Research paper
Knowledge Economy and Socio-spatial Polarization in Vienna
What do the main Viennese agents in the field of knowledge economy focus on and why?
Institute for Regional Development and Environment
Dr. Andreas Novy
Summer term 2007
Research paper compiled by:
Nicole Brandstätter
Katharina Stuefer
Andrea Visotschnig
1 Introduction
Knowledge Economy and Socio-spatial Polarization are two terms which at first glance have nothing in common. Usually they are treated like two fields which require different political actions. However, it is possible that there are interdependencies between Knowledge Economy and Socio-spatial Polarization. If this is true, a dialogue between these two fields would be necessary in order to implement appropriate political actions. Since the question of the existence of interdependencies is a very broad one, the focus of the research paper on hand is a limited one. It deals with the sub-issue of the agents in the field of knowledge economy in Vienna.
1.1 Research question
This paper deals with the following research question:
What do the main Viennese agents in the field of knowledge economy focus on and why?
Every institution or organization promoting innovation, development of technology or other similar issues needs to place an emphasis on a specific area in the huge field of knowledge economy. This raises the following questions: How do institutions decide about the focus of their activities? On the basis of which criterions do they make their decisions? By which principles are they led?
The purpose of this paper is to answer these questions.
1.2 Relevance of the research question
By placing an emphasis on a specific area, other areas are left out. Focussing on the dimension concerning the knowledge economy means disregarding another arm. There another question arises: Could the situation of promoting one area inten-sively while neglecting another one permanently lead to socio-spatial polarization? Is it possible that the line which is drawn between supported and disregarded areas is similar to the line between center and periphery, or educated and uneducated, or affluent and poor? By dealing with these questions at the end of this paper we are trying to link our results concerning the agents of the knowledge economy with the principle question of the seminar – namely whether there are interdependencies between the knowledge economy and socio-spatial polarization and whether a dialogue between these two fields is necessary and desirable.
1.3 Structure of this paper
The following section deals with the theoretical framework and provides definitions of the terms which will be used permanently in this paper. Section 3 explains the methodology by which the research has been carried out. Section 4 deals with 3 agents of the knowledge economy in Vienna which are subject to our research and the interpretation of our research results. The last section summarizes the answer to our research question and tries to answer the principal question of the seminar.
2 Theoretical framework
The following terms will be used frequently in this report; therefore, we saw the ne-cessity to give clear definitions of these terms.
2.1 Technical vs. tacit knowledge
“Knowledge is information combined with experience, context, interpretation, and reflection. It is a high-value form of information that is ready to apply to decisions and actions.”
Technical or formal knowledge is built upon scientific and technological processes. To access this form of knowledge basic skills in literacy and numeracy like the abili-ties to read, write, perform arithmetic operations, and reason mathematically, are needed.
Neoclassical economics consider knowledge as “a technical information that is codi-fied and therefore a public good” as well as being a main factor for positive externali-ties. The government policies, which are based on this definition, mainly deal with intellectual property rights and neglect the importance of tacit knowledge as one of the core features for economic success.
Tacit knowledge can be explained – in its simplest form – as individual practical skills that are impossible to codify and cannot be transmitted through telecommunication media. Nevertheless tacit knowledge is crucially important for economic success, whether it is practical or analytically oriented tacit knowledge. Most decisions are based upon the interpretation of complex sets of information, and the identification of patterns and tacit knowledge is facilitating this process by locating, selecting and using appropriate information. This form of knowledge is achieved through experience or, respectively, in interaction with people, especially in master-apprentice or collegial relationships, and is therefore socially embedded in the learning process. Interactive learning is a key to obtaining shared tacit knowledge and can be accomplished through industrial networks and inter-firm co-operation. Spillovers, which were regarded as problem in neo-classical analysis, are now an important way of creating, sharing and pooling knowledge. However, this would not be possible in a purely competitive economy since the interaction of different agents needs trust as a basis for their knowledge sharing. “Little can be learnt and information cannot be used effectively in a society where there is little trust.”
