ВЕСТНИК КЭУ: ЭКОНОМИКА, ФИЛОСОФИЯ, ПЕДАГОГИКА, ЮРИСПРУДЕНЦИЯ
18
The vast maj ority of Hungarian enter prises
(especially SMEs) typically tend to have little
c apac i t y to a b so r b k no wl e dg e eman at i n g
f r o m th e pu bl i c sec t or r esea r c h ba se .
Acc ordi ngl y, PROs have yet to bec ome the
innovation centres of their regions, although
t hi s al so r e f l ec ts i n par t th ei r o wn sl o w
a da pt at i o n to t he r e q u i r emen ts o f a
knowledge-based ec onomy.
Since the mid-1990s the government has
b ee n ad dr e ssi n g th ese w ea kn esses, an d a
c onsi der abl e number of measur es (notabl y
d i r ec t
su ppo r t mea su r e s)
ha ve b ee n
e st ab l i sh ed t o f a c i l i t at e an d pr omot e
c ol l a bo r a ti on a nd n e tw or ki ng , no ta bl y
between i ndustry and academia. Prominent
amon g these i s th e Co-o per ati v e R ese ar c h
C en tr es sc h e me , wh i c h w as r ec en tl y
favourably evaluated and is set to continue.
A further recently launched major initiative,
the Regional Knowledge Centres programme,
has similar objectives, highlighting the need
f or some str eamli ni ng between i ni ti ati ves.
The number of centres to be supported under
this scheme also appears quite large for such
a small research system. By contrast, the new
funding strategy of NKTH envisages a much
more focused approach to funding the centres,
and will pr ovide larger amounts of support
t o a mu c h -r e du c e d nu mb er of N at i o na l
Research Centres. At the same time, cluster-
based policies have been adopted. While these
have the potential to better embed MNEs into
the various regional innovation systems, the
i ntegr ati on of i ndi genous SM Es i nto these
clusters is generally rather weak. Here, the
volume and intensity of co-operation and the
efficiency of cluster management need to be
i mpr ov ed. Whi l e th e establ i shment of t he
N at i o na l Te c h n ol og y Pl at f or ms i s no t a
cluster-based programme in a strict sense, it
c ou l d pr o vi d e a ba si s f or a r t i c u l a ti on o f
Hungarian innovation policy with European
polic y.
STI policy makers need to be aware of the
r i sk th at th e va r i ou s sc h emes pr omot i n g
c l uste r s, ne two r k s an d c o l l a bo r a ti on may
send conf usi ng, even c onf li cting signals to
actors. The establishment of well-functioning
gover nanc e and c ommuni c ati on str uc tur es
b et we en t h e va r i ou s i ni ti at i v e s se ems a
d au nt i n g, y et i mpor t an t, t ask f o r th e
governance of innovation policy.
Overal l, and apart from the di ffic ulti es
hi gh l i ght ed ab ov e, Hu ng ar i an i nno va ti on
policy has rightly embarked upon approaches
for strengthening linkages at the national and
the regional levels, which are broader in scope
than a mere focus on industry-scienc e R&D
collaboration. The question, as in other areas
o f i n no va ti on pol i c y, i s a ga i n o ne o f
i mpl e me nt a ti on a nd t h e esta bl i sh me nt o f
sound, tr ansparent and stable insti tutional
f r a me wo r k s f o r c l u st er d e ve l o pmen t an d
industry-science relations.
Достарыңызбен бөлісу: