskie in the Poland Operational Programme for Infrastructure and Environment for & Table 8: Funding allocated to projects in Warmińsko-Mazurskie in for Eastern Polish Regions for ). Specialisation areas The chosen smart specialisation area for ESIF chosen by Warmińsko-Mazurskie are related to the water economy, food and wood products. There appears to be some alignment with the agri-food and forestrywood aspects of those specialisation areas at the national level chosen by Poland. (Table 9: Specialisation areas chosen in the smart specialisation strategy of Warmińsko-Mazurskie & Table 10: Specialisation areas chosen in the smart specialisation strategy of Poland). Almost 50% of the funding Warmińsko-Mazurskie received from the FP7 Cooperation programme can be related the region's smart specialisation strategy. This is true for Food, Agriculture and Fisheries for which the largest EU contribution is received and accounts for 48.2% of Warmińsko-Mazurskie's funding whereas it only accounts for 4.6% of FP7. There are other areas that demonstrate a similar bias in FP7 funding that are not specialisation areas such as Security and Energy (Table 11: General assessment of the participation of the region in the FP7 themes and activities and correspondence with specialisation areas of S3, Table 12: Budget breakdown among themes& Figure 4: S&T specialisation areas according to the EU contribution received by FP7 participants). 4

6 Beneficiaries profile including SME participation By far the largest proportion of FP7 beneficiaries for Warmińsko-Mazurskie is for Public Research Organisations (77.9%). For both Poland and FP7 generally the Higher or Secondary Education sector accounts for the highest proportion EU contribution recipients whereas this is the second sector for Warmińsko-Mazurskie accounting for 16.6% (Table 13: Breakdown of the FP7 EU contribution & Figure 5: Comparison of the EU contribution breakdown by type of participant). Both the FP7 financial contribution and participation (to a lesser extent) for SMEs in Warmińsko-Mazurskie is proportionally larger than Poland and FP7 overall. No SMEs in Warmińsko-Mazurskie coordinated projects (Table 14: General indicators about SME participation in the FP7 Cooperation programme & Figure 6: Number of SMEs in FP7 research themes). Main regional collaboration axis and structural comparison between the targeted region and other European regions The region that Warmińsko-Mazurskie collaborated with the most in FP7 was Southern and Eastern Ireland followed by Île-de-France (Paris area). There follow several regions that each collaborate three times with Warmińsko-Mazurskie from Austria, Germany, Denmark, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, UK and The Netherlands (Table 15: The closest EU region from Warmińsko-Mazurskie in the FP7 cooperation programme & Figure 7 Origins of organisations collaborating with Warmińsko-Mazurskie in FP7 thematic activities). For structurally similar regions (according to the structural proximity criteria outlined in Section 3.2) outside Poland seven of the top 20 are from France followed by Hungary with five. France is the only EU15 country represented in the top twenty regions (Table 16: The nearest structurally similar non-polish regions to Warmińsko-Mazurskie). For Higher or Secondary Education Organisations in Warmińsko-Mazurskie the strongest FP7 links are to Public Research organisations in Attiki (Athens area) and Other Private Organisations in Brussels-Capital (Figure 8: The main collaboration network of Warmińsko-Mazurskie (PL62) in the FP7). Private Commercial Organisations in Warmińsko-Mazurskie are most strongly linked to Private Commercial Organisations in Southern and Eastern Ireland (Figure 8). 5