2.2 Territorial Innovation Models (TIM)
TIM is an umbrella term for different families of “models of regional innovation in which local institutional dynamics play a significant role.” The main focus of TIMs is on “economic restructuring and improved competitiveness of regions and localities.” Non-economic and non-market-led dimensions are neglected. Economic growth is equated with improvements in the quality of life of local communities.
2.3 Community development
In contrast to the TIM the community development-approach is a more holistic one. It is a less individualistic, market-led model and rather a “social innovation” approach. The satisfaction of basic human needs, the distribution of wealth and income as well as tacit knowledge and social capital are important components of this model.
3 Methodology
Considering our field of research and our resources we have decided to obtain our results by open interviews with representatives of the institutions dealing with innovation, technology etc. After a consultation on May 15, 2007 with Michaela Trippl, a research assistant of the Institute for Regional Development and Environment we chose the following three institutions of being subject to our research:
• WWTF: Vienna Science and Technology Fund
• ZIT: Center for Innovation and Technology
• Municipal Department MA 27 (EU-strategy and economic development)
The goal of the interviews is to get the interviewee to talk freely and without restrain. That is why an open and stress free interview situation had to be created. Moreover, the interview questions were not formulated clearly as the space that was created by not doing this provided the interviewees with the greatest possible freedom concern-ing their replies. We drafted only a rough outline of the interview questions without any fixed order in which they should be posed during the interview. These questions were the following:
• What was the motivation of founding the institution?
• Where does the institution see itself in the field of knowledge economy? Which role does it play? What are its tasks?
• How does the institution differ from other institutions in that field?
• Are there any emphases regarding its activities? Who decides what to em-phasize on? How are the emphases chosen?
• Is it important to work actively in niches? Is it desirable to be a leader in a spe-cific field?
• Are there any direct successes which result from the institution’s work?
Not all of these questions were posed explicitly in every interview since some were answered implicitly by the interviewees. Moreover, due to the fact that we allowed the interviewees to decide on the course of the interview, we did not receive answers to these questions only. Some other issues have been addressed which are not mentioned in the interview outline above.
After interviewing one representative of each institution we started an evaluation. The obtained data were analyzed and the key contents categorized to enable an interpretation. By categorizing the interviews from the beginning, the research team was able to compare the statements themselves without giving an interpretation linked to the moment they were made during the interview.
4 The Viennese Actors
The three Viennese actors we are focusing our research on are the WWTF, ZIT and MA 27. Before presenting the results of the interviews, we want to come back to our research question and present the hypothesis we have been working with.
4.1 Research question and hypothesis
As already mentioned above, our research question is the following: What do the main Viennese agents in the field of knowledge economy focus on and why?
According to the theoretical framework we were consulting, an institution can decide on what to emphasize on by focusing on either the market demands or the demands of the community (Territorial Innovation Model vs. Community Development). Sometimes both demands overlap, but this is not always the case. While studying the official websites and accessible information of WWTF, ZIT and MA 27 we received the impression that WWTF and ZIT were market-oriented organizations while MA 27 was more concerned about the demands of the Viennese population. Therefore we hypothesized prior to conducting the interviews that WWTF and ZIT were following the TIM approach, while MA 27 was more concerned about community development. We have tried to corroborate this hypothesis with the results of our interviews.
4.2 WWTF: Vienna Science and Technology Fund
In order to get an insight into one of Austria’s leading Knowledge Institutions, the Vienna Sciences and Technology Fund (WWTF) we talked to the managing director Dr. Michael Stampfer and to his colleague Mag. Klaus Zinöcker.
The Vienna Science and Technology Fund (WWTF) is a private non-profit research funding organization and aims at sponsoring high quality scientific research with special interest in promoting the region of Vienna as an outstanding location for science and innovation. The fund was established in 2001 on the initiative of the Viennese mayor Dr. Michael Häupl and its then deputy mayor DDr Görg, who gave the money earned through the sale of Bank Austria shares held by the city of Vienna as seed money for the fund. The two politicians are still involved as President and Vice President of the Board of Directors in the decision-making processes, albeit they act as private individuals and not in their elected functions. The fund is therefore independent from the city’s budget and directives, but works closely with the other Viennese knowledge actors in order to avoid counteractive behavior.
