1. PUBLISHABLE SUMMARY

Transcription

1 1. PUBLISHABLE SUMMARY Inter cluster initiative to target the future challenges for the European Polymer Converting Industry (FP7 Capacities ROK) The European Polymer Converting Industry (EPCI) is one of the major European industries. However, it is facing a huge international competition coming from both, low labour cost regions with increasing innovation ambitions and high developed countries which are massively investing in edge technology towards leading innovation markets. To overcome these challenges, the EPCI has to be able to promote innovation through technology breakthroughs, where synergies between RTD players, European companies (especially SMEs) and local and regional authorities are essential. That is the reason why the 6 european regions of CLUSTERPLAST project 1 and their respective clusters worked together during 18 months with the support of the 7th Framework program of the European Commission. First, the collection of data was supported on a questionnaire specifically developed for this purpose and filled in at cluster level (relevant players outside the clusters were also contacted in order to encompass within the analysis the potential growth of each cluster). We should note that the EPCI clusters involved in CLUSTERPLAST project have different profiles and are in different development stages. In fact, 3 are well established clusters: CLUSTERLAND in Upper Austria region, PROPLAST in Piemonte Italian region, and PLASTIPOLIS in the region of Rhônes Alpes in. Engineering and tooling from Portugal is a recently established cluster in Portugal and finalized its official creation during the CLUSTERPLAST project. Two clusters, from the Provincia of Valencia in and Zlín region in Czech Republic, are still not formally constituted. Even if differences are reflected in the collected data, very interesting results were achieved allowing comparisons and correlations between clusters. 1 Rhône Alpes (), Piemonte (), Land Oberösterreich (Austria), Communidad de Valencia (), Zlinsky Kraj (Czech Republic), Marinha Grande (Portugal)

2 This enquiry allowed: The identification and characterisation of the research entities as well as the established synergies with the business entities. In particular, data/information was collected at cluster level, it includes for instance the number, dimension and typology of research entities and their main R&D axes. Simultaneously, past and running R&D projects were identified and categorized by funding source, respective program, and by typology. A quantification of transnational established collaborations was developed and a set of best practices were identified, having in mind the promotion of synergies and the furthering of the interactions between research organizations and business entities at cluster level Percentage of identified research entities having competences in the specified R&D axe REPARTITION BY R&D AXES located outside the region 10 6 Number of research entities % 25% 5 75% % 5 Materials & compound technologies Smart plastics (functionalisation of materials) Tooling and machines Management & manufacturing system design Potential members % 67% at located outside the region Potential members at 33% 17% 5 33% 83% Composites and nanocomposites Transformation processes Engineering design & industrial engineering Process integration & eco conception Review of research entities per cluster Number of employees in plastic topics, R&D axes, legal type & funding, characteristics of platforms, characteristics of projects, etc The mapping of the Business entities presence and state of play in the CLUSTERPLAST partners territories/areas. The partners have realized a research work with the aim to get the required data about business entities: structure size, activities in which they are involved in, turnover and markets. The information was collected in regard to 2 periods, the present and 10 years ago and give the state of the art of the business entities playing in the 6 European regions involved in the project and allowing to compare data in a temporal and geographical perspective and providing a complete and practical analysis as a starting point to identify strategies of areas or aspects to be improved. Furniture 1% Rest of Consumer Agriculture 13% Industrial 5% 5% 1 Medical Construction 2% Automotive / 3 3 Number of business entities in REPARTITION BY MARKETS located outside the region Furniture Construction Rest of 1% Consumer 2% Agriculture 13% 5% Industrial 15% Medical Automotive / All business entities Rest of Construction Furniture Consumer 1 Agriculture 6% Industrial 1 Construction Automotive / Medical Industrial Agriculture Furniture Rest of Consumer Review of business entities per cluster at located outside the region All business entities at 32% Automotive / Medical 1 Number of employees, main activity, turn over, markets, involvement in RTD projects, etc

