PhD Thesis Program of Serena Novero

1

CE

RI S

-CN

R

ECONOMIC-TERRITORIAL FIRMS

AGGLOMERATIONS: ANALYSIS OF THE

IMPACT OF PUBLIC POLICIES ADDRESSED TO

SUSTAIN THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE

TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION IN THE

COUNTRIES

PhD Thesis Program of Serena Novero

Doctorate in Economy and Management of Technology - University of Bergamo

Ceris - Cnr, Torino – www.ceris.cnr.it

2

CE

RI S

-CN

RPreliminary remarks:

New increasing attention to agglomeration phenomenos due to the competitiveness in national and international markets need of “make a system” to contrast itAttention to networks in their different types, characteristics, way of development, points of strenght and weakness, role in innovation production:

• In Italy: Industrial and Technological Districts (Marshall, 1890; Antonelli, 1986)

•In the world: Perroux Poles (1955-’71); Clusters (Porter, 1990); Milieu Innovateur (Camagni, Cappellin,Brenner, 2000); Networks; Poles de Compétitivité (2005)

•SMEs, Big firms, Centre of research, Public Bodies, spread know-how, skilled workers

Serena Novero – Maastricht, October 2007

3

CE

RI S

-CN

RElement of success: ability of cohesion and collaboration among

them

• Paper 1:

“Economic-territorial agglomerations of enterprises: typologies, definitions, characteristics, comparison”

Important rule in territorial performances: rise of territorial specificities and innovations in products and processes

• Research Question 1: Differences among economic agglomerations, in particulary between districts and clusters: the role and the relationship with the areas of location the topic has been only partially treated


4

CE

RI S

-CN

R Paper 1:

Storical excursus of the teories of economic agglomerations: birth of the different agglomeration typologies, their evolutions and their diversification

Importance of technological innovation in TD, poles and clusters and their role in it

•Huggins R., 2001;

•Krugman P., 1991

•M.Lazzeroni, 2001-2004

•Lorenzen E., Maskell P.,2004

•Lorenzoni G., 1990

•Markusen, A., 1996,

•Marshall A., 1890-1920

•Maskell P., 2001

•Mills E.S., 1992

•Ozcan S., 2004

•Patrono A.,2002

•Piccaluga A., 2002-2003

•Porter, M.E., 1990-2000

•Rullani E.,1997

•Sforzi, F., 1990-2002

•Storper M.,, 1992

•P.Aydalot,1986;

•C.Antonelli, 1986-2003;

•G.Becattini, 1991-2000;

•F.Belussi, 2002;

•H.Bennett, 1992;

•Bergman E., Feser E., 1999;

•Bottazzi G., Dosi G., Fagiolo G., 2002;

•Brenner T., 2000-2001;

•Callegati E., Grandi S., 2005

•Cavallo C., 2002;

•Cesaroni, 2003;

•Cooke P.,1998-2006;

•Dümmler Patrick, 2003;

•Guerrieri P., Pietrobelli C., 2001

•Harrison B.


5

CE

RI S

-CN

R Territorial transitions and life cycles of districts phenomenons

have been recognized

Necessity of a public intervention

• Research Question 2:

Which is the innovation policies impact on

economic/territorial agglomerations? And which are

the most important points of these collaborations?

How public policies have to work to gain positive

results?


6

CE

RI S

-CN

R

Paper 2: “Technological districts and innovation: TT policies

and processes, methods and measures of valuation of public

actions, analysis of the impact of public policies made to their

support – The case of Canavese”

Centrality of knowledges and innovations (territorially localized)

Innovation and Technological Transfer policies = the solution for innovation problems of firms?

•Strategic variable for SMEs•First responsable of success or failure of the policy actions made•Foundamental for innovative knowledges diffusion•Different in dissimilar ambits•Transfer the knowledges in the space new variable: a field of stregths•Characteristics, subjects and channels envolved

7

CE

RI S

-CN

R

•Channels of communication:- a network among the econimic actors- public bodies and structures

Technological intermediary

TT could be:- formal: patents, licences, spinn-off, R&D collaborations, join ventures, mergers, consortia- informal: direct contacts

•Different methods of transmission:

-Tacit knowledges undirect way (services) firms

-Esplicit knowledges direct way (texts, workshops,patents) institute of research

•Subjects: sources, interfaces, users importance of relationship among them


8

CE

RI S

-CN

R

Methods and measures of impact of innovation policies?