The fund uses calls and comparative instruments within temporary focal points to support their target group of research establishments and individual scientists. Therefore only universities or independent research institutes which bear reference to the region of Vienna are permitted to apply for a sponsorship. Companies can only take part in the form of members of a consortium which is under the heading of a scientific applicant.
Sponsored professorships are one instrument of the WWTF that aims at bringing excellent scholars to Vienna. The person is integrated in an already existing working environment and provided with a team. The sponsorship targets projects with a min-imum value of one million Euro and provides funding for a period between two and five years maximum. The endowed chairs can be used to lead to the full employment of that person as university professor.
The second instrument mainly used by the WWTF are major projects with a focus on the exploitation and usage of the results. It offers existing outstanding groups of scientists the possibility to deepen and extend their work in a research project run-ning over a couple of years. The minimum value of the projects is 200,000 Euro and the projects are laid out to last from a minimum of two years up to a maximum of four years.
All projects are chosen on behalf of “calls” which focus on specific themes and have a highly competitive edge. The evaluation of the applications is conducted by an in-ternational expert panel composed of highly ranked international scientists who rec-ommend the most promising projects to the Board of Directors. The final decision on which projects will be funded is up to the Board of Directors.
These specific themes, which are Life Sciences, Creative Industries and Applied Mathematics, are determined by the Board of Directors and the Advisory Board. In general it aims at funding excellent scientific research which also takes into account the exploitability of its results and the creation of social value for the city of Vienna. The interviewees admit that this combination is hard to find since one of the aspects most of the time outweighs the others, but they like to focus on quality instead of quantity and therefore prefer balanced projects.
Their choice of emphases results from their limited finances, which leads to the need of concentrating and focusing on specific areas. Due to their usage of calls as an instrument in the application process there needs to be a certain amount of applicants available in order to give it the desired competitive edge. The WWTF focuses on already strong areas which are subject to further development and extension. As a result the WWTF lays is main focus on the areas which fit into the scientific concept of Vienna instead of funding niche projects. Furthermore, it is involved in the development of the Viennese Knowledge Strategy (see chapter 4.4 MA 27), which decides on the main scientific areas Vienna likes to specialize in in the future.
Overall it can be said that the WWTF concentrates on the funding of technical know-ledge with a stress on exploitability and doesn’t take into account socio-spatial polarization at all. Its success is measured by applications for new patents, career advancements, articles publicized in journals and so on. The WWTF sees itself as a sponsor of excellent scientific research and therefore doesn’t consider socio-spatial polarization as a part of its mission. According to them, that side of the knowledge economy lies in the field of operation of other actors.
4.3 ZIT: Center for Innovation and Technology
The ZIT Centre for Innovation and Technology is a subsidiary of the WWFF the 'Wiener Wirtschaftsförderungsfonds and was founded in the year 2000. It now employs 16 people. We interviewed Mag. Christian Bartik from the Department of promotion and funding to gather information about the dealings of this organization.
The main focus of the ZIT lies in the promotion of technology for companies located in the City of Vienna. This promotion takes on different forms that range from financial assistance given to companies to providing infrastructure necessary to work in the technology field as well as providing other services to create an optimal environment for local companies. Trends and developments in the technology sectors are closely monitored, and based on these observations this technology promoting agency develops strategies and measures to support technology-oriented companies in the City of Vienna.
The main idea of the ZIT is to enable companies to pursue new and profitable ideas with a minimum risk and high quality standards. With these measures, Vienna should be able to further strengthen its already well developed technology sectors such as life-sciences and creative industries.
