German and Israeli Innovation: The Best of Two Worlds

This study reviews – through desk research and expert interviews with Mittelstand companies, startups and ecosystem experts – the current status of the Israeli startup ecosystem and the Mittelstand region of North Rhine- Westphalia (NRW), Germany. As a case study, it highlights potential opportunities for collaboration and analyzes different engagement modes that might serve to connect the two regions. The potential synergies between the two economies are based on a high degree of complementarity. A comparison of NRW’s key verticals and Israel’s primary areas of innovation indicates that there is significant overlap in verticals, such as artificial intelligence (AI), the internet of things (IoT), sensors and cybersecurity. Israeli startups can offer speed, agility and new ideas, while German Mittelstand companies can contribute expertise in production and scaling, access to markets, capital and support. The differences between Mittelstand companies and startups are less pronounced than those between startups and big corporations. However, three current barriers to fruitful collaboration have been identified: 1) a lack of access, 2) a lack of transparency regarding relevant players in the market, and 3) a lack of the internal resources needed to select the right partners, often due to time constraints or a lack of internal expertise on this issue. To ensure that positive business opportunities ensue, Mittelstand companies and startups alike have to be proactive in their search for cooperation partners and draw on a range of existing engagement modes (e.g., events, communities, accelerators). The interviews and the research conducted for this study made clear that no single mode of engagement can address all the needs and challenges associated with German-Israeli collaboration

New horizons shaping science, technology and innovation diplomacy: the case of Latin America and the Caribbean and the European Union. EL-CSID Working Paper Issue 2018/20 • August 2018

Europe and the world face a moment of transformation. The global financial crisis wiped out years of economic and social progress, exposed structural weaknesses in world economies and emphasised the importance of the real economies and strong industries. Modernisation and digitalisation of the industrial base together with the promotion of a competitive framework for industry through research, technology and innovation are drivers for recovery. Innovation, and particularly open innovation, is a key factor of global competitiveness. The European Commission (EC) addresses international cooperation policy in a wider framework and adapts to the evolving needs of partner countries at different stages of development (EC, 2018a). Latin America and the Caribbean countries’ (LAC) and the European Union’s (EU) cooperation on science, technology and innovation has a long history based on cultural roots and common concerns. They share a strategic bi-regional partnership, which was launched in 1999 and stepped up significantly in recent years. The two regions co-operate closely at international level across a broad range of issues and maintain an intensive political dialogue at all levels. EU-LAC relationships are moving from a traditional cooperation model towards a learning model, where sharing experiences and learning from innovations appear to be decisive (OECD, 2014). This paper focuses on the challenges that innovation nowadays poses to international relations and diplomacy. It is based on the evidence gained by the research team from participation in several EULAC projects, especially the ELAN Network project coordinated by TECNALIA, the INNOVACT project as well as other projects and activities

Impact in networks and ecosystems: building case studies that make a difference

open accessThis toolkit aims to support the building up of case studies that show the impact of project activities aiming to promote innovation and entrepreneurship. The case studies respond to the challenge of understanding what kinds of interventions work in the Southern African region, where, and why. The toolkit has a specific focus on entrepreneurial ecosystems and proposes a method of mapping out the actors and their relationships over time. The aim is to understand the changes that take place in the ecosystems. These changes are seen to be indicators of impact as increased connectivity and activity in ecosystems are key enablers of innovation. Innovations usually happen together with matching social and institutional adjustments, facilitating the translation of inventions into new or improved products and services. Similarly, the processes supporting entrepreneurship are guided by policies implemented in the common framework provided by innovation systems. Overall, policies related to systems of innovation are by nature networking policies applied throughout the socioeconomic framework of society to pool scarce resources and make various sectors work in coordination with each other. Most participating SAIS countries already have some kinds of identifiable systems of innovation in place both on national and regional levels, but the lack of appropriate institutions, policies, financial instruments, human resources, and support systems, together with underdeveloped markets, create inefficiencies and gaps in systemic cooperation and collaboration. In other words, we do not always know what works and what does not. On another level, engaging users and intermediaries at the local level and driving the development of local innovation ecosystems within which local culture, especially in urban settings, has evident impact on how collaboration and competition is both seen and done. In this complex environment, organisations supporting entrepreneurship and innovation often find it difficult to create or apply relevant knowledge and appropriate networking tools, approaches, and methods needed to put their processes to work for broader developmental goals. To further enable these organisations’ work, it is necessary to understand what works and why in a given environment. Enhanced local and regional cooperation promoted by SAIS Innovation Fund projects can generate new data on this little-explored area in Southern Africa. Data-driven knowledge on entrepreneurship and innovation support best practices as well as effective and efficient management of entrepreneurial ecosystems can support replication and inform policymaking, leading thus to a wider impact than just that of the immediate reported projects and initiatives

