정책동향
A benchmarking study of the Swedish and British life science innovation systems
- 등록일2009-01-21
- 조회수6385
- 분류정책동향 > 기타 > 기타
-
자료발간일
2008-11-25
-
출처
VINNOVA(스웨덴 기술혁신청)
-
원문링크
-
키워드
#스웨덴#스웨덴 기술혁신청#British life
- 첨부파일
va-08-12.pdf
A benchmarking study of the Swedish and British
life science innovation systems
Comparison of policies and funding
Contents
Abbreviations ........................................................................................... 9
1 Introduction ..................................................................................... 11
1.1 Background ......................................................................................... 11
1.2 Objectives ........................................................................................... 11
1.3 Spatial delimitation ............................................................................. 12
1 Introduction ..................................................................................... 11
1.1 Background ......................................................................................... 11
1.2 Objectives ........................................................................................... 11
1.3 Spatial delimitation ............................................................................. 12
2 Choice of analytical model and approach .................................... 14
2.1.1 Industry survey ....................................................................... 15
2.1.2 System structure ..................................................................... 15
2.1.3 Activities ................................................................................ 15
2.1.4 Strengths and weaknesses identified ...................................... 18
2.1.5 The interconnectedness of innovation systems ...................... 18
2.1.6 Innovation system comparison ............................................... 18
2.1.1 Industry survey ....................................................................... 15
2.1.2 System structure ..................................................................... 15
2.1.3 Activities ................................................................................ 15
2.1.4 Strengths and weaknesses identified ...................................... 18
2.1.5 The interconnectedness of innovation systems ...................... 18
2.1.6 Innovation system comparison ............................................... 18
3 The Swedish life science innovation system ............................... 21
3.1 Industry survey ................................................................................... 21
3.1.1 Classification and scope ......................................................... 21
3.1.2 Industry structure .................................................................... 29
3.1.3 Employment development ...................................................... 35
3.1.4 Development of production and relative results 1997-2006 ...................... 38
3.2 Activities ............................................................................................. 47
3.2.1 Knowledge development ........................................................ 47
3.2.2 Financial support systems for innovation ............................... 56
3.2.3 Policy evolution ...................................................................... 60
3.1 Industry survey ................................................................................... 21
3.1.1 Classification and scope ......................................................... 21
3.1.2 Industry structure .................................................................... 29
3.1.3 Employment development ...................................................... 35
3.1.4 Development of production and relative results 1997-2006 ...................... 38
3.2 Activities ............................................................................................. 47
3.2.1 Knowledge development ........................................................ 47
3.2.2 Financial support systems for innovation ............................... 56
3.2.3 Policy evolution ...................................................................... 60
4 The UK Life Science Innovation system ....................................... 67
4.1 Activities ............................................................................................. 67
4.1.1 Knowledge development ........................................................ 67
4.1.2 Financial support systems for innovation ............................... 78
4.1.3 Policy evolution ...................................................................... 80
4.1 Activities ............................................................................................. 67
4.1.1 Knowledge development ........................................................ 67
4.1.2 Financial support systems for innovation ............................... 78
4.1.3 Policy evolution ...................................................................... 80
5 The Scottish life science innovation system ................................ 94
5.1 The choice of Scotland ....................................................................... 94
5.2 Activities ............................................................................................. 95
5.2.1 Knowledge development ........................................................ 95
5.2.2 Financial support systems .................................................... 103
5.2.3 Policies ................................................................................. 108
5.2.4 Strengths and weaknesses .................................................... 112
5.3 Case study: Cellartis ......................................................................... 112
5.3.1 History of the company ........................................................ 113
5.3.2 The selection of stem cells as a Scottish key technology and the selection of Cellartis
5.1 The choice of Scotland ....................................................................... 94
5.2 Activities ............................................................................................. 95
5.2.1 Knowledge development ........................................................ 95
5.2.2 Financial support systems .................................................... 103
5.2.3 Policies ................................................................................. 108
5.2.4 Strengths and weaknesses .................................................... 112