7 2. Main regional characteristics 2.1 General macro-economic indicators Table 1 demonstrates some selected macro-economic variables appertaining to the research and development activities, including the R&D expenditure and number of full time equivalent research personnel by different sectors. While the significant gap between EU15 and EU13 Member States is observable in this table, it also provides a general comprehension on the pos ition of the region and MS in the European geography. Table 1: General macro-economic indicators of the region Warmińsko- Mazurskie Poland EU13* EU15 EU28 Population GDP - Euro per capita GDP - Euro per capita in % of EU average R&D expenditure Total (million Euro) R&D expenditure Total [% of GDP] R&D expenditure - Business Enterprise Sector (BES) [% of GDP] R&D expenditure - Government Sector (GOV) [% of GDP] R&D expenditure - Higher Education Sector (HES) [% of GDP] R&D expenditure - Private non-profit Sector (PnP) [% of GDP] R&D Personnel** Total (% of active population) R&D Personnel BES (% of active population) R&D Personnel GOV (% of active population) R&D Personnel HES (% of active population) R&D Personnel PnP (% of active population) Unemployment Rate*** Source: Compiled and calculated by using the latest complete Eurostat data. At the regional level 2011 is used and at the National & EU levels 2013is used. * As EU13 indicators are not available in the data sources, the values are calculated over national statistics provided by Eu rostat ** R&D personnel refer to the number of full time equivalent R&D personnel. ***Unemployment uses latest available figures for 2013 age group 15 years and over. 2.2 Main EU funding targeting Research and Innovation received by the region Breakdown of the main EU funding received by Regions The data in Table 2 is for FP7 and the Structural Funds The FP7 data represents the total EU contribution to projects for each NUTS2 region in Poland. The information is from the contract database for FP7 and it represents funding to beneficiaries in the regions for projects that have been successfully evaluated. The table is ranked by the first region being the one with the largest contribution from FP7. The data on structural funds is from the Annual Implementation Reports (AIR) 1 for 2013 and represents the EU support allocated to selected projects. The values for Structural Funds presented in Table 2 are only for priority themes that represent research and technological development, innovation and 1 The Annual Implementation Reports are progress reports produced by the Structural Fund managing authority they monitor information on (1) allocations decided, (2) amounts allocated to projects and (3) the core indicators used for ERDF and Cohesion Fund. 6

8 entrepreneurship (categories 1-9) and category 74 ''Developing human potential in the field of research and innovation'' as described in the Official Journal 2. Hereafter categories 1-9 and 74 are collectively known as research and technological development, and innovation (RTDI). It should be noted that these values do not represent the funding available, only the total allocated to projects at the time of the 2013 AIRs. It is notable that more than 50% of the funds allocated to projects were managed at the national level rather than the regional level. Table 2: Regional breakdown of FP7 EU contribution received by the country Nuts2 Region FP7 EU contribution % of the national Structural funds % of the national (in M) total (in M) total Mazowieckie (PL12) % % Wielkopolskie (PL41) % % Małopolskie (PL21) % % Pomorskie (PL63) % % Dolnośląskie (PL51) % % Łódzkie (PL11) % % Śląskie (PL22) % % Lubelskie (PL31) % % Zachodniopomorskie (PL42) % % Podkarpackie (PL32) % % Warmińsko-Mazurskie (PL62) % % Kujawsko-Pomorskie (PL61) % % Podlaskie (PL34) % % Opolskie (PL52) % % Lubuskie (PL43) % % Świętokrzyskie (PL33) % % Poland (PL) % Total (PL+NUST2) % % Source: EU FP7 contract database June 2014 and Annual Implementation Report (AIR) for The region in the FP7 3 This section presents how the region participated in the FP7 by comparison with the country, EU13, the EU15 and FP7 in The EU FP7 budget captured (also per inhabitant), the numbe r of participation and coordination (Table 3), the Regional distribution of FP7 contribution received by Poland ( Figure 1). The breakdown between FP7 specific programmes (Table 4 and Figure 2) and funding instruments (comparison only with the FP7) (Figure 3 and Table 5). Table 3: General FP7 indicators Warmińsko-Mazurskie Poland EU13 EU15 (% of national) (% of FP7) (% of FP7) (% of FP7) FP7 4 EU contribution (in M ) 4.20 (0.96%) (1.0%) (4.2%) (85.3%) Number of participations 15 (0.68%) (1.7%) (8.0%) Number of coordinations 5 (2.08%) 240 (1.0%) (4.0%) EU contribution per inhabitant (in ) (EU28) Source: EU FP7 contract database June See Annex IV in Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 available at 3 The ''Headquarter effect '' in the FP7 contract database can be an important issue for Regions (especially in the most centralized countries). If available, the location of a research department has been used as the true location if this differs from the headquarter location. 4 EU28 and associated countries 7

9 Figure 1: Regional distribution of FP7 contribution received by Poland (in Mln and % of the total) Source: JRC-IPTS calculated using FP7 contract database-june 2014 Figure 2 and Table 4 below show the difference between national and regional participation profile in terms of themes and FP7 specific programmes where the FP7 breakdown is taken as reference. Figure 2: Comparison of the EU contribution breakdown among FP7 Table 4: Breakdown of the FP7 EU contribution among specific programmes % of EU CONTRIBUTION Pl62 Poland FP7 COOPERATION 20.7% 57.4% 63.3% IDEAS 0.0% 4.4% 16.7% PEOPLE 3.3% 10.2% 10.7% CAPACITIES 76.0% 27.4% 8.5% EURATOM 0.0% 0.6% 0.8% 100% 100% 100% Source: JRC/IPTS calculated using the EU FP7 contract database June