Cracking the Code on Stem: A People Strategy for Nevada\u27s Economy

Nevada has in place a plausible economic diversification strategy—and it’s beginning to work. Now, the state and its regions need to craft a people strategy. Specifically, the state needs to boost the number of Nevadans who possess at least some postsecondary training in the fields of science, technology, engineering, or math—the so-called “STEM” disciplines (to which some leaders add arts and design to make it “STEAM”). The moment is urgent—and only heightened by the projected worker needs of Tesla Motors’ planned “gigafactory” for lithium-ion batteries in Storey County. Even before the recent Tesla commitment, a number of the more high-tech industry sectors targeted by the state’s new economic diversification strategy had begun to deliver significant growth. Most notable in fast-growing sectors like Business IT Ecosystems (as defined by the Governor’s Office for Economic Development) and large sectors like Health and Medical Services, this growth has begun to increase the demand in Nevada for workers with at least a modicum of postsecondary training in one or more STE M discipline. However, there is a problem. Even though many available opportunities require no more than the right community college certificate, insufficient numbers of Nevadans have pursued even a little STEM training. As a result, too few Nevadans are ready to participate in the state’s emerging STEM economy. The upshot: Without concerted action to prepare more Nevadans for jobs in STEM-intensive fields, skills shortages could limit growth in the state’s most promising target industries and Nevadans could miss out on employment that offers superior paths to opportunity and advancement. Which is the challenge this report addresses: Aimed at focusing the state at a critical moment, this analysis speaks to Nevada’s STEM challenge by providing a new assessment of Nevada’s STEM economy and labor market as well as a review of actions that leaders throughout the state—whether in the public, private, civic, or philanthropic sectors—can take to develop a workforce capable of supporting continued growth through economic diversification

Co-opetition of TV broadcasters in online video markets : a winning strategy?

This article focuses on TV broadcasters adopting co-opetition strategies for launching online video services. It is claimed that the emergence of online video platforms like YouTube and Netflix is driving TV broadcasters to collaborate with their closest competitors to reduce costs and reach the necessary scale in the global marketplace. The article sheds light on online video platforms that were developed following a co-opetition strategy (Hulu and YouView). The establishment of joint ventures in online video, however, has been scrutinised by competition authorities which fear that collaboration between close competitors lessens rivalry and reduces consumer choice. Therefore, several co-opetition projects (among others BBC’s Kangaroo and Germany’s Gold) have been prohibited by competition authorities

Complex regional innovation networks and HEI engagement the case of Chicago

This article considers how HEIs engage within local complex development networks in order to develop the urban metropolis, using the case of Chicago as a specific example. It focuses on three main issues: how collaboration occurs amongst regional stakeholders; how goals are set and how shared goals have been created; and the extent to which there exist conflicting views amongst stakeholders, and their capability to create solutions where there are disagreements and clashing purposes. Chicago is in the middle of making a paradigm shift, with at its core an open system approach that includes a variety of ways to engage citizen-users as co-creators, including through user-driven innovation and digitalised services. In the metropolitan area there is a widely shared goal amongst stakeholders to develop and improve novel approaches for regional engagement to enhance innovativeness and competitiveness. The paradigm shift in regional engagement from building co-operation clusters to one of organisational betweenness and open systemic thinking requires new skills in management and leadership centred on interaction, co-creation and sharing of knowledge

Charles Stewart Mott Foundation - 2000 Annual Report

Contains mission statement, president's message, project summaries, program information, grants list, financial statements, and list of board members and staff