Analysis of a tangible case: how the development of technological district of Canavese has been

supported - The story of the area

•Address of TT: - Market oriented: active TT because it creates financial fees in

the Centre of research involved: measured in units of money

- Education oriented: it produces benefits in the long time for the receiving social system, it increas the level of knowledges:measured with the n° of courses, students, doctorate, etc..


9

CE

RI S

-CN

RTHE CANAVESE AREA

In the north-west of Italy, in Piedmont, at north of Turin


10

CE

RI S

-CN

RThe snapshot of Canavese in the nineties:

The firms 1 Big Firm : Olivetti, 1908 - Ivrea

290 High-Tech SMEs of informatic, elettronic semimanufactured and ICT products or

services

December 1993 – Province of Turin– Commune of Ivrea– Association of Industrial Managers of Canavese

Founded: Consortium for the Technological District

of Canavese (CTDC - www.canavese.to.it)

The innovative 5 Centres of Competence : Cellular Sheet

services of TT Laser

Mechanical engineering

Microsystems

Metal PressingSerena Novero – Maastricht, October 2007

11

CE

RI S

-CN

R

THE CTDC PROJECTS:

T.S. (Tecnologia & Sviluppo) CANAVESE July 1999 – September 2001

PIA (Progetti Integrati d’Area) 01 July 2003 – May 2005

PIA 02 May 2004 – December 2005

PIA 03 August 2004 – December 2005

DIADI January 2004 – December 2006

CF 2 October 2005 – March 2008

The objective of each project was to give a significative impulse to the technological,

economic and social development of the manufacturing industry of the area,

supporting the rise of the competitiveness and of the employment in the local SMEs


12

CE

RI S

-CN

RThe technical services (described in a technical way) given to Canavese High Tech firms in the projects :

A Planning and making machineries

B Metallographic analysis for problems rise during the welding

C Use of laser technology

D Analyses and advices

E Certification of the products

F Use of the laboratories and services that the Centre supply

G Studies of fattibility

H Others different collaboration in the future


13

CE

RI S

-CN

R•The firms: definited with ATECO - ISTAT activities code

25 - Plastic and rubber manufactures 45 – Constructions

26 - Mineral not metalliferous products 50 - Motor vahicle commerce, maintenance and repair

27 – Metallurgy 51 – Wholesale trade and intermediaries

28 - Metal products manufactures (machineries and systems excluded)

52 - Retail commerce

29 - Mechanical machineries manufactures 64 - Post and telecommunications

30 - Manufacture of typewrites, PC and informatic systems

70 - Estate activities equipment

31 - Manufacture of machineries and elettric products

72 – Informatic and connected activities

32 – Manufacture of broadcasting and communication apparatus

74 – Test and technical analyses of products

33 – Manufacture of precision medical apparatus, optical instruments and watches 92 Cultural and sports activities and

Equipment34 - Cars, trailers and semi-trailers fabbrication

14

CE

RI S

-CN

RValuation of their impact - The method (Antonelli, 2005)Balance sheets data, comparison with the area as a whole (index) and probit models:

Y = Balance sheet performances (sales, ROI, G.O.M.)

X1 = ATECO code of activity of the firm

X2 = Size of the firm (number of employeers)

X3 = Gross Operative Margin (GOM = A.V. - salaries & wages)

X4 = Sales

X5 = Profit

X6 = GOM / Sales

X7 = ROS, ROI, ROE

X8 = existing technological problems

X9 = Centre of Competence involved

X10 = Objectives of the collaborations (A-H)

X11 = Feasibility studies

X12 = Results and possible developments

X13 = Processes or products modifications, patents

X14 = Projects execution

X15 = Further developments

X16 = Technological Status of each firm, before and

after the collaborations

X17 = Technological level and utility interventions

X18 = Their impact in the production

X17 = Relationships with the Centre

X18 = if new employments have been done or are

preview

X19 = if new opportunity of work are rised

15

CE

RI S

-CN

RSOME RESULTS..

