Transcript IST 2003 Presentation Milano

The role of inter-regional
benchmarking in the
policy-making process
Brussels, 20 June 2006
Karsten Gareis, empirica, Bonn
1
Background
• BISER (2002-2004)
– Development and piloting of a set of survey-derived
indicators to be used for benchmarking regions in the
Information Society
– Top down approach: Indicators are developed based on
conceptual framework, then discussed with regions
– BISER Benchmarking Report and interactive data analysis
tool available at www.biser-eu.com
2
Status quo
National level
Level of
activity
Regional level
Impact
Intensity
Readiness
t
measurability using “hard” measures
easy
difficult
explanatory power
low
high
3
Selected challenges
•
•
•
•
•
Identifying the “right” indicators
Obtaining the data
Choosing the appropriate geographical reference unit
Contextualise Information Society data
Looking beyond indicators on “hard” factors
4
Geographical reference units
• EU standard (NUTS) is based on geographical units
which were defined for political reasons
• Very different from functional regions (but functional
regions are not available at EU level)
• Risk of wrong conclusions as a result of aggregation
• NUTS3 better than NUTS2?
5
An example
100 10
5
10
5
10
5
200 20
10
20
10
20
10
20
10
20
10
20
10
20
20
10
20
10
20
10
20
10
20
10 400 10
20
10
10
20
10 400 10
20
10
20
40
20
40 300
10
20
10
20 150
40
20
Number of cars (x1000)
20
10
Number of households (x1000)
Number of cars per household
0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Aggregation
0.74
1.04
1.6
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
a. NUTS3
b. NUTS2
6
Contextualisation
• The diffusion of ICT is partly determined by income
(GDP/capita) and other independent variables
• Comparing data at company level, the huge differences
in sectoral structures need to be taken into account
• Contextualisation (normalisation) necessary!
7
Highlighting weak points
Example: RB Darmstadt
Computer users
17
Internet access
25
Internet users
21
Average weekly Internet use
28
Internet user base: expected growth
-20
E-mail users
Average share of intra-regional e-mails
-31
Costs as barrier for Internet take-up
32
Internet want-nots
-37
Mobile phone users
11
E-commerce
E-banking
24
Internet chatters
-16
Peope tele-cooperating at the workplace
multi-locational workers
home-based teleworkers
Lifelong learning for work
37
E-learning for work 2
Computer skills Index
24
Have had computer training
9
E-health users
25
Users of online timetables
37
eGovernment users
-48
eGovernment want-nots
26
Persons with strong regional identity
-28
Users of Internet for regional information
6
- 100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
47
47
48
107
148
© BISER 2003
60
80
100
8
An example
Indicator: Internet users -last four weeks (2003)
USA
© SIBIS 2003
10-30%
30-40%
40-50%
50-60%
>60%
9
An example
Internet access and income (GDP/head)
80
Internet access at home in % of population
15+ (2002/2003)
NL
70
SE
60
UK
50
DE
40
IT
DK
r= .891*
FI
IE
AT
BE
SI
ES
30
FR
EE
PT
20
BG
10
RO
PL
CZ
LT
SK
LV
EL
HU
Lux excluded
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
GDP/head in PPP 2002 (EU15 = 100)
10
11
Beyond “hard” indicators
• Differences in R&D and infrastructure investments alone
cannot explain the persistence of the territorial digital
divide
• Rather than levelling regional disparities, ICTs seem to
have exacerbated existing inequalities
• Disparities seem to be related to the effectiveness with
which ICTs are used to transform traditional ways of
doing things
• The ability to use ICTs in a transformative way appears to
be influenced by cultural factors
• Need for more insight into Regional Innovation Cultures
12
Ongoing work
• TRANSFORM (2006-2008)
– Focus on indicatores on “soft” issues which underpin
regions’ ability for transformative use of ICTs
– Key issues: Regional innovation cultures, social capital
(bonding / bridging / linking), networking capital, impact of
ICT usage, empowerment, participation
– Revised top down approach: Indicators are developed
based on conceptual framework, then tested during case
study fieldwork in 16 regions across Europe
– Specific Support Action (“Scientific Support for Policy”)
in FP6
– Consortium: empirica, CURDS, eris@, IRISI, CARPAT
13
Thank you!
More information at: www.biser-eu.com
www.transform-eu.org (soon)
or contact:
E-mail contact:
empirica Gesellschaft für Kommunikationsund Technologieforschung mbH
Oxfordstr. 2
D-53111 Bonn
Tel.: (+49) 2 28 - 9 85 30-0
Fax: (+49) 2 28 - 9 85 30 -12
[email protected]
14