5.3 Case study: Cellartis ......................................................................... 112
5.3.1 History of the company ........................................................ 113
5.3.2 The selection of stem cells as a Scottish key technology and the selection of Cellartis
for the partnership .................. 113
5.3.3 The partnership ..................................................................... 114
5.3.4 Factors underlying the establishment ................................... 115
5.3.5 Attraction and retention factors in the Swedish and Scottish innovation systems ... 116
5.3.3 The partnership ..................................................................... 114
5.3.4 Factors underlying the establishment ................................... 115
5.3.5 Attraction and retention factors in the Swedish and Scottish innovation systems ... 116
6 Macro-level innovation system comparison .............................. 118
6.1 Sweden - UK ..................................................................................... 118
6.2 Sweden ? Scotland ............................................................................ 120
6.1 Sweden - UK ..................................................................................... 118
6.2 Sweden ? Scotland ............................................................................ 120
7 Micro-level: The life science innovation systems of Cambridge and Uppsala .......... 123
7.1 Sub-regional scope ............................................................................ 123
7.1.1 Choice of sub-regions ........................................................... 123
7.1.2 Previous work ....................................................................... 124
7.1.3 Delimitations of the innovation systems .............................. 125
7.1.4 Course of action ................................................................... 125
7.1 Sub-regional scope ............................................................................ 123
7.1.1 Choice of sub-regions ........................................................... 123
7.1.2 Previous work ....................................................................... 124
7.1.3 Delimitations of the innovation systems .............................. 125
7.1.4 Course of action ................................................................... 125
8 Cambridge life science innovation system ................................ 127
8.1 Industry structure Cambridge ........................................................... 127
8.2 System Structure Cambridge ............................................................ 130
8.2.1 Public authorities .................................................................. 130
8.2.2 Industry associations and partnerships ................................. 131
8.2.3 Innovation centres, science parks and incubators ................ 132
8.2.4 Research Institutions and Universities ................................. 132
8.2.5 Networks and funding networks .......................................... 133
Funding networks ............................................................................. 135
8.3 Activities ........................................................................................... 136
8.3.1 Knowledge development ...................................................... 136
8.3.2 Financial support systems for innovation ............................. 148
8.3.3 Policy evolution .................................................................... 153
8.1 Industry structure Cambridge ........................................................... 127
8.2 System Structure Cambridge ............................................................ 130
8.2.1 Public authorities .................................................................. 130
8.2.2 Industry associations and partnerships ................................. 131
8.2.3 Innovation centres, science parks and incubators ................ 132
8.2.4 Research Institutions and Universities ................................. 132
8.2.5 Networks and funding networks .......................................... 133
Funding networks ............................................................................. 135
8.3 Activities ........................................................................................... 136
8.3.1 Knowledge development ...................................................... 136
8.3.2 Financial support systems for innovation ............................. 148
8.3.3 Policy evolution .................................................................... 153
9 Uppsala Life Science Innovation System ................................... 161
9.1 Industry structure Uppsala ................................................................ 161
9.2 System Structure Uppsala ................................................................. 161
9.2.1 Public authorities .................................................................. 162
9.2.2 Industry associations and partnerships ................................. 162
9.2.3 Innovation centres, science parks and incubators ................ 163
9.2.4 Research Institutions and Universities ................................. 163
9.2.5 Networks and funding networks .......................................... 164
9.3 Activities ........................................................................................... 166
9.3.1 Knowledge development ...................................................... 166
9.3.2 Financial support systems .................................................... 176
9.3.3 Policy evolution .................................................................... 180
9.1 Industry structure Uppsala ................................................................ 161
9.2 System Structure Uppsala ................................................................. 161
9.2.1 Public authorities .................................................................. 162
9.2.2 Industry associations and partnerships ................................. 162
9.2.3 Innovation centres, science parks and incubators ................ 163
9.2.4 Research Institutions and Universities ................................. 163
9.2.5 Networks and funding networks .......................................... 164
9.3 Activities ........................................................................................... 166
9.3.1 Knowledge development ...................................................... 166
9.3.2 Financial support systems .................................................... 176
9.3.3 Policy evolution .................................................................... 180