10 Figure 3: Comparison of funded participations breakdown among FP7 funding instruments Table 5: Breakdown of the participations among FP7 funding instruments % of EU CONTRIBUTION Pl61 Poland FP7 Collaborative research 13.3% 47.7% 52.4% projects Network of excellence 0.0% 0.8% 0.8% Coordination and support 73.3% 22.5% 15.3% actions Infrastructure initiatives 0.0% 5.1% 3.1% ERC actions 0.0% 1.0% 3.8% Marie Curie Actions 0.0% 11.7% 13.5% SME Measures 13.3% 7.5% 6.4% JTI calls and initiatives 0.0% 3.2% 4.3% ERA NET actions 0.0% 0.5% 0.3% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Source: JRC/IPTS calculated using the EU FP7 contract database June Structural funds 5 dedicated to Research and innovation in the region Table 6 shows the estimated funds for the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Regional Operational Programme dedicated to the priority themes identified as research and technological development, innovation and entrepreneurship (RTDI). The absorption rate (last column) gives information on the funding allocated to projects as reported in the 2013 Annual Implementation Reports. Only those priority themes that actually have funds attributed to them are shown in the table. There are ten priority themes identified as RTDI: 1. R&TD activities in research centres 2. R&TD infrastructure and centres of competence in a specific technology 3. Technology transfer and improvement of cooperation networks 4. Assistance to R&TD, particularly in SMEs (including access to R&TD services in research centres) 5. Advanced support services for firms and groups of firms 6. Assistance to SMEs for the promotion of environmentally-friendly products and production processes 7. Investment in firms directly linked to research and innovation 8. Other investment in firms 9. Other measures to stimulate research and innovation and entrepreneurship in SMEs 74. Developing human potential in the field of research and innovation, in particular through post - graduate studies. 5 ERDF = European Regional Development Fund, ESF = European Social Fund, CF = Cohesion Fund 9

11 Table 6: Estimated funding dedicated to Research and innovation and funding allocated to projects for the Warmińsko-Mazurskie regional OP for Priority code Priority Theme 2 R&TD infrastructure and centres of competence in a specific technology Technology transfer and improvement of 3 cooperation networks... Advanced support services for firms and 5 groups of firms Assistance to SMEs for the promotion of 6 environmentally-friendly products and production processes (...) Investment in firms directly linked to 7 research and innovation (...) Estimate in Adopted OP AIR 2013 M (a) % of OP % of RTDI M (b) % of OP % of RTDI Absorption (b/a) % 1.3% % 1.5% % % 3.9% % 4.5% % % 13.7% % 14.5% 96.6 % % 2.4% % 1.8% 69.9 % % 23.5% % 24.2% 94.0 % 8 Other investment in firms % 43.7% % 45.7% 95.3 % 9 Other measures to stimulate research and innovation and entrepreneurship in SMEs Total Research and innovation activities in Operational Programme % 11.6% % 7.8% 61.5 % % 100% % 100% 91.1 % Total Operational Programme % % 90.3 % Source: JRC/IPTS based on Warmińsko-Mazurskie Regional Operational Programme for and AIR 2013 For the programming period there are national operational programmes for the Innovative Economy, Infrastructure and Environment, Eastern Poland, Human Capital and Technical Assistance. There can also be funds from these national operational programmes that are directed to the regions. Warmińsko-Mazurskie receives funding under the Infrastructure and Environment and Eastern Poland programmes and Table 7 and Table 8 show the funding allocated to the projects for research and innovation relevant priorities. Table 7: Funding allocated to projects in Warmińsko-Mazurskie in the Poland Operational Programme for Infrastructure and Environment for Priority Theme Estimate in Adopted OP AIR 2013 M (a) % OP % TDI M (b) % OP % RTDI Absorp. (b/a) 2 - R&TD infrastructure 0 0 % 0 % n/a Total RTDI in OP (All regions) % 100% % 100 % 97.8% Total OP (All regions) % % % Source: JRC/IPTS based on Poland Operational Programme for Infrastructure and Environment for and AIR 2013 Table 8: Funding allocated to projects in Warmińsko-Mazurskie in for Eastern Polish Regions for Priority Theme Estimate in Adopted OP AIR 2013 M (a) % OP % TDI M (b) % OP % RTDI Absorp. (b/a) 2 - R&TD infrastructure % 5.5% 8 - Other investment in firms % 2.5% n/a Total RTDI in OP - Warmińsko-Mazurskie % 8.0% Total RTDI in OP (All regions) % 100% % 100% 99.5% Total OP (All regions) % % % Source: JRC/IPTS calculated from the funding allocated to projects in AIR 2013 for the Development of Eastern Polish Regions OP for for Warmińsko-mazurskie 10