Industry 4.0: The Future of Indo-German Industrial Collaboration

Industry 4.0 can be described as the fourth industrial revolution, a mega- trend that affects every company around the world. It envisions interconnections and collaboration between people, products and machines within and across enterprises. Why does Industry 4.0 make for an excellent platform for industrial collaboration between India and Germany? The answers lie in economic as well as social factors. Both countries have strengths and weakness and strategic collaboration using the principles of Industry 4.0 can help both increase their industrial output, GDP and make optimal use of human resources. As a global heavy weight in manufacturing and machine export, Germany has a leading position in the development and deployment of Industry 4.0 concepts and technology. However, its IT sector, formed by a labor force of 800,000 employees, is not enough. It needs more professionals to reach its full potential. India, on the other hand, is a global leader in IT and business process outsourcing. But its manufacturing industry needs to grow significantly and compete globally. These realities clearly show the need for Industry 4.0-based collaboration between Germany and India. So how does Industry 4.0 work? In a first step, we look at the technical pers- pective – the vertical and horizontal integration of Industry 4.0 principles in enterprises. Vertical integration refers to operations within Smart Factories and horizontal integration to Smart Supply Chains across businesses. In the second step, we look at manufacturing, chemical industry and the IT sector as potential targets for collaboration between the two countries. We use case studies to illustrate the benefits of the deployment of Industry 4.0. Potential collaboration patterns are discussed along different forms of value chains and along companies’ ability to achieve Industry 4.0 status. We analyse the social impact of Industry 4.0 on India and Germany and find that it works very well in the coming years. Germany with its dwindling labor force might be compensated through the automation. This will ensure continued high productivity levels and rise in GDP. India, on the other hand has a burgeoning labor market, with 10 million workers annually entering the job market. Given that the manufacturing sector will be at par with Europe in efficiency and costs by 2023, pressure on India’s labor force will increase even more. Even its robust IT sector will suffer fewer hires because of increased automation. Rapid development of technologies – for the Internet of Things (IoT) or for connectivity like Low-Power WAN – makes skilling and reskilling of the labor force critical for augmenting smart manufacturing. India and Germany have been collaborating at three levels relevant to Industry 4.0 – industry, government and academics. How can these be taken forward? The two countries have a long history of trade. The Indo-German Chamber of Commerce (IGCC) is the largest such chamber in India and the largest German chamber worldwide. VDMA (Verband Deutscher Maschinen- und Anlagenbau, Mechanical Engineering Industry Association), the largest industry association in Europe, maintains offices in India. Indian key players in IT, in turn, have subsidia- ries in Germany and cooperate with German companies in the area of Industry 4.0. Collaboration is also supported on governmental level. As government initiatives go, India has launched the “Make in India” initiative and the “Make in India Mittelstand! (MIIM)” programme as a part of it. The Indian Government is also supporting “smart manufacturing” initiatives in a major way. Centers of Excellence driven by the industry and academic bodies are being set up. Germany and India have a long tradition of research collaboration as well. Germany is the second scientific collaborator of India and Indian students form the third largest group of foreign students in Germany. German institutions like the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) or the German House for Research and Innovation (DWIH) are working to strengthen ties between the scientific communities of the two countries, and between their academia and industry. What prevents Industry 4.0 from becoming a more widely used technology? Recent surveys in Germany and India show that awareness about Industry 4.0 is still low, especially among small and medium manufacturing enterprises. IT companies, on the other hand, are better prepared. There is a broad demand for support, regarding customtailored solutions, information on case studies and the willingness to participate in Industry 4.0 pilot projects and to engage in its platform and networking activities. We also found similar responses at workshops conducted with Industry 4.0 stakehold- ers in June 2017 in Bangalore and Pune and in an online survey. What can be done to change this? Both countries should strengthen their efforts to create awareness for Industry 4.0, especially among small and medium enterprises. Germany should also put more emphasis on making their Industry 4.0 technology known to the Indian market. India’s IT giants, on the other hand, should make their Industry 4.0 offers more visible to the German market. The governments should support the establishing of joint Industry 4.0 collaboration platforms, centers of excellence and incubators to ease the dissemination of knowledge and technology. On academic level, joint research programs and exchange programs should be set up to foster the skilling of labor force in the deployment of Industry 4.0 methods and technologies

Six Collective Challenges for Sustainability of Almería Greenhouse Horticulture

Globally, current food consumption and trade are placing unprecedented demand on agricultural systems and increasing pressure on natural resources, requiring tradeoffs between food security and environmental impacts especially given the tension between market-driven agriculture and agro-ecological goals. In order to illustrate the wicked social, economic and environmental challenges and processes to find transformative solutions, we focus on the largest concentration of greenhouses in the world located in the semi-arid coastal plain of South-east Spain. Almería family farming, predominantly cooperative, greenhouse intensive production, commenced after the 1960s and has resulted in very significant social and economic benefits for the region, while also having important negative environmental and biodiversity impacts, as well as creating new social challenges. The system currently finds itself in a crisis of diminishing economic benefits and increasing environmental and social dilemmas. Here, we present the outcomes of multi-actor, transdisciplinary research to review and provide collective insights for solutions-oriented research on the sustainability of Almeria’s agricultural sector. The multi-actor, transdisciplinary process implemented collectively, and supported by scientific literature, identified six fundamental challenges to transitioning to an agricultural model that aims to ameliorate risks and avoid a systemic collapse, whilst balancing a concern for profitability with sustainability: (1) Governance based on a culture of shared responsibility for sustainability, (2) Sustainable and efficient use of water, (3) Biodiversity conservation, (4) Implementing a circular economy plan, (5) Technology and knowledge transfer, and (6) Image and identity. We conclude that the multi-actor transdisciplinary approach successfully facilitated the creation of a culture of shared responsibility among public, private, academic, and civil society actors. Notwithstanding plural values, challenges and solutions identified by consensus point to a nascent acknowledgement of the strategic necessity to locate agricultural economic activity within social and environmental spheres.This paper demonstrates the need to establish transdisciplinary multi-actor work-schemes to continue collaboration and research for the transition to an agro-ecological model as a means to remain competitive and to create value