10 Micro-level Innovation System Comparison .............................. 186
11 Interconnectedness of sub-regional, regional and national level ............ 190
11.1.1 Interconnectedness between UKLIS and CLIS .................... 190
11.1.2 Interconnectedness between ULIS and SLIS ....................... 191
11.1.1 Interconnectedness between UKLIS and CLIS .................... 190
11.1.2 Interconnectedness between ULIS and SLIS ....................... 191
12 Overall competitiveness of the Swedish life science innovation system in relation to the British one ............. 193
13 Appendices ................................................................................... 197
Appendix 1. Important policy documents ................................................... 197
Appendix 2. Initiatives and programmes aiming to address the equity gap ................ 198
The Early Growth Fund .................................................................... 198
Regional Venture Capital Funds ....................................................... 198
Enterprise Venture Capital Funds ..................................................... 198
Small Firms Loan Guarantee ............................................................ 198
Community Investment Tax Relief ................................................... 199
13 Appendices ................................................................................... 197
Appendix 1. Important policy documents ................................................... 197
Appendix 2. Initiatives and programmes aiming to address the equity gap ................ 198
The Early Growth Fund .................................................................... 198
Regional Venture Capital Funds ....................................................... 198
Enterprise Venture Capital Funds ..................................................... 198
Small Firms Loan Guarantee ............................................................ 198
Community Investment Tax Relief ................................................... 199
14 References .................................................................................... 200
Actors 206
Other Internet Sites ........................................................................... 215
Interviews in person .......................................................................... 217
Interviews and conversations with company representatives at the Bench to boardroom
Actors 206
Other Internet Sites ........................................................................... 215
Interviews in person .......................................................................... 217
Interviews and conversations with company representatives at the Bench to boardroom
conference 20071017 in Cambridge: ........................................................................... 217
Meetings, debates, hearings and conferences ................................... 217
Telephone interviews ........................................................................ 218
Databases .......................................................................................... 218
Meetings, debates, hearings and conferences ................................... 217
Telephone interviews ........................................................................ 218
Databases .......................................................................................... 218
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
This report is one of the consequences of VINNOVA’s commission from the Swedish Government to conduct an international benchmarking of the Swedish Life Science innovation system. In the commission, it is stated that the emphasis should be on the competitiveness of Sweden in an international comparison. Also, the study should provide knowledge of trends and initiatives in other countries and regions1. This report comprises one part of the overarching study, which is managed by Anna Sandstrom (VINNOVA) and provides a case study of the life science innovation system of Sweden in comparison to Britain. The aim has been to fulfil the requests for knowledge on trends and initiatives for the UK and an analysis of
Swedish competitiveness. Hopefully, the theoretical model and approach offer a sufficiently exhaustive description of the systems so as to form a solid basis for comparison and analysis of the competitiveness. Trends and initiatives of relevant actors have been given particular attention. Yet another consequence of the commission was to produce an updated version for the entire life science industry of the report entitled National and Regional Cluster Profiles. The updated report, written by Anna Sandstrom and Helena Bergqvist (VINNOVA) and Tage Dolk (Addendi) is also linked to this report, since it provides information vital to a relatively up-to-date picture of the competitiveness of the Swedish system. For the innovation
system analysis of Sweden, material from the National and regional cluster profiles 2007 constitutes a foundation that has been further analysed. The report includes one macro-level comparison, comprising the UK, Scotland and Sweden and one micro-level comparison comprising Cambridge and Uppsala. The competitiveness of the Swedish system is based on results and experiences from both the macro and micro levels and on their interconnectedness.
Swedish competitiveness. Hopefully, the theoretical model and approach offer a sufficiently exhaustive description of the systems so as to form a solid basis for comparison and analysis of the competitiveness. Trends and initiatives of relevant actors have been given particular attention. Yet another consequence of the commission was to produce an updated version for the entire life science industry of the report entitled National and Regional Cluster Profiles. The updated report, written by Anna Sandstrom and Helena Bergqvist (VINNOVA) and Tage Dolk (Addendi) is also linked to this report, since it provides information vital to a relatively up-to-date picture of the competitiveness of the Swedish system. For the innovation
system analysis of Sweden, material from the National and regional cluster profiles 2007 constitutes a foundation that has been further analysed. The report includes one macro-level comparison, comprising the UK, Scotland and Sweden and one micro-level comparison comprising Cambridge and Uppsala. The competitiveness of the Swedish system is based on results and experiences from both the macro and micro levels and on their interconnectedness.
☞ 자세한 내용은 첨부파일을 참고하시기 바랍니다.
관련정보