12 3. Regional specialisation areas 3.1 Specialisation areas chosen in the smart specialisation strategy for the period The following tables show the specialisation areas chosen by Warmińsko-Mazurskie and Poland in the design of their smart specialisation strategy. Based on informatio n that regional and national authorities submit to the Eye@RIS3 6 database the following related information is added: the regional capability for the priority; the target market that will be addressed; and the EU priority to which this specialisation area connects. Capability and market categories are based on NACE 7 sectoral codes. Often these capability and market categories overlap, as is the case in for Warmińsko-Mazurskie but this is not always the case as can be seen for Poland. Any subcategories were combined with the main category. For the Poland national smart specialisation strategy the Eye@RIS3 was not yet complete and the areas were taken from the strategy documents, this means that not all areas are linked to capabilities, target market and EU priority. Table 9: Specialisation areas chosen in the smart specialisation strategy of Warmińsko-Mazurskie Description of chosen specialisation area Identified capability and target market Identified target market EU priority connected to Water economy. transport, sports, tourism, Transporting & storage Creative, cultural arts & Blue growth food, machinery, yachts, environment entertainment High quality food. Aqua and animal farming, food processing, manufacturing and services for livestock, production of agro machineries, and processing and disposal of farm waste. Agriculture, forestry & fishing Manufacturing & industry - Food, beverage & tobacco products Wood and furniture. Furniture production, carpentry, wood processing, design services and maintenance of wooden goods. Services - Other professional, scientific & technical activities Manufacturing & industry - Furniture Source: S3 web platform - extracted on 30/06/

13 Table 10: Specialisation areas chosen in the smart specialisation strategy of Poland Description of chosen specialisation area Identified capability Identified target market EU priority connected to Modern technology sourcing, processing and use of natural resources and the production of substitutes Innovative technologies and processing water recovery and reducing its consumption Minimizing waste, including unfit for processing and use of materials and energy waste (recycling and other recovery methods) Medical engineering technologies, including biotechnologies Medical diagnosis and treatment of lifestyle diseases and personalized medicine Production of medicinal products Innovative technologies, processes and products of the agri-food and forestrywood Biotechnological processes and products specialty chemicals and environmental engineering Multifunctional materials and composites with advanced properties, including nano-processes and nanoproducts Sensors (including biosensors) and smart sensor networks Smart grids and geo-information technologies Electronic conducting polymers NATURAL RESOURCES AND WASTE MANAGEMENT Mining & quarrying Manufacturing & industry Sustainable innovation - Resource efficiency Water supply, sewerage, waste management & remediation activities - Water collection, treatment & supply Water supply, sewerage, waste management & remediation activities - Waste collection, treatment & disposal activities, materials recovery & remediation activities HEALTHY SOCIETY Manufacturing & industry Human health & social work activities - Human health activities (medical services) Manufacturing & industry - Basic pharmaceutical products & pharmaceutical preparations Water supply, sewerage, waste management & remediation activities - Water collection, treatment & supply Sustainable innovation - Sustainable land & water use Manufacturing & industry Sustainable innovation - Waste management Human health & social work activities - Human health activities (medical services) Human health & social work activities - Human health activities (medical services) Human health & social work activities - Human health activities (medical services) Public health & security - Public health & well-being Public health & security - Public health & well-being Public health & security - Public health & well-being BIOECONOMY AND ENVIRONMENT Agriculture, forestry & fishing Agriculture, forestry & fishing Sustainable innovation - Sustainable agriculture Manufacturing & industry Manufacturing & industry Sustainable innovation INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES AND INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES (HORIZONTAL APPROACH) Manufacturing & industry Manufacturing & industry KETs Manufacturing & industry Manufacturing & industry KETs Information & communication technologies (ICT) - Information service activities Manufacturing & industry - Coke & refined petroleum products Information & communication technologies (ICT) - Information service activities Manufacturing & industry - Computer, electronic & optical products Manufacturing & industry - Automation and Robotics processes Manufacturing & industry - Machinery & equipment n.e.c. Machinery & equipment n.e.c. Optoelectronic systems and materials Manufacturing & industry - Information & communication Computer, electronic & optical technologies (ICT) products SUSTAINABLE ENERGY Environmentally friendly transport solutions High efficiency, low-emission and integrated circuits manufacturing, storage, transmission and distribution of energy Smart and energy efficient construction Source: S3 web platform - extracted on 09/01/2015 Digital Agenda Digital Agenda KETs - Advanced manufacturing systems Digital Agenda Transporting & storage Transporting & storage Sustainable innovation - Smart green & integrated transport systems Energy production & distribution Energy production & distribution Sustainable innovation - Sustainable energy & renewables Construction Construction Sustainable innovation - Resource efficiency 12

