A Snapshot on STI Policies and Indicators for Belgium

A snapshot on STI policies and indicators for Belgium

Peter Teirlinck – Belgian Science Policy Office

1. Introduction

Institutionally speaking, Belgium is a ‘mini-Europe’, each of the federated authorities (regions and linguistic communities) is singularly competent for the areas of STI granted to it by the constitutionConstitution. The long process of decentralisation, which began in the 1970s, has led to a differentiation of institutions and policies adapted to the STI (science, technology and innovation) potential, and the social and economic needs of each part of Belgium.

Benchmarked with the total of the European Union, Belgium has a high share of human resources for the knowledge-based economy and is characterised by a high labour productivity. Also, involvement in technological innovation is one of the highest in Belgium and the business sector is strongly integrated into the international economy through foreign direct investments. Main weaknessesare the weak entrepreneurial activity and a rather low share of graduates in science and engineering at the first stage university level. In terms of R&D intensity (R&D expenditures as a percentage of GDP) Belgium is close to the EU average. However, the fact that close to 60% of business research is carried concentratedout within a limited number of large R&D spending multinational firms that have established or took over research & development (R&D) facilities in Belgium also involves substantial risks of delocalisation.

Both STI policy making and statistics are confronted with a number of challenges. First, STI is an increasingly international phenomenon and policy making still is largely based on territorially linked principles. This international context in which multinational enterprises are the key drivers is characterised not only by knowledge development but also by knowledge exchange and valorisation (as emphasized by the paradigm of ‘open innovation’). Second, especially in policy terms, higher attention is paid to the role of STI to respond to (global) challenges in terms of environment, health, security, energy supply ... This forces STI policy making to be considered in a broader policy mix (which actually is not the case) and challenges the evaluation of public funding for research to be based on statistical evidence paying more attention to long term impacts (i.e. beyond the currently applied short term input or output additionality views on indicators).

This text provides a brief description of the STI institutional and policy system in Belgium (Section 2) and gives a snapshot on data and trends in indicators on Belgian R&D and innovation(Section 3). The policy ‘mapping’ complements the statistical data and will helps the reader put into context the choices made by the Belgian authorities in terms of policy objectives and instruments. For each of the authorities, attention is paid to current policy objectives for STI, the main actors and implementation measures of this policy.

A final section (Section 4) provides some perspectives for STI policy for the small open Belgian economy. This is regarded from a perspective on future orientations of policy, notably in the context of the European Commission’s Europe 2020 Strategy, the future European Research & Innovation Plan and the on-going actions to reinforce the European Research Area (ERA).Topics concerning internationalisation, open innovation, broader policy mix and evaluation will be addressed.

Dealing with the complex issues of STI policies, indicators and a critical reflection on it in a brief way implies the risk of too much simplification. For a broader view on STI statistics and policies for Belgium we refer to ‘Key data on science, technology and innovation Belgium 2010’ (Belgian Science Policy Office, 2010a) and the ‘Belgian Report on Science and Technology 2010’ (Belgian Science Policy Office, 2010b). These reports are the sources for the STI policy description and the statistical evidence here presented. For more detailed insights into broad STI policy trends in an international context we refer to the ‘OECD STI Outlook’ (OECD, 2010).

The insights presented – especially those concerning perspectives for STI policy making - are written to stimulate debate and represent the author’s personal opinions.

2. Institutions and competences in science, technology and innovation policy in Belgium

In this section attention is paid to the repartition of responsibilities in the Belgian STI policy system (Section 2.1) and to the general STI policy orientations of the main policy actors (Section 2.3). To provide an idea on the importance in budgetary terms of the STI policies of the different governments a brief overview is provided on the budget outlays for R&D at the level of each of the policy levels (Section 2.2)

2.1 Distribution of responsibilities in the Belgian STI policy system

Belgium is a federal country[1] composed of seven autonomous entities: the Federal State, three regions (Flemish Region, Walloon Region, and Brussels-Capital Region) and three communities (Flemish Community, French-speaking Community, and the German-speaking Community). In practice, the Flemish region and the Flemish Community merged to form a single government, parliament and administration: the Flemish Authority.

Each entity elects its own Government and Parliament and establishes all regulations and institutions necessary to ensure effective government within its realm of responsibilities. Each “federated” entity and the Federal State have exclusive powers in a number of areas.

the The Federal State is competent for areas of national interest, such as, defence, justice, monetary and fiscal policy, social security and important elements of health policy.. The Federal Government also is competent for the scientific research necessary for it to perform its own general competences, including scientific research aimed at the execution of international or supra-national agreements; space research within an international framework; networks of data-exchange on a national or international basis (Belnet),and the federal scientific institutes, and – within the framework of cooperation agreements with thecommunities and/or the regions – programmes and actions requiring homogenous execution at national or international level; the maintenance of a permanent inventory of the country’s scientific potential; Belgian participation in activities of international research bodies. The Federal Government can also take any action in areas belonging to the competences of the federated entities, if acting on the basis of an opinion expressed by the Federal Council for Science Policy. These actions must, furthermore, either be related to an international agreement or refer to actions and programmes going beyond the interests of one community or one region. In addition, the Federal Government retains responsibility for a number of other key fields of policy with an influence on STI performance, notably tax and social security (and hence the possibility to provide incentives through the tax system), (scientific) visas, intellectual property law, etc.