Companies who apply for financial assistance in so called 'calls' are selected by the ZIT by comparing the projects of the applicants with each other; this enables the agency to select the best project - meaning the most profitable and competitive ones are chosen. These calls are one of the promotional instruments the ZIT uses to fund certain projects. The agency issues an invitation to tender for a certain project and companies willing to participate can hand in an application and are then - based on competitive criteria - granted the financial assistance. The evaluation of the projects is executed by a jury of independent experts varying from project to project, as well as in-house members who actually only hand in a suggestion on which a committee then decides which project will be funded.
As the Centre of Innovation and Technology is largely funded by the City of Vienna, those decisions are also politically motivated in the end. In their selection of projects the ZIT often refers to the “Viennese strategy for research and development”, a paper rendered on behalf of the City of Vienna and not yet published. It can be assumed that the individual agencies for technological development in Vienna and the agency assigned with the preparation of the “Viennese strategy for research and development” are in contact with each other; thus, there will be no surprises and this paper will only be the official seal on a strategy that the City had been following all along (for further information see chapter 4.4).
Another measure for promoting technology oriented companies used by the ZIT is to allocate real estate for companies. This happens in the 'Media Quarter Marx' located in Vienna's 3rd district and at the 'Campus Vienna Biocentre' also located in the 3rd district. The focus of the 'Media Quarter Marx' lies on highly specialized and creative small and medium enterprises and offers the advantage of strong networking possibilities. It brings together companies of one sector to facilitate cooperation on the basis of geographical closeness which ensures growth and development.
The 'Campus Vienna Biocentre' provides infrastructure for Vienna's growing Bio-technology sector. It provides an environment in which cooperation between various universities and academies in Vienna and corporate-driven research is possible.
In a wider sense the ZIT actively promotes not only companies and projects that are highly profitable but general research for the greater good. Medication and treatments developed here might help to cure cancer or other diseases one day. Other than that the Center of Innovation and Technology has little focus on socio-spatial polarization, with the exception of 'gender mainstreaming'. The ZIT tenders calls with a focus point on women doing highly qualified research work in order to increase the number of women who, at the moment, are underrepresented in this field. Still, the focus of the promotional and funding work lies in the high-end elite sponsorship with the aim of maximum growth and profit, so as to make Vienna an attractive location for international research.
4.4 MA 27: Municipal Department MA 27 (EU strategy and economic development)
Since the activities of this department are very diversified, it is impossible to sum up the field of work under one umbrella term. The official name of this department – “EU strategy and economic development” – does not mirror the whole area the department is working in. That is due to the fact that it is divided into subunits, each having their own agenda. According to our research question we decided to focus on the subdivision “Economic Development” and talk to the head of this division, Dr. Christian Wurm.
Dr. Wurm’s major task is to coordinate the project team who is working on the draft of a “Viennese Strategy for Research and Development”. This project was started by order of deputy mayor Rieger in 2006 and runs under the meaningful heading of “Vienna thinks Future”. In November 2006 a conference representing the official start of the project took place in the city hall where all the 450 people participating in the draft of the research strategy were present. Four different working groups were built, each focusing on one of the following emphases :
• Economy: research, technology and innovation in the enterprise sector
• Science: research emphases and knowledge transfer
• Society: science and society
• City: urban development with regard to Vienna as a research site
Each of the working groups consists of 20-25 experts. They have been chosen from enterprises, research institutions, universities and political organizations. Starting in November, they have been working on their specific issues. In June 2007 the compilation of the results gained in the 4 separate areas has started and will be finished by November 2007. Then this draft of the Viennese Research Strategy has to receive the blessing of the politicians. After that, it will be compulsory for all Viennese organizations working in the research, technology or innovations sector. Dr Wurm, however, indicated that this strategy will not include completely new issues, and that the basic orientation of institutions like WWTF and ZIT will not change because of the strategy. This is due to two facts: Firstly, members of WWTF and ZIT are participants in the working groups, so they are able to influence the draft of the strategy. Secondly, a strategy for Vienna has been developed on an oral basis during the last years. The current project is more concerned with putting this strategy down in writing than with inventing a completely new research strategy for the city. That is why it is not surprising that institutions like WWTF and ZIT are referring to the Viennese Research Strategy when talking about their emphases. Although it does not exist in writing yet, the institutions already know the content.
It is obvious that the population cannot influence the focus of the strategy since there are no representatives of the population participating in the working groups. However, quite often taxes are used for the funding of research projects. It is the population who pays these taxes and thus finances parts of the research projects. Therefore, it would be more than justified to give the population a voice and let them participate in the process of formulating a research strategy.
3 of the 4 working groups deal with market-related issues and focus on aspects con-cerning enterprises and the attractiveness of Vienna as a location for them. Only one group places its emphasis on the relation between society and science. Dr. Wurm specified the following questions which are dealt with in the working group “Science and Society”:
• How is knowledge imparted?
• What is the concept of knowledge among the population? Are there any chances necessary?
• What is the investment climate like? Can and should it be influenced?
• Is science a field where reflections about general developments are taking place?
• Which role do the different sciences play in the field of support for innovation and research?
• Is innovation necessary for the cohesion of a society and the effectiveness of a democratic system?
• Is there enough space for innovation?
In the course of finding answers to these questions the issue of social or socio-spatial polarization may arise. However, it is not dealt with by posing a separate question concerning polarization. Therefore, it seems that the people involved are – at first sight – not concerned about a relation between research, knowledge and science on the one hand, and polarization on the other hand.
When talking about knowledge, MA 27 refers to highly sophisticated, technical knowledge that can be produced by research and that is a significant factor in the economy – at a national as well as at an international scale. Since being in a leading position concerning research, innovation and technology is implying to have a competitive advantage that can be beneficial for the economy of a whole region of a country, this position is desirable. However, it seems that the research strategy will only focus on producing more technical knowledge in order to boost the economy. It is obvious that this knowledge created by research and innovation will not be used to educate the general public. It will be knowledge created by and for a small elite who will benefit from it. (However, this is not true for the pharmaceutic industry where sick members of the population will benefit from innovations.) It is doubtful that the results of the working group “Science and Society” will influence the general orientation of the strategy.
5 Conclusion
The general impression that we gained by evaluating our interviews is that the three Viennese actors see themselves as part of the knowledge economy while they do not feel responsible for socio-spatial polarization at all. None of them used the term “polarization” during the interview unless we addressed it. The questions arising now are whether this separation between institutions responsible for the creation of knowledge on the one hand, and institutions responsible for the reduction of negative consequences of socio-spatial polarization on the other hand is illegitimate or not, and whether it would actually be possible to build bridges between these two fields. Answering these questions will be the effort of the following paragraphs.
The results of the evaluation are refuting our hypothesis. Contrary to our assump-tions, all three institutions are market-oriented rather than following the community development-approach. The production of economically exploitable knowledge represents the main focus of the WWTF, the ZIT as well as for the MA 27. However, two out of the three institutions are not financed by the private sector but by the state. (The third one – the WWTF – is apparently not directly financed by the state. However, the seed money for this fund was provided by the government.) Obviously, money contributed by the general public is used to improve the competitiveness of Vienna as a business location. Needless to say that the rise in quality and quantity of research and the attraction of more enterprises benefits a society in terms of the creation of new jobs or the development of new products. However, only a small part of the population is able to benefit from these advantages – namely people who are educated well enough to bring along the qualifications demanded by employers in the knowledge economy.
As far as new products are concerned it is not that easy to determine who exactly will benefit from them since on the one hand there are highly sophisticated goods produced for affluent consumers and on the other hand there are for instance new drugs developed for sick people irrespective of their financial status (at least in the case of drugs the Austrian social insurance system is paying for). Yet it can be said that only a specific group of people will benefit from the activities WWTF, ZIT and MA 27 are involved in, while the whole society is paying for these activities. This discrepancy could be smoothed out by following a community development approach and trying to spread the benefits created by a knowledge economy across the whole society. Therefore, a dialogue between institutions working in the field of the knowledge economy and institutions dealing with community development (such as organizations focusing on the avoidance of socio-spatial polarization) is necessary.