14 3.2 Regional & national specialisation indication through the participation in FP7 for the period In the innovation Union progress report published in , the science and technology classifications were matched with FP7 thematic priorities thereby offering the possibility of further analysis of co - developments of science and technologies at the EU and national level. We choose here to follow the same taxonomy in order to offer the reader the possibility to compare easily specialisation information provided by the IU progress report and those provided in this report. The following table shows the participation breakdown by EU contribution among research areas. Correspondence with specialisation areas chosen by the region and countries in their Smart specialisation strategy is shown in the last column according to JRC-IPTS interpretation. Some specialisation areas chosen by the region or country can be too generic or on the contrary too specific with regard to the taxonomy used. In this case, we consider the research area not being fully covered by S3 strategy. yes = Research area fully included into S3 priority definition; yes partially= Research area only partially included into S3 priority definition (S3 priority definition do not cover the full scope the research area). Table 11: General assessment of the participation of the region in the FP7 themes and activities and correspondence with specialisation areas of S3 Research area EU Contribution (in M ) S3 Priority Food, Agriculture and Fisheries 0.42 yes Biotechnology 0.00 Health 0.00 Yes Information & communication technologies (ICT) 0.00 Nanosciences & Nanotechnologies 0.00 Materials 0.00 yes New production technologies (incl. Construction technologies) 0.00 yes Integration of nanotechnologies for industrial applications (JTI ENIAC Incl.) 0.00 Energy 0.29 Environment 0.00 yes Aeronautics 0.00 Space 0.00 Automotive 0.00 Rail 0.00 Waterborne 0.00 yes Urban transport and intermodalities 0.00 Socio economic sciences and humanities 0.00 Security 0.16 TOTAL Cooperation Programme 0.87 TOTAL Cooperation Programme related to S3 priorities 0.4 (48.2%) Source: data: FP7 contracts database-june 2014, processed by JRC-IPTS Regarding specialisation areas emerging from the FP7 participation, the following graph (Figure 4) shows the difference in the budget breakdown between overall FP7 funding and the FP7 contribution received by the country (or the region) among themes. This is not a performance indicator because we are only comparing the territory (Country or Region) with itself. In order to avoid mass effect of better funded themes (such as Health, ICT for instance) It has been decided to consider a uniform distribution of the overall FP7 funding among themes. The graph shows if the indicator is superior to one an "over - distribution" or a "sub-distribution" if indicator below one. The graph must be read with the table below it 8 FP7 participations can be analysed with regard to specialisation indic ators provided with bibliometric and patents indicators provided in the Innovation Union progress report (only) at national level. 13

15 (Table 12). The table shows the weight of each theme in the total funding and Figure 4 is only the graphical interpretation of the table. The matching between smart specialisation areas chosen by (national or regional) authorities should be treated with care in the case of specialisation areas that are more detailed than FP7 or conversely less detailed. The themes funded by FP7 encompass a broad range of activities (see table in Annex 1 to see research activities funded under each theme) whereas specialisation areas concern only one or a limited number of activities. Figure 4: S&T specialisation areas according to the EU contribution received by FP7 participants Source: data: FP7 contracts database-june 2014, processed by JRC-IPTS 14

