N.Vakalis, MEP, ITRE

“Greek experiences in using Structural funds for regional

development”

Conference 

"Research and Innovation - an Opportunity for Convergence Regions” 

Warsaw, 13 February 2006

N.Vakalis, MEP, ITRE

Issues addressed

Lessons learned by :

• the management of the Structural Funds

• The way that these funds were used for research and innovation purposes

The experience of 25 years of Greek membership in 12 minutes !

N.Vakalis, MEP, ITRE

Historical review of CSF, in Greece1st CSF: 1989-1993

7,2 bil. ECU

Sectoral OP+13 Regional OP

•Natural Gas

•Electricity

•Major road network

•Telecommunications

•Research and Technology

•Industrial Areas

•Railways

•Agricultural Structures

•13 Regional OP

2nd CSF :1994-1999

14 bil. ECU

Sectoral OP+13 Regional OP

•Roads, Ports and Airports,

•Rail Transport, •Telecommunications•Energy•Natural Gas•Urban Development •Healthcare and Welfare •Environmental Protection•Industry and Services•Research and Technology•Tourism-Culture •Agriculture and Fishery•Human Resource•Employment•13 Regional OP

3rd CSF : 2000-2006

22,7 bil. euros

Sectoral OP+13 Regional OP

•Training and initial Professional instruction

•Employment &Professional training

•Roads, Ports, Urban Development

•Rail Transport, Airports, Transports

•Competitiveness•Agricultural Development•Fishery•Environment•Culture•Health and welfare•Information Society•13 Regional OP

N.Vakalis, MEP, ITRE

The Greek approachThe Greek approach1. Main initial target: Infrastructure

Transport, schools, hospitals etc, ex.: highways, Athens metro

Results Life quality improvement Athens became a metropolis of high quality European standards High economic growth (4,7%) New investments expected in future

2. Evolution of Greek national priorities

"Lisbonised" prioritiesThis is reflected :

in the revision of the current 3rd CSF and the planning of the future 4th CSF

N.Vakalis, MEP, ITRE

Research and Innovation through CSFsResearch and Innovation through CSFs11stst CSF (1989-1993) CSF (1989-1993) Target: Infrastructure establishment of a first integrated and country-wide network of Science

and Technology parks. 7 Parks and Incubators established by Universities and other public

research institutesSuccessful cases:

Foundation for Research and Technology–Hellas (FORTH) in Crete Centre for Research and Technology Hellas (CERTH) in Thessaloniki

22ndnd CSF (1994-1999) CSF (1994-1999) A broader approach of R&D infrastructure projects new targets, such as :

bringing labs and companies closer for innovative products investing in technology transfer projects investing in human resources

N.Vakalis, MEP, ITRE

Research and Innovation through CSFsResearch and Innovation through CSFs

33rdrd CSF (2000-2006) CSF (2000-2006) Lisbon (2000) and Barcelona (2002) targets

Creation of the appropriate environment for new technologies and for the promotion of innovation and entrepreneurship.

A new Operational Programme dedicated to “Competitiveness” with priorities to:

involvement of the private sector involvement of companies cooperation and scientists' mobility projects improvement of the entrepreneurial environment technological research and innovation investment in knowledge-

intensive sectors.

N.Vakalis, MEP, ITRE

Lessons learnedLessons learnedProblemsProblems too many scattered projectstoo many scattered projects immaturity, inconsistency and low quality of projects immaturity, inconsistency and low quality of projects weaknesses in implementation bodiesweaknesses in implementation bodies a lack of procedures and legal frame a lack of procedures and legal frame the absence of the private sectorthe absence of the private sector bureaucracy bureaucracy a huge number of beneficiariesa huge number of beneficiaries

Problems for R&D and Innovation in regionsProblems for R&D and Innovation in regions Too little investment by Regional Operational Programmes to Too little investment by Regional Operational Programmes to

relevant priorities relevant priorities limited experience of the regional administrationslimited experience of the regional administrations poor understanding of the great importance of such activities for a poor understanding of the great importance of such activities for a

region region

N.Vakalis, MEP, ITRE

Lessons-Best Practices Lessons-Best Practices for R&D and Innovation in Regionsfor R&D and Innovation in Regions

“Training" of regional authorities / making them aware of the

benefits

Final beneficiaries : better prepared

Dissemination of results and evaluation of the spill-over impact

at all levels of economic activity

Introduction of quantitative targets in regional R&D and

innovation policies

More support for SMEs (backbone of the Greek economy)

Fostering of public-private partnerships (right legal framework)

N.Vakalis, MEP, ITRE

Lessons-Best Practices Lessons-Best Practices for R&D and Innovation in Regions (cont) for R&D and Innovation in Regions (cont)

A successful example / a good practice funded by 3rd CSF:

programme ELEFTHO for private actors in S&T Parks and

Incubators.

Particular emphasis on creating regional Innovation Poles spread

evenly around the country.

2 examples in the area of Thessaloniki Innovation Zone and Innovation Pole of Thessaloniki

Aim: to involve Universities, research centers, and other knowledge parties of

the area

Thessaloniki : international center of innovation Technopolis Project, to promote ICT

6 social and educational bodies

71 information-technology companies and individuals

N.Vakalis, MEP, ITRE

ConclusionConclusion

Let’s not “skimp on” investment in Let’s not “skimp on” investment in research and innovation. These are research and innovation. These are

strong economic drivers.strong economic drivers.

““In today’s European environment the In today’s European environment the winner is the one who has the biggest winner is the one who has the biggest dynamic in dynamic in innovationinnovation and a dominant and a dominant

position in the market”position in the market”