Moreover, like mentioned above some people are likely to be left out and to be una-ble to find a place in the system of the knowledge economy. These people have to be supported by giving them access to education and thus empowering them. Institutions working in the field of socio-spatial polarization know about these groups of people and are therefore important dialogue partners for the actors of the knowledge economy. Both dialogue partners – actors of the knowledge economy on the one side, actors dealing with socio-spatial polarization on the other hand – form the basis of the bridge-building process.
In order to sum up our findings it can be said that there is no dialogue between two political fields where actually a dialogue should take place. By following a community development approach the necessity of a dialogue would become more obvious. Unfortunately, naming the exact form of this dialogue surpasses our competences and would require an additional research project.
6 References
• Europaforum Wien: http://www.europaforum.or.at/project.php?PROJECT_ID=129, 10.7.2007
• Jarboe, Kenan Patrick (2001): Knowledge Management as an Economic Development Strategy. U.S. Economic Development Administration: Reviews of Economic Development Literature and Practice: No. 7.
• Lundvall, Bengt-Ake (2002): Innovation Policy in the Globalizing Learning Economy. The Globalizing Learning Economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 273-310.
• Lundvall, Bengt-Ake/Archibugi, Daniele (2002): Introduction: Europe and the Learning Economy. The Globalizing Learning Economy. 1-19.
• Moulaert, Frank/Nussbaumer, Jacques (2005): The social region – Beyond the territorial dynamics of the Learning Economy. In: European Urban and Regional Studies 12 (1), 45-64
• Wien denkt Zukunft: http://www.wiendenktzukunft.at/de/strategie.html, 10.7.2007
• WWTF: http://www.wwtf.at/, 16.8.2007
• ZIT (2007): Campus Vienna Biocenter. Standortinformationen. Wien
• ZIT: www.zit.co.at, 16.8.2007
What do the main Viennese agents in the field of knowledge economy focus on and why?
Institute for Regional Development and Environment
Dr. Andreas Novy
Summer term 2007
Research paper compiled by:
Nicole Brandstätter
Katharina Stuefer
Andrea Visotschnig
1 Introduction
Knowledge Economy and Socio-spatial Polarization are two terms which at first glance have nothing in common. Usually they are treated like two fields which require different political actions. However, it is possible that there are interdependencies between Knowledge Economy and Socio-spatial Polarization. If this is true, a dialogue between these two fields would be necessary in order to implement appropriate political actions. Since the question of the existence of interdependencies is a very broad one, the focus of the research paper on hand is a limited one. It deals with the sub-issue of the agents in the field of knowledge economy in Vienna.
1.1 Research question
This paper deals with the following research question:
What do the main Viennese agents in the field of knowledge economy focus on and why?
Every institution or organization promoting innovation, development of technology or other similar issues needs to place an emphasis on a specific area in the huge field of knowledge economy. This raises the following questions: How do institutions decide about the focus of their activities? On the basis of which criterions do they make their decisions? By which principles are they led?
The purpose of this paper is to answer these questions.
1.2 Relevance of the research question
By placing an emphasis on a specific area, other areas are left out. Focussing on the dimension concerning the knowledge economy means disregarding another arm. There another question arises: Could the situation of promoting one area inten-sively while neglecting another one permanently lead to socio-spatial polarization? Is it possible that the line which is drawn between supported and disregarded areas is similar to the line between center and periphery, or educated and uneducated, or affluent and poor? By dealing with these questions at the end of this paper we are trying to link our results concerning the agents of the knowledge economy with the principle question of the seminar – namely whether there are interdependencies between the knowledge economy and socio-spatial polarization and whether a dialogue between these two fields is necessary and desirable.
1.3 Structure of this paper
The following section deals with the theoretical framework and provides definitions of the terms which will be used permanently in this paper. Section 3 explains the methodology by which the research has been carried out. Section 4 deals with 3 agents of the knowledge economy in Vienna which are subject to our research and the interpretation of our research results. The last section summarizes the answer to our research question and tries to answer the principal question of the seminar.
2 Theoretical framework
The following terms will be used frequently in this report; therefore, we saw the ne-cessity to give clear definitions of these terms.