16 Table 12: Budget breakdown among themes Research area PL62 (%) PL (%) FP7 (%) Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Biotechnology Health ICT Nanosciences & Nanotechnologies Materials New production technologies (incl. Construction technologies) Integration of nanothechno. for industrial applications Energy Environment Aeronautics Space Automotive Rail Waterborne Urban transport and intermod Socio economic sci and humanit.y Security Total Cooperation Programme 100% 100% 100% Source: IPTS/JRC calculated using the FP7 contracts database-june

17 4. EU funding users profile 4.1 FP7 beneficiaries profile Participation profile by type of activity Figure 5 shows graphically the difference between national (in dark blue) and regional (red line) participation profile by type of participant with the standardized FP7 breakdown taken as the reference. We observe the difference in the distribution at country level and at regional level. Table 13 complements the figure comparing the breakdown of FP7 contribution among the participant typology for the region, the country and the whole FP7 participants. Figure 5: Comparison of the EU contribution breakdown by type of participant Table 13: Breakdown of the FP7 EU contribution Higher or secondary education est. % of EU contribution PL62 PL FP7 16.6% 42.1% 43.5% Private commercial 4.6% 21.3% 24.7% Research organisations Public body (excl.research and education) 77.9% 32.7% 26.9% 0.0% 2.8% 2.6% Other 1.0% 1.2% 2.3% 100% 100% 100% Source: JRC/IPTS calculated using the FP7 contracts database-june 2014 Source: JRC/IPTS calculated using the FP7 contracts database-june 2014 FP7 SME Participation This section shows the participation of SMEs 9 from the region in the FP7 cooperation programme and other activities and compares figures with the national level. Table 14 provides information about SMEs participation in the regional research and innovation landscape. The official EU target is 15% of FP7 budget dedicated to the cooperation programme (thematic) should go to SMEs. The region (column i) is compared in budget and in number of participations and coordinations to the country level (ii) and to the overall FP7 (column iii). Table 14: General indicators about SME participation in the FP7 Cooperation programme Warmińsko-Mazurskie Poland FP7 EU Financial Contribution- Cooperation Programme 0.19 (22.1%) (11.8%) (9.1%) Number of SME participation- Cooperation Programme 1 (12.5%) 146 (10.8%) (10.9%) Number of SME coordination- Cooperation Programme 0 (0%) 1 (2.3%) 555 (7.1%) Source : data: FP7 contracts database-june processed by JRC-IPTS 9 following the criteria defined in the COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION of 6 May 2003 (2003/361/EC) 16

18 The participation of regional and national SMEs among the various research areas is shown with Figure 6 Information about the chosen regional (R) and national (N) specialisation areas are given to assess the extent to which the research theme participation of SMEs corresponds to the specialisation areas. Figure 6: Number of SMEs in FP7 research themes Source : data: FP7 contracts database-june processed by JRC-IPTS 4.2 FP7 Main regional collaboration axis and stakeholder analysis From a territorial perspective The map below shows the European regions (at NUTS2 level) collaborating the most with Warmińsko - Mazurskie in the FP7 thematic activities. Table 15 shows the list of the first regions collaborating with Warmińsko-Mazurskie. The figure represents the number of project where at least one participant from Warmińsko-Mazurskie collaborates with at least one participant from the other region. 17

19 Figure 7 Origins of organisations collaborating with Warmińsko-Mazurskie in FP7 thematic activities 18

20 Table 15: The closest EU region from Warmińsko-Mazurskie in the FP7 cooperation programme Rank NUTS2 Code Name Nbr of Collaborations 1 IE02 Southern and Eastern 5 2 FR10 Île de France 4 3 AT13 Wien 3 4 DE11 Stuttgart 3 5 DE42 Brandenburg - Südwest 3 6 DK01 Hovedstaden 3 7 EL30 Attiki 3 8 ES30 Comunidad de Madrid 3 9 ITE4 Lazio 3 10 NL33 Zuid-Holland 3 11 PT11 Norte 3 12 SE11 Stockholm 3 13 UKI1 Inner London 3 Structural proximity The collaboration profile presented in Figure 6 is one way to identify related regions. Another method is to consider structural similarities. Table 16 presents the regions in EU countries outside Poland that are structurally similar to Kujawsko-Pomorskie (PL62). This information is taken from the Benchmarking Regional Structure interactive tool on the Smart Specialisation Platform. The lower the Distance Index the closer the region is to the reference region. The elements used to determine the structural distance between regions are based on those that may be suitable for the ben chmarking requirement to develop a regional RIS3. The elements included are grouped into broad dimensions as follows: Geo-demography; Educational level of human resources; Technological specialisation; Sectoral structure; Firm size; Openness; and Institutions and values. It allows for the identification of structurally similar regions as when learning lessons through regional benchmarking it is better to compare homogenous regions 10. In Table 16 the regions in Poland are not shown as the greatest added value is considered to be identification of structurally close regions outside Poland to allow Kujawsko-Pomorskie regional actors to identify non-polish regions that they are less familiar with. A rationale for developing the structural distance index was to avoid selecting regions for regional benchmarking based on their high performance 10. However, having selected based on structural similarity a next step could be to introduce performance by selecting a structurally similar region whose success relative to Kujawsko-Pomorskie could provide lessons. 10 Further details available in ''Regional benchmarking in the smart specialisation process: Identification of reference regions based on structural similarity'', S3 Working Paper Series No. 3, available at c6a5ab2d3e09 19