Probability of success of an innovative project = 62%

Larger firms answer better to innovation

Previous high technological status has a big weight

Types and high technical quality of the collaborations are also very important

Firms belonging to the sectors 28, 29, 30 and 72 have had a bigger economic growth and have required mostly the collaborations C and D.

Firms of sectors 25, 27, 28 and 51 have had a better evolution of employment.

Collaborations B, C, D and E have given a good result for the increase of the employment

ATECOCode

EmploymentBalance sheets

variations 2001 / 2004

Rate ofGrowth

2001 /2004

Rate ofgrowth 2003 /

2004

Better Worse

25 6,5% 67,3% 1 1

27 -1,7% 90,3% 2

28 4,5% 40,1% 8 5

29 -0,2% 27,5% 11 11

30 -4,6% -1,6% 8 2

31 6,0% 12,7% 2 2

32 25,0% 5,3% 2 1

33 12,0% 2,0% 1 1

34 42,8% -22,3% 3 3

45 -32,0%

50 37,8% -42,3% 2

51 27,5% 45,7% 4 1

52 -11,1%

72 2,9% 0,5% 11 4

74 37,8% 14,1% 6

92 37,8% -42,3% 1

Medium 12% 14% 59,4% 40,6%

16

CE

RI S

-CN

RCOLLABORATIONS

Types of Collaborations Frequency Better Worse Employed

A Planning and making machineries 3,4% 3,6% 6,9%

B Metallographic analysis for problems rise during the welding

3,4% 4% 29,2%

C Use of laser technology 22,4% 18% 25% 27,1%

D Analyses and advices by technics 24,1% 24% 21,4% 28,1%

E Certification of the products 8,6% 12% 7,1% 50,6%

F Use of the laboratories and services that the centre supply

8,6% 12% 7,1% 17,6%

G Studies of fattibility 10,3% 8% 21,4% -11,1%

H Others different collaboration in the future

19% 22% 14,3% 59,4%

TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%


17

CE

RI S

-CN

R

Collab. Technical level and utility

High Medium Low

A 1

B

C 6 3

D 7 2

E 2 2

F 2

G 6 3 1

H 4 1

Productive effects in the firms

Good Medium Nothing

2 3

4 1

2

1

1 1 3

2 1

18

CE

RI S

-CN

R

It(.) = f (collabt) + f (relationshipt) + f(serv.typologyt) + f(locationt) + + f(feasibilityt) + f(projectt) + vt

Bt(.) = f (ATECOt) + f (sizet) + f (salest) + f (profitt) + f (tech.problemst) + + f (collabt) + f (tech.statust) + f(serv.typologyt) + wt

Collaborations

Innovativeness

Balance sheet

Services typologies

19

CE

RI S

-CN

R

Research Question 3:

How enterprises in economical territorial agglomerations of others UE

Countries have been supported by public interventions finalized to their

innovation?

and which have been their impacts?

International comparison with the French case


20

CE

RI S

-CN

R

PAPER 3: AN INTERNATIONAL CONFRONTATION:

FROM LPS (Local Productive Systems) TO CP (Competition

Poles), FRENCH POLICIES GENESIS AND EVOLUTION

French Poles de Compétitivité: points of strength and weakness

Policies and the governance management followed by the regional governments – International comparison

Their impacts: effects on technological innovation, creation and diffusion of knowledges, abilities and technologies, training of skilled employeers, spillovers

Results on firms balance sheets


21

CE

RI S

-CN

R

Conclusions:

Determination of typologies of interventions useful to substain technology innovation and to support firms development, competitiveness and networking. All that to:

•Cut down the costs

•Favour a fast circulations of ideas and projects

•Allow the development of the areas


22

CE

RI S

-CN

R

Thank you for the attention!

Serena Novero

Documents

PhD Thesis Program of Serena Novero