Competing in the Single Market - SMEs and ... - Erhvervsstyrelsen

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The panel identified the following key challenges for / obstacles to enabling thedevelopment of a critical mass of innovative and internationally competitive SMEs:SMEs and the SME sector are relatively new and young institutions in the AccessionCountries (the New Europe) -> the development of a dynamic innovative internationallycompetitive SME sector will take timeOf great importance is changing the attitudes of bureaucrats, policy makers andacademics re. entrepreneurship and innovation, but also attitudes to failures and incentivesfor risk-taking“(There is) still a push mentality instead of an entrepreneurial pull mentality.”(Marian Geldner)SMEs don’t have sufficient access to R&D and innovative capabilitiesInnovation and R&D are concentrated in large, foreign-owned firms (particularly innew member states); internationally competitive, innovative export-oriented firms areclearly in the minorityThere is a need to improve cooperation / linkages between government, privatesector and academia (triple helix model)“It is important to increase the interactions between companies and government. Noone institution is enough by itself.” (Per Eriksson)It is important to increase international cooperation among Baltic and Nordiccountries and increase the opportunities for learning from others’ successes and failures(policy exchange and learning)“(There are) many programs supporting structural reform to support SMEs.. BalticSea countries should aspire to be EU leaders in policies/activities to support SMEs.”(Meelis Atonen)SMEs need greater access to financial capital: there is a substantial need for capital inSMEs to invest in R&D but also to upgrade plant and equipment facilities to comply withEU standards“The #1 problem for starting a business is lack of capital. In Latvia, there arecurrently 17 companies per 1000 inhabitants; the European average is 51 companiesper 1000 inhabitants.” (Andris Denins)SMEs need greater access to human capital (know how, entrepreneurship, etc.).116
Regarding the role of policymaking, the panellists agreed that,Policy should not focus too much on direct subsidies to firms but rather on creatingthe ‘right conditions’“The Latvian national innovation program will focus on two main areas: supportinglinkages between companies and research institutions, and supporting access to financethrough guarantees for risk capital and help in creating business plans.”(Juris Lujans)There is a need for a common vision for innovation and sustainable economic growth,shared by all stakeholdersInnovation should not be limited to large-foreign owned firms and a handful (‘top 10%’) ofhigh-tech SMEsEnabling the development of a critical mass of innovative and internationallycompetitive SMEs is a challenge which is not unique to the New Europe or‘Transition economies’ but also very much an issue in ‘Old Europe’ and, inparticular, common to all countries in the Baltic Sea Region. For this reason, theregion stands to benefit immensely as a whole, from a structured and continuousexchange of policy experiences, policy learning and common initiatives on how toenable the development of a critical mass of innovative and internationallycompetitive SMEs in their respective countries. By bringing together high-levelrepresentatives from business, academia and the private sector from the region,The Baltic Development Forum provides a good platform for such exchange andcommon initiatives. The panel gave a clear mandate to explore possibilities forcooperation. (Possibilities include IKED’s Baltic Programme where high-level workinggroups can discuss ideas/experiences on venture capital markets, entrepreneurship,innovation policy awareness issues, human capital issues, cluster policies, innovation innon-market sectors, etc.)Summing up, the panel agreed that SMEs deserve the particular attention andfocus of policymakers, NOT because they are small and in need of specialprotection / support (helpless), but because, given the right conditions, in thenear future, they will be the economic giants in and the guarantors of a dynamicand prosperous Baltic Sea Region.117
Page 1 and 2:
Sylvia Schwaag SergerEmily HanssonC
Page 4 and 5:
About the International Organisatio
Page 7:
PREFACEAccession to the Single Mark
Page 10 and 11:
enterprise development. There are n
Page 12 and 13:
BOXESBox 1: The ‘Knowledge-Based
Page 15 and 16:
INTRODUCTIONAfter more than 10 year
Page 17 and 18:
CHAPTER 1: FROM STABILISATION TO IN
Page 19:
increased competitive pressure as B
Page 22 and 23:
Box 2: On Innovation and Innovation
Page 24 and 25:
Table 5: GDP Growth 1995-2003 in Se
Page 26 and 27:
Table 7: Relative Strengths and Wea
Page 28 and 29:
Box 3: The Indicator ProblemExistin
Page 31 and 32:
CHAPTER 2:BALTIC SMEs - AGENTS OF F
Page 33 and 34:
Table 9: Average Annual Growth of S
Page 35 and 36:
Box 4: Overview of Selected Multina
Page 37 and 38:
The Role of SMEs in Transitional Ec
Page 39 and 40:
e to the potential advantage of the
Page 41 and 42:
A common measurement of business ac
Page 43 and 44:
Figure 8: Labour Productivity per P
Page 45 and 46:
Figure 10: Employment in Med/Hi-tec
Page 47 and 48:
Summing up, there are fewer economi
Page 49 and 50:
Overall, SMEs tend to lack the fina
Page 51 and 52:
Figure 12: Enterprises with Innovat
Page 53 and 54:
Figure 14: Proportion of Enterprise
Page 55 and 56:
Table 14: Barriers to Innovation fo
Page 57 and 58:
Some interesting examples of cluste
Page 59 and 60:
CHAPTER 3:POLICIES PROMOTING SMEs A
Page 61 and 62:
National governments themselves wil
Page 63 and 64:
Institutional StructureIn all of th
Page 65 and 66:
EU countries (innovation relay cent
Page 67 and 68: LITHUANIAAgency/OrganisationLithuan
Page 69 and 70: From the private sector, the chambe
Page 71 and 72: On the whole, the B4 have relativel
Page 73 and 74: LITHUANIAProgramme/Policy DocumentI
Page 75 and 76: Table 19: B4 National Rankings of A
Page 77 and 78: Box 11: Structural Funds to the Can
Page 79 and 80: Box 12: On SMEs and FinancingIt doe
Page 81 and 82: examples of evaluations of national
Page 83 and 84: CHAPTER 4:CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDA
Page 85 and 86: General challengesBased on our own
Page 87 and 88: the above-mentioned channels. 27 On
Page 89 and 90: the EU average and particularly wit
Page 91 and 92: RecommendationsBased on the challen
Page 93 and 94: CHAPTER 5:A VISION OF A NORDIC-BALT
Page 95 and 96: addition, they are the most advance
Page 97 and 98: countries. One such sign is the rap
Page 99 and 100: CONCLUSIONSEU accession will not re
Page 101 and 102: REFERENCESAlfonso, Antonio, Ludger
Page 103 and 104: European Commission (2003f), Compre
Page 105 and 106: Eurostat (2004a), SMEs in the Candi
Page 107 and 108: Statistical Office of Estonia (2004
Page 109 and 110: APPENDIX I:Agenda for Working Group
Page 111 and 112: DAY 2:POLICY SOLUTIONS9:30-10:30 In
Page 113 and 114: APPENDIX II:Participants in the IKE
Page 115 and 116: APPENDIX III:Conclusions from the I
Page 117: APPENDIX IV:Summary of the Panel se
Page 121 and 122: APPENDIX V:Description of Field Stu
Page 123 and 124: Mr. Miroslaw MarekMr. Talis Millers
Page 126: IKED - International Organisation f
show all

Competing in the Single Market - SMEs and ... - Erhvervsstyrelsen

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?