21 Table 16: The nearest structurally similar non-polish regions to Warmińsko-Mazurskie Rank Country NUTS code Region name Distance index 1 France FR72 Auvergne Romania RO11 Nord-Vest France FR23 Haute-Normandie France FR24 Centre France FR53 Poitou-Charentes Hungary HU32 Eszak-Alfold Romania RO21 Nord-Est France FR63 Limousin Hungary HU33 Del-Alfold Hungary HU23 Del-Dunantul Latvia LV00 Latvija Czech Republic CZ03 Jihozapad Hungary HU31 Eszak-Magyarorszag France FR43 Franche-Comté Czech Republic CZ06 Jihovychod France FR21 Champagne-Ardenne Slovakia SK03 Stredne Slovensko Czech Republic CZ05 Severovychod Lithuania LT00 Lietuva Hungary HU22 Nyugat-Dunantul Source: 2014 Orkestra - Instituto Vasco de Competitividad & S3 Platform (IPTS) available at: From a stakeholder perspective This section reveals the main organisations in Europe and the region playing a key rol e in Research networks involving at least one participant of the Region. Table 17 shows the organisations most frequently collaborating with organisations based in Warmińsko -Mazurskie in the FP7 cooperation programme when Table 18 shows the leading organisations based in Warmińsko-Mazurskie in the FP7 cooperation programme. Table 17: the leading organisations collaborating with organisations based in Warmińsko-Mazurskie in FP7 Nbr of Legal Name Theme Type NUTS2 Participations ITTI SP ZOO Security PRC PL41 2 Source: JRC/IPTS calculated using the FP7 contracts database-june 2014 There were a further 154 organisations that participated once from 31 different countries. Table 18: the leading organisations based in Warmińsko-Mazurskie (PL62) in FP7 Legal Name Theme Type Nbr of Participations UNIWERSYTET WARMINSKO- MAZURSKI W OLSZTYNIE Marie-Curie Actions HES 4 WYZSZA SZKOLA POLICJI W SZCZYTNIE Security HES 3 UNIWERSYTET WARMINSKO- MAZURSKI W OLSZTYNIE Food, Agriculture, and Biotechnology HES 2 STOWARZYSZENIE PRODUCENTOW RYB LOSOSIOWATYCH Research for the benefit of SMEs OTH 1 UNIWERSYTET WARMINSKO- MAZURSKI W OLSZTYNIE Research for the benefit of SMEs HES 1 Instytut Rozrodu Zwierzat i Badan Zywnosci Polskiej Akademii Nauk Research Potential REC 1 UNIWERSYTET WARMINSKO- MAZURSKI W OLSZTYNIE Energy HES 1 ANDRZEJ STANISLAW FETLINSKI Food, Agriculture, and Biotechnology PRC 1 Source: JRC/IPTS calculated using the FP7 contracts database-june