2.1 Technical vs. tacit knowledge
“Knowledge is information combined with experience, context, interpretation, and reflection. It is a high-value form of information that is ready to apply to decisions and actions.”
Technical or formal knowledge is built upon scientific and technological processes. To access this form of knowledge basic skills in literacy and numeracy like the abili-ties to read, write, perform arithmetic operations, and reason mathematically, are needed.
Neoclassical economics consider knowledge as “a technical information that is codi-fied and therefore a public good” as well as being a main factor for positive externali-ties. The government policies, which are based on this definition, mainly deal with intellectual property rights and neglect the importance of tacit knowledge as one of the core features for economic success.
Tacit knowledge can be explained – in its simplest form – as individual practical skills that are impossible to codify and cannot be transmitted through telecommunication media. Nevertheless tacit knowledge is crucially important for economic success, whether it is practical or analytically oriented tacit knowledge. Most decisions are based upon the interpretation of complex sets of information, and the identification of patterns and tacit knowledge is facilitating this process by locating, selecting and using appropriate information. This form of knowledge is achieved through experience or, respectively, in interaction with people, especially in master-apprentice or collegial relationships, and is therefore socially embedded in the learning process. Interactive learning is a key to obtaining shared tacit knowledge and can be accomplished through industrial networks and inter-firm co-operation. Spillovers, which were regarded as problem in neo-classical analysis, are now an important way of creating, sharing and pooling knowledge. However, this would not be possible in a purely competitive economy since the interaction of different agents needs trust as a basis for their knowledge sharing. “Little can be learnt and information cannot be used effectively in a society where there is little trust.”
2.2 Territorial Innovation Models (TIM)
TIM is an umbrella term for different families of “models of regional innovation in which local institutional dynamics play a significant role.” The main focus of TIMs is on “economic restructuring and improved competitiveness of regions and localities.” Non-economic and non-market-led dimensions are neglected. Economic growth is equated with improvements in the quality of life of local communities.
2.3 Community development
In contrast to the TIM the community development-approach is a more holistic one. It is a less individualistic, market-led model and rather a “social innovation” approach. The satisfaction of basic human needs, the distribution of wealth and income as well as tacit knowledge and social capital are important components of this model.
3 Methodology
Considering our field of research and our resources we have decided to obtain our results by open interviews with representatives of the institutions dealing with innovation, technology etc. After a consultation on May 15, 2007 with Michaela Trippl, a research assistant of the Institute for Regional Development and Environment we chose the following three institutions of being subject to our research:
• WWTF: Vienna Science and Technology Fund
• ZIT: Center for Innovation and Technology
• Municipal Department MA 27 (EU-strategy and economic development)
The goal of the interviews is to get the interviewee to talk freely and without restrain. That is why an open and stress free interview situation had to be created. Moreover, the interview questions were not formulated clearly as the space that was created by not doing this provided the interviewees with the greatest possible freedom concern-ing their replies. We drafted only a rough outline of the interview questions without any fixed order in which they should be posed during the interview. These questions were the following:
• What was the motivation of founding the institution?
• Where does the institution see itself in the field of knowledge economy? Which role does it play? What are its tasks?
• How does the institution differ from other institutions in that field?
• Are there any emphases regarding its activities? Who decides what to em-phasize on? How are the emphases chosen?
• Is it important to work actively in niches? Is it desirable to be a leader in a spe-cific field?
• Are there any direct successes which result from the institution’s work?
Not all of these questions were posed explicitly in every interview since some were answered implicitly by the interviewees. Moreover, due to the fact that we allowed the interviewees to decide on the course of the interview, we did not receive answers to these questions only. Some other issues have been addressed which are not mentioned in the interview outline above.
After interviewing one representative of each institution we started an evaluation. The obtained data were analyzed and the key contents categorized to enable an interpretation. By categorizing the interviews from the beginning, the research team was able to compare the statements themselves without giving an interpretation linked to the moment they were made during the interview.