the The communities act in fields pertaining to the needs and rights of individual citizens; notably primary, secondary and higher education, scientific research and culture. The concept of 'community' refers to persons that make up a community and the bond that unifies them, namely their language and culture. The communities are competent in the following areas: research related to education, culture and other individual matters, such as health policy, and personal assistance. This covers both research in these areas as well as research conducted by organisations of the sectors concerned, namely universities and other higher education institutes. It can be said that communities have the main responsibility for fundamental research in universities and applied research in higher education establishments, including international activities of these institutions. They are also in charge of popularisation and communication of science.

the The creation of the three regions responded to the need to develop socio-economic policies adapted to the specific needs of each territory. Economic development, innovation, land use, environment and natural resource management and agriculture are among the major competences of the regions.. The regions are competent in the following areas: applied industrial research related to the economy, energy policy, public works, telecommunications, environment, transport, water, preservation of nature, land, agriculture, trade, employment. In terms of innovation regional support and subsidies covers the development of new products and processes in SMEs, technology transfer, public research organisations, venture capital, and science parks and incubation centres (supporting start-ups). In short, the regions have the main responsibility for economically oriented research, technological development and innovation promotion.

The distribution of responsibilities in STI across the various authorities in Belgium is based on fields of competences, rather than on the actors. This is illustrated by the case of universities, major players in the Belgian research system. Whereas the Communities are competent for research at universities and other third-level higher education institutions (HEI, namely ‘Hogeschool’ in the Flemish system and ‘Hautes Ecoles’ in the French Community) and administer the basic allocations to these organisations, the Federal Government and the regions can also fund projects of HEI for STI activities in their own realm of competences. Concretely, this means that universities may receive funding from the federal government, regionals or communities (according to their location and their linguistic regime), but for different purposes and with different conditions attached to the finances received.

Increasingly, the core of STI policy is inter-linked with other policy areas with an influence on innovation in the broader sense. This concerns economic policy, a regional competences in terms of economic policy (under which fall, for example, start-up promotion and risk capital provision) and environmental policy (with the push to promote green or ‘eco-innovation’) or federal competences such as fiscal policy (e.g. tax breaks for R&D activities.) or social security (e.g. issues related to the social security regime of researchers), etc. In such areas policy initiatives and instruments are developed that may in some cases have a major impact on STI and this requires, increasingly, consultation amongst the Belgian authorities to ensure an optimal outcome in terms of research and innovation potential.

The distribution of competence in STI matters across all Belgian authorities, as described above, goes hand-in-hand with the need for co-ordination in a number of areas on either a permanent or ad hoc basis. Co-ordination and consultation between the various components of the Belgian state is organised through a committee embracing these authorities and offering a space for dialogue on all matters requiring concerted action at national level. The Inter-Ministerial Conference on Science Policy (CIPS-ICWB)[t1] is the co-ordination instrument between the Federal State, the Communities and the Regions, composed of those members of respective governments having responsibilities in science policy matters.The CIPS-ICWB has established two permanent administrative sub-committees, attended by representatives from each authority: the International Co-operation Commission (CIS) for international matters, and the Federal Co-operation Commission (CFS) for national matters.Examples of matters dealt by these committees are the permanent inventory of scientific potential in Belgium, or the positioning of Belgium in the EU’s Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7).

As illustrated in Figure 1, all the Belgian authorities[2] have advisory councils, ministerial portfolios and administrative departments and implementing agencies, with diverse responsibilities for the design, the implementation and the evaluation of STI policy, within their field of competence. The institutional structure has evolved from a ‘common base’ since the 1980s as each of the authorities chose their ‘own road’ in terms of ministerial and departmental responsibilities, creation of agencies, orientation of their STI policy mix, etc. As a result, certain organisations that continue to have a national mandate, such as the collective research centres, increasingly fulfil specific missions related to regional/community policy objectives.

1

Figure 1: Belgian STI policy system[t2]

1

2.2 Government budget outlays for R&D of the different authorities in Belgium

Government budget outlays for R&D (GBAORD) give an idea on the financial support in terms of R&D of the different governments in Belgium. The GBAORD indicator is not based on real expenditure on scientific and technological activities but on the budget allocations of the aforementioned authorities, and this irrespective of where the money is spent, thus whether or not within the public sector or within the national territory. The GBAORD tells us something about the theoretical destination of the investment. It shows trends in the financial involvement and attitude of the public authorities over time towards investment in research and development.

Based on the results presented in Table 1 it turns out that over the period 1998-2009 there has been a substantial increase in government budget outlays for R&D, and this at the level of each of the governments. In terms of repartition per government, in the year 2009, the Flemish Community represents 41.5%, the Federal Authority 35%[3], the French Community and Walloon Region taken together account for 22.5%, and the Region of Brussels-Capital represents about 1%. In budgetary terms there are three largely funded socio-economic objectives: ‘general advancement of knowledge’, ‘industrial production and technology’, and ‘exploration and exploitation of space’.

Table 1: GBAORD (including tax credits), million EURO, current prices, by authority

1998 / 2009(i)
Flemish Community / 518 / 1.147
Federal Authority (including tax credit for R&D) / 460 / 963
French Community / 203 / 291
Walloon Region / 104 / 331
Region of Brussels-Capital / 11 / 29
TOTAL / 1.296 / 2.761

Source: Federal Cooperation Commission, CFS/STAT

Table 2: GBAORD (excluding tax credits) by socio-economic objectives, 2008

1. Exploration and earth exploitation / 1,0% / 9. Education / 0,3%
2. Environment / 2,1% / 10. Culture, recreation, religion and mass media / 2,0%
3. Exploration and exploitation of space / 11,8% / 11. Political & social systems/structures/processes / 3,1%
4. Transport, telecommunication and other infrastructures / 1,9% / 12. General advancement of knowledge: R&D financed from General University Funds (GUF) / 15,7%
5. Energy / 1,5% / 13. General advancement of knowledge: not GUF / 23,5%
6. Industrial production and technology / 33,7% / 14. Defence / 0,2%
7. Health / 2,0% / (Other civil research) / 0,0%
8. Agriculture / 1,3%

Source: Federal Cooperation Commission, CFS/STAT

2.3 General orientations for STI policies of the different authorities in Belgium

2.3.1 General orientations of STI policies of the Federal Government

The Federal Government is entitled to support scientific and research activities and can develop its own strategy and instruments for science policy in its fields of responsibility granted by the Constitution. Indeed, aAt federal level, science policy remains an important department both in terms of its missions as well as by the number of people employed directly or indirectly through the funding programmes supported. With a budget in excess of half a billion euro (in GBAORD terms) and more than 5000 people employed, the federal authorities fund a number of specific programmes and institutions. A majority of the federal R&D budget is allocated for participation in international scientific and industrial research initiatives (European Space Agency (ESA), Airbus, etc.) and, hence, contributes to reinforcing Belgium’s position in the European Research Area (ERA).

Over the last decade, the main driving forces of the Federal Science Policy have been twofold. Firstly, the pursuit of the Federal Science Policy, per se, based on the implementation of its research programmes (notably in the field of climate and sustainable development), stimulation of public and private R&D through tax and social security measures, supporting research infrastructures of national interest, and through a small number of ‘flagship’ initiatives including the pursuit of Belgian space policy, ‘sustainable’ nuclear energy (the MYRHHA project) and Belgian polar research. Second, the federal authorities have sought to support the integration of Belgium Belgian scientists in the ERA and thereby contribute to the Ljubljana process and the Lisbon Agenda, and in the future to the ERA 2020 strategy.

For both strands of action, the federal authorities co-operate, or as indicated in the Belgian Report on Science, Technology and Innovation 2010, orchestrate policy, with the other Belgian authorities to ensure that the interests of all actors in the Belgian research and innovation system are taken into account (e.g. in the field of space research or tax measures); and that Belgian’s contribution to meeting EU objectives related to STI is made in a concerted manner.

The Federal Government’s science policy seeks to strengthen and promote the Belgian research potential at national and international levels, to foster scientific co-operation between the universities and research centres of the north and south of the country, to support the development of Belgian research in fields such as space and aeronautics; and to promote centres of expertise and Belgium’s outstanding scientific heritage and collections at international level.

Table 3 presents the budget detail for the main actor at the Federal level (the Federal Science Policy) with inclusion of the tax credits for R&D (FPS Finance). In 2009 and 2010, despite the difficult economic context, the federal budget for science policy has been further reinforced (especially tax credits increased –estimated at 470 million euro in 2009), reflecting the efforts made in 2009 to consolidate and maintain the commitment to supporting R&D. [t3]

Table 3: Budget detail for Federal Science Policy and tax credits for research, 2008

Action lines / Budget 2008
International R&D funding
Space research / €257,2m
Other international research (+ research infrastructures) / €82,8m
National R&D
Federal scientific institutions and research organisations / €117,6m
Research programmes and grants (+ €31.6m for IUAP) / €100,1m
Other federal actions / €35,3m
Tax credits for research(ers) / €284,5m

Source: CFS/STAT. Data computation: BELSPO and FPS Finance.

2.3.2 General orientations of STI policies of the Flemish Government

At the time of the second constitutional reform in 1980, the Flemish authorities merged the community and newly established regional institutions. A single Flemish Parliament, Flemish Government, official consultative bodies and an administration, supported by specific agencies, oversee both community and regional competencies. The Flemish Parliament debates and legitimates all official legal decisions pertaining to both community and regional competence, whilst the Flemish Government is charged with policy execution.