3 The review of the state of play of local/regional authorities in order to support the setting up and implementation of coherent economical development strategies which is essential for the EPCI to structure and support its economical development on the basis of its local/regional clusters. Public authorities, development agencies, area of support/action, typology, programs and policies, etc From this previous work, SWOT charts were established for each region presenting its Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Treats and, its potential individual actions to be led. The establishment of SWOT charts has allowed an overall analysis of each cluster and the possibility to compare them. Additionally, it provided a first basis for the definition of recommendations for the setting up of a Joint Action Plan (JAP). In fact, the combination of strength or weakness, and opportunity or threat, allowed the identification of general actions for each cluster. Each cluster has proposed a set of subsequent recommendations for each general action. These recommendations could be considered either individually by each cluster or through the Joint Action Plan as joint recommendations applicable to at least two CLUSTERPLAST clusters. Regarding joint recommendations, potential cooperations between clusters were identified thanks to the synthesis of the overall analysis. Comparison of the clusters to identify potential STENGTHS collaborations WEAKNESSES Cluster composition I1 (HIGH) Level of involvement of research entities Czech Rep. (LOW) Level of involvement of research entities I1 Portugal (HIGH) Level of involvement of business entities I2 1/6 I2 (LOW) Level of involvement of business entities Portugal (HIGH) Level of involvement of training centres I3 Portugal 1/6 I3 Austria (LOW) Level of involvement of training centres within the cluster Research entities Portugal Czech Rep. I4 6/6 (WIDE) Level of diversity of R&D axes I4 (NARROW) Level of diversity of R&D axes Austria Global analysis to support the establishment of the JAP OPPORTUNITIES THREATS Support from local and regional entities E1 (STRONG) Presence of public authorities E1 (WEAK) Presence of public authorities Czech Rep. (STRONG) Degree of support/action of public (WEAK) Degree of support/action of public authorities E2 4/6 E2 Austria authorities at regional and/or sub at regional and/or sub Austria E3 Portugal 3/6 (STRONG) Presence of development agencies E3 3/6 (WEAK) Presence of development agencies Czech Rep. Portugal (STRONG) Degree of support/action of development E4 4/6 E4 Austria (WEAK) Degree of support/action of development Czech Rep. agencies at regional and/or sub agencies at regional and /or sub (WIDE) Level of diversity of development agencies in Austria (NARROW) Level of diversity of development

4 Simultaneously, an international benchmarking was carried out on the two top leaders of the polymer converting industry in the world: USA 2 and Japan. The purpose of this international benchmarking was to focus on these two countries and to study one of their clusters covering the polymer converting industry in order to get a better understanding of their strategy and organisation. It examined how innovation clusters are organized in these two countries with leading plastics industry. Once again, the aim was to bring recommendations and best practices for the building of CLUSTERPLAST Joint Action Plan. 2 a US expert was welcomed to participate to the debates during the final conference of the CLUSTERPLAST project Finally the major outcome of the project was the Joint Action Plan dedicated to the creation of synergies between the different regions involved in the project, members of the Satellite group who reviewed the Joint Action Plan all along the project and eventually to other external partners. An action sheet was created for each action presenting the description of the action, objectives, potential partners, expected impacts, timing and budget and potential funding. In conclusion a summary table presents all the actions. The Joint Action Plan compiles 44 actions in 7 axes: Sharing of RTD infrastructures: 5 actions Knowledge transfer: 3 actions Mobility: 5 actions RTD projects to be supported: 10 actions Fostering of entrepreneurship: 6 actions Setting up of integrated and relevant education/training strategies: 8 actions Mutual learning and mentoring: 7 actions Joint Action Plan

5 CLUSTERPLAST partners were very active to promote the project and created a strong and efficient network. The results of the project were disseminated at several occasions: European Research Connection May 2009, Prague, Czech Republic European tooling Forum September 2009, Tortona, Milan, Manufuture November 2009, Gothenburg, Sweden These network built thanks to the CLUSTERPLAST project has seen a real motivation to continue exchanging after the project. The CLUSTERPLAST network is still meeting in order to follow and set up actions from the JAP and also to discuss jointly main issues of the EPCI and the role to be assumed by the clusters. All the necessary information: Week of Innovative regions in Europe March 2010, Grenada, CLUSTERPLAST final event Toward a common European and regional strategy for plastic clusters June 2010, Lyon,