4 The Viennese Actors
The three Viennese actors we are focusing our research on are the WWTF, ZIT and MA 27. Before presenting the results of the interviews, we want to come back to our research question and present the hypothesis we have been working with.
4.1 Research question and hypothesis
As already mentioned above, our research question is the following: What do the main Viennese agents in the field of knowledge economy focus on and why?
According to the theoretical framework we were consulting, an institution can decide on what to emphasize on by focusing on either the market demands or the demands of the community (Territorial Innovation Model vs. Community Development). Sometimes both demands overlap, but this is not always the case. While studying the official websites and accessible information of WWTF, ZIT and MA 27 we received the impression that WWTF and ZIT were market-oriented organizations while MA 27 was more concerned about the demands of the Viennese population. Therefore we hypothesized prior to conducting the interviews that WWTF and ZIT were following the TIM approach, while MA 27 was more concerned about community development. We have tried to corroborate this hypothesis with the results of our interviews.
4.2 WWTF: Vienna Science and Technology Fund
In order to get an insight into one of Austria’s leading Knowledge Institutions, the Vienna Sciences and Technology Fund (WWTF) we talked to the managing director Dr. Michael Stampfer and to his colleague Mag. Klaus Zinöcker.
The Vienna Science and Technology Fund (WWTF) is a private non-profit research funding organization and aims at sponsoring high quality scientific research with special interest in promoting the region of Vienna as an outstanding location for science and innovation. The fund was established in 2001 on the initiative of the Viennese mayor Dr. Michael Häupl and its then deputy mayor DDr Görg, who gave the money earned through the sale of Bank Austria shares held by the city of Vienna as seed money for the fund. The two politicians are still involved as President and Vice President of the Board of Directors in the decision-making processes, albeit they act as private individuals and not in their elected functions. The fund is therefore independent from the city’s budget and directives, but works closely with the other Viennese knowledge actors in order to avoid counteractive behavior.
The fund uses calls and comparative instruments within temporary focal points to support their target group of research establishments and individual scientists. Therefore only universities or independent research institutes which bear reference to the region of Vienna are permitted to apply for a sponsorship. Companies can only take part in the form of members of a consortium which is under the heading of a scientific applicant.
Sponsored professorships are one instrument of the WWTF that aims at bringing excellent scholars to Vienna. The person is integrated in an already existing working environment and provided with a team. The sponsorship targets projects with a min-imum value of one million Euro and provides funding for a period between two and five years maximum. The endowed chairs can be used to lead to the full employment of that person as university professor.
The second instrument mainly used by the WWTF are major projects with a focus on the exploitation and usage of the results. It offers existing outstanding groups of scientists the possibility to deepen and extend their work in a research project run-ning over a couple of years. The minimum value of the projects is 200,000 Euro and the projects are laid out to last from a minimum of two years up to a maximum of four years.
All projects are chosen on behalf of “calls” which focus on specific themes and have a highly competitive edge. The evaluation of the applications is conducted by an in-ternational expert panel composed of highly ranked international scientists who rec-ommend the most promising projects to the Board of Directors. The final decision on which projects will be funded is up to the Board of Directors.
These specific themes, which are Life Sciences, Creative Industries and Applied Mathematics, are determined by the Board of Directors and the Advisory Board. In general it aims at funding excellent scientific research which also takes into account the exploitability of its results and the creation of social value for the city of Vienna. The interviewees admit that this combination is hard to find since one of the aspects most of the time outweighs the others, but they like to focus on quality instead of quantity and therefore prefer balanced projects.
Their choice of emphases results from their limited finances, which leads to the need of concentrating and focusing on specific areas. Due to their usage of calls as an instrument in the application process there needs to be a certain amount of applicants available in order to give it the desired competitive edge. The WWTF focuses on already strong areas which are subject to further development and extension. As a result the WWTF lays is main focus on the areas which fit into the scientific concept of Vienna instead of funding niche projects. Furthermore, it is involved in the development of the Viennese Knowledge Strategy (see chapter 4.4 MA 27), which decides on the main scientific areas Vienna