Transcript Industrial.

Industrial policy in Europe
Primary aim:
A down-to-earth description of ip in the European integration
•The new notion of comparative advantages and competitiveness?
•The regulatory agency?
Lisbon strategy from 2000:
•
EU sets itself the goal to become the most dynamic and
competitive knowledge-based economy in the world.
•
Sustainable economic growth with greater social cohesion
and respect for the environment
•
Faster growth is ….paramount for the sustainability of the
European model, which puts a high premium on cohesion
(the Sapir report 2004)
European capitalism with a social model
outcompetes liberal market capitalism (the US)?
Important complementarities when economic knowledge
becomes the key determinant of competiveness:
•
Between the following institutional areas
1) Traditional competition policies
2) Education and employee protection (social policy)
1) has a positive impact on innovations and 2) on human
capital, which is necessary for innovative activities
The Lisbon strategy and ip-governance:
From
Intergovernmentalism before SMP
•
Policy–coordination among sovereign states
to
Multi-level governmentalism after SMP
•
•
•
Multi-centric system for exercising authority
The Open Method of Coordination (OMC): voluntary
cooperation in areas, where competence remains with the
states /Lisbon strategy/
Devolution, where responsibility moves from national to subnational level /Renewed Lisbon agenda/
Multi-level governance in European ip:
•
Competition policy - the supra-national (EU) level
•
Social policy - the national (governmental) level
•
Cluster policies (R&D, innovation) - the regional level.
This multi-centric system of authority is coordinated by the
European Commission
Historical background of Lisbon strategy:
•
•
•
•
•
The end of the 1970s:all industrialised countries
stagnated. Support of traditional industries (textile,
shipyards….) (“Saving the looser”)
EU “a laggard”: French government initiates the Single
Market Programme
Single Market Act from 1987: Community competence to
pursue policies on R&D (the Framework Programmes)
The end of the 80s: new sectoral policy directed to
technological advanced IT and bio-technological industries
Social cohesion in Europe: SMP makes clear that the
community shall aim at reducing the backwardness of the
least favoured regions and rural areas
Reform of Structural Funds 1988:
Two institutional innovations:
1. Technological development became one of the main
instruments of the Structural funds (complementarities
between Structural funds and Framework Programme)
2. ‘Partnership' that ensures the regional authorities a role in
the EU: “Community operations shall be established
through close consultations between the Commission, the
Member State concerned and the competent authorities
designed by the Member State at the national, regional,
local or other level" (Ansell et. al. 1997 pp 354, 355).
R&D as percentage of GDP
1980
1985
1990
1995
Germany
2.50
2.75
2.75
2.28
France
1.82
2.25
2.41
2.34
Finland
1.19
1.58
1.91
2.36
Sweden
2.22
2.88
2.85
3.45
EU12
1.60
1.90
2.03
1.84
Greece
0.20
0.28
0.36
0.48
Portugal
0.29
--
0.57
0.59
The new
member
countries
in ECE?
World shares of patents:
EU-15
EPO
1985
50.0
1995
USPTO
1985
1995
42.4
21.4
16.0
Social cohesion and the new ip-paradigm:
•
Strengthening of the Firms capability to understand and
absorb new technologies important