Science parks and innovation centres Making our case to government

Transcription

1 Science parks and innovation centres Making our case to government Presentation to UKSPA Dublin meeting 11 th June 2015 Charles Monck & Associates

2 Scope of presentation How can we demonstrate the contribution that Science Parks and Innovation Centres are making to Government s policy issues over the next 5 years? 1. What evidence do we have to support our case? 2. Going forward, which government policies are particularly relevant? 3. Where are there gaps in the evidence? 4. How are we going to build up the evidence? Charles Monck & Associates 2

3 Why research is critical UKSPA requires objective evidence on the role and added value of Science Parks and Innovation Centres across the UK: 1. To support our case with national and local governments and the agencies responsible for innovation, exports inward investment and local economic development 2. To help individual Science Parks and Innovation Centres in their discussions with their key stakeholders about forward strategy and funding 3. To provide individual Science Parks and Innovation Centres with benchmark data to help them to assess performance Charles Monck & Associates 3

4 2. What evidence do we have to support our case? Charles Monck & Associates 4

5 2. What evidence do we have now to support out case? Evidence on the development of Science Parks & Innovation Centres over time: total and vacant space, number of tenants and employment types of location and proximity to the research base, ownership structure and funding sources for business support and property key objectives, services provided and strategic added value Evidence on the contribution to creating jobs mapped against local authority area and region (and their competitiveness indexes, R&D and high tech employment) Evidence about the tenant base: broad sectors new firm formation, growth of firms (limited data) prior location of tenants (including spin outs from research base) legal status (including foreign owned firms) distribution of tenants by employment and size of premises occupied new tenants and departures (not consistent) Charles Monck & Associates 5

6 Some headline figures A concentration of technology based firms: Over 4,000 firms are currently based on 53 science parks, 28 innovation centres and 12 bio-incubators across the UK. A high proportion are qualified scientists and engineers. Over 60,000 people are employed on science parks and innovation centres contributing to higher GVA/head and productivity across the UK. Innovation and links to research base: 18% tenants are from the research base. Around 40% of tenants (around 1,600 firms) employ local graduates, and 27% (1,080 firms) have on going relationships with their local research base through joint research, use of facilities and via student projects etc. Incubation: Over 46% of tenants (1,870 firms) came to the Science Park or Innovation Centres as start ups. Half the science parks offer active incubation programmes supporting around 500 start ups a year and raising around 60m/year Exports and inward investment Over half of all firms are exporters. For around 20% (730 firms), exports account for more than 30% of total sales. Around 9% of tenants (360 firms) are foreign owned. Land for expansion: around half of all science parks lack sufficient land with planning permission for future expansion Charles Monck & Associates 6

7 2. Going forward, which Government policies are particularly relevant? Charles Monck & Associates 7

8 2. WHICH GOVERNMENT POLICIES? What policy areas might be relevant? A. Business competitiveness Enhanced productivity, innovation and exports by firms with above average GVA per person. Key areas: 1. Level of R&D and innovation by SMEs and Improved linkages with the research base 2. Smart Specialisation Strategies around niche clusters 3. Improved rate of formation of innovative start ups with growth potential 4. Scale up of technology based companies 5. Enhanced exports 6. Attracting R&D related FDI B. Local economic development Spatial distribution with a focus on economic development around by city regions and LEPs Charles Monck & Associates 8

9 3. Where are there gaps in the evidence? Charles Monck & Associates 9

10 3. WHERE ARE THERE GAPS IN THE EVIDENCE? 1. Are firms on Science Parks and innovation Centres undertaking more R&D and Innovation? We require better data on: Average salary (and GVA figures) of tenants to demonstrate the productivity of science parks locally and nationally R&D spending and employment by tenants by sector, to assess our contribution to each region and to particular sectors. Intensity of engagement of the tenants with the Research Base compared with the annual higher education-business and community interaction survey (HE-BCI) Data on new/ improved products and services introduced by tenants to align with national data Level of uptake of UK Innovate and Horizon 2020 programmes by tenants Charles Monck & Associates 10

11 University collaboration by NETPark Charles Monck & Associates 11

12 3. WHERE ARE THERE GAPS IN THE EVIDENCE? 2. How are Science Parks and Innovation Centres contributing to local Smart Specialisation Strategies? We require better information on: Examples where there are niche clusters on science parks and innovation centres The progress being made to nurture the development of these niche clusters? Charles Monck & Associates 12

13 3. WHERE ARE THERE GAPS IN THE EVIDENCE? 3. Are we setting up more technology based start ups with above average GVA? We require better data on: Capacity of incubation on Science Parks and Innovation Centres and resulting performance Volume of technology based start ups by sector and location Funds raised by start ups (and growing firms) with the help of Science Parks and Innovation Centres Subsequent performance of incubated firms 3-8 years after start up compared to national average Charles Monck & Associates 13

14 3. WHERE ARE THERE GAPS IN THE EVIDENCE? 4. What contribution are firms on Science Parks making to the national Scale Up Strategy? We require better data on: The number and case examples of Scale Up Enterprises on Science Parks compared to national figures set out in the Scale Up report Services and benefits of a Science Park location to support Scale up enterprises Note: Scale Up Enterprises: > 10 employees with an annualised growth in employment (or turnover) > 20% a year over 3 year period. Charles Monck & Associates 14

15 3. WHERE ARE THERE GAPS IN THE EVIDENCE? 5. Are tenants on Science Parks more export orientated? We require better data on: Analysis of export levels by tenants on Science Parks by: volume, as a % of total sales, by country and by sector Uptake of export services offered by UKTI Export potential of new products and services being developed by tenants Level of engagement of Science Park tenants with UKTI export advisers Charles Monck & Associates 15

16 3. WHERE ARE THERE GAPS IN THE EVIDENCE? 6. How successful are Science Parks in attracting R&D related FDI projects We require better data on: Current level of foreign owned firms attracted to Science Parks Availability of soft landing services on Science Parks for foreign firms Level of engagement of Science Parks with UKTI FDI teams Partnership programmes established between UK and foreign Science Parks (as well as with University/ Research Institute partners) Charles Monck & Associates 16

17 3. WHERE ARE THERE GAPS IN THE EVIDENCE? 7. How are Science Parks and Innovation Centres supporting the growth of City Regions & LEPs? We require better data on: Case studies with performance data to demonstrate the role and value of Science Parks and innovation Centres as key components of City Region (and LEP) strategies Survey to assess whether there are land and property constraints which are holding back the growth and development of Science Parks and Innovation Centres Charles Monck & Associates 17

18 4. How are we going to build up the evidence? Charles Monck & Associates 18

19 4. How are we going to build up the evidence? Streamlining of the UKSPA Annual Survey to provide core performance data + information on a specific theme, with separate analyses for Science Parks, Innovation Centres and Bio-incubators Periodic specific surveys and mini questionnaires by UKSPA to get feedback on views and perceptions of Science Park and Innovation Centre managers UKSPA to request Science Parks and Innovation Centres to provide short case studies (with tenant stories) to illustrate particular themes Formation of a group of Science Parks and Innovation Centres willing to adopt a common approach towards carrying out profiles and performance reviews of their tenants, coordinated by UKSPA UKSPA to secure sponsorship to fund a substantive survey of tenants, based on face to face interviews carried out by an external consultancy, backed by sponsors Charles Monck & Associates 19