1 / 7

Knowledge formation for structural change, innovation and growth – a challenge for Evaluation!

Knowledge formation for structural change, innovation and growth – a challenge for Evaluation!. 2011-10-11 Göran Brulin. Both the former and the present government have been critical to the structural funds:.

deanna
Télécharger la présentation

Knowledge formation for structural change, innovation and growth – a challenge for Evaluation!

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Knowledge formation for structuralchange, innovation and growth – a challenge for Evaluation! 2011-10-11 Göran Brulin

  2. Both the former and the present governmenthave been critical to the structural funds: The prime minister and EU minister in Sweden is arguingthat Sweden is the thirdheaviestnetcontributorafterGermany and the Netherlands! The netcontributionto EU:s budget is 1,1 billion Euros.Accordingto the both ministers ”neither Sweden nor the other 26 memberstatesbenefit from the structuralfunds in relation totheircosts”. Theywanttosee the structuralfunds (and the rural fund!) replaced by programmesthatreally support research, innovation and growth! 2

  3. Why isn’t the implementation of the structural funds convincing? Although it could be argued that structural funds are playing an important role in experimentation and learning for structural change, innovation and competence development in Swedenmuch more has to be done to convince! Especially in the present crisis the Swedish implementation could be viewed as the seeds for future structural policy in EU, a policy that, according to many experts, is urgently needed to complete the financial support to member states. There have, however, been severe problems in the systems for follow up, indicators and evaluation approach! 3

  4. Problems in the systems for follow up (Tarschy, frustrated expert to Commission): Reliability, how are e.g. NEW JOBS measured? Validity, what figures are used for reporting e.g. NEW FIRMS, INNOVATIONS, etc. Deadweight, why are not the alternative use of these resources discussed? Logical errors, the systems do not support the overall objectives of the structural funds and national programmes! (Tarschy, Daniel. 2011. How Small are the Regional Gaps? How Small is the Impact of Cohesion Policy? A Commentary on the Fifth Report on Cohesion Policy. European Policy Analysis, issue 2011:1epa.) 4

  5. An illustrative example of the problems in the indicator systems: The projetFindITillustrates the problems. The overall goal is to contribute to competiveness within the region through smarter and more efficient business system solutions. I.e. the number of employees working with business system solutions have to be reduced whereas the competence of the employees has to be increased. I.e. the 170 companies working with business system solutions in the region need to be reduced by half and significantly upgraded in order to collaborate with international suppliers such as SAP. In other words, FindITto reach success actively has to WORSEN the core indicators – NEW JOBS AND NEW FIRMS! 5

  6. There are problems in the evaluation approaches applied: The three C:s approach – Control group/experiments, Counterfactual and Cost Benefit Analyzes – does not convince about the merits of the structural funds. Also the Commission acknowledges that a more efficient implementation needs smart specialization; fewer projects of similar kind in different program areas; more co-operation between projects; connections between the structural fund programs and the research programmes and so on. 6

  7. There is a quest for a paradigmaticchange in knowledge formation and evaluation: • The former chairman of US Evaluation Society argue in Developmental Evaluation. Applying Complexity concepts to Enhance Innovation and Use.thatwhat is needed is knowledge formation throughevaluationthat supports change and development! • Developmental evaluation includes an on-going and learning approach; a system perspective with dynamic relationships between different actors; a rapid response to changes made; working with emerging ideas; trying to find general principles and adapting them to new contexts. • Our contribution to this quest is the book: Managing Sustainable Development Programmes. A Learning Approach to Change (to be published by Gower 2012).

More Related