22 Figure 8 is a network analysis revealing the main collaboration links between organisations based in the region with national and international organisations. To improve the readability, organisations have been gathered in "groups" according to their type of activities (research, industry, higher education, governmental) and their geographical origins (according to NUTS 2 classification). The graph does not show the full picture, some groups (nodes) may not appear on the graph if they do not have at least one strong link to another group. Figure 8: The main collaboration network of Warmińsko-Mazurskie (PL62) in the FP7 Remark: -The graph does not show the full picture of regional collaborations. A node appears on the graph only if the number of connections (collaborations) is superior to 6. The size of nodes depends of the number of collaboration (degree centrality measure) HES Higher or secondary education est. REC Public Research organisations PRC Private commercial (Large companies and SME) PUB Public body (excl.research and education) OTH Other private organisations BE10 BG32 DE11 DE42 DE71 DK01 EL30 ES23 ES52 ES61 FI13 IE02 ITE4 NL22 NL41 PT11 UKG3 UKI1 Région de Bruxelles-Capitale Северен централен/ Severen tsentralen Stuttgart Brandenburg - Südwest Darmstadt Hovedstaden Attiki La Rioja Comunidad Valenciana Andalucía Itä-Suomi Southern and Eastern Lazio Gelderland Noord-Brabant Norte West Midlands Inner London Source: JRC/IPTS calculated using the FP7 contracts database-june

23 Annexes 1. Participation in FP7 cooperation programme Table 19: Detailed participation figures in FP7 research areas Source: JRC/IPTS calculated using the FP7 contracts database-june 2014 Warmińsko-Mazurskie Poland FP7 EU contrib. (In M) Nbr of part. EU contrib. (In M) Nbr of part. EU contrib. (In M) Nbr of part. TOTAL FP Health Biotechnology. generic tools and medical technologies for human health PL PL FP High-throughput research PL PL FP Detection. diagnosis and monitoring PL PL FP Suitability. safety. efficacy of therapies PL PL FP Innovative therapeutic approaches and interventions PL PL FP Integrating biological data and processes: large-scale data gathering. systems biology PL PL FP JTI-IMI (Innovative Medicines Initiative) PL PL FP Translating research for human health PL PL FP Research on the brain and related diseases. human development and ageing PL PL FP Translational research in major infectious diseases: To confront major threats to public health PL PL FP Translational research in other major diseases PL PL FP Optimising the delivery of healthcare to European citizens PL PL FP Translating the results of clinical research outcome into clinical practice including better use of medicines. and appropriate use of behavioural and organisational interventions and new health therapies and technologies PL PL FP Quality. efficiency and solidarity of healthcare systems including transitional health systems PL PL FP Health promotion and prevention PL PL FP International public health & health systems PL PL FP Specific international cooperation actions for health system research PL PL FP Other Actions across the Health Theme PL PL FP Coordination and Support Actions across the Theme PL PL FP Responding to EU policy needs PL PL FP Specific International Cooperation Actions (SICA) PL PL FP Horizontal topics for collaborative projects relevant for the whole of theme health PL PL FP Food. Agriculture and Fisheries. and Biotechnology PL PL FP

24 Sustainable production and management of biological resources from land. forest. and aquatic environment PL PL FP Increased sustainability of all production systems (agriculture. forestry. fisheries and aquaculture); plant health and crop protection PL PL FP Optimised animal health production and welfare across agriculture. fisheries and aquaculture PL PL FP Fork to farm: Food (including seafood). health and well being PL PL FP The Ocean of Tomorrow PL PL FP Consumers PL PL FP Nutrition PL PL FP Food processing PL PL FP Food quality and safety PL PL FP Environmental impacts and total food chain PL PL FP Life sciences. biotechnology and biochemistry for sustainable nonfood products and processes PL PL FP Novel sources of biomass and bioproducts PL PL FP Marine and fresh-water biotechnology (blue biotechnology) PL PL FP Industrial biotechnology: novel high added-value bio-products and bioprocesses PL PL FP Biorefinery PL PL FP Environmental biotechnology PL PL FP Emerging trends in biotechnology PL PL FP Other activities PL PL FP Socio-economic research and support to policies and Cross cuting activities PL PL FP Information and Communication Technologies PL PL FP Pervasive and Trustworthy network and service infrastructures PL PL FP Cognitive systems. interaction. robotics PL PL FP Components. systems. engineering PL PL FP Digital libraries and content PL PL FP ICT for mobility. environmental sustainability and energy efficiency PL PL FP ICT for Health. Ageing Well. Inclusion and Governance PL PL FP Future and emerging technologies PL PL FP Horizontal Actions PL PL FP ICT for the Enterprise and Manufacturing PL PL FP ICT for Learning and Access to Cultural Resources PL PL FP International Cooperation PL PL FP JTI-ARTEMIS (Embedded Computing Systems) PL PL FP Nanosciences. Nanotechnologies. Materials and new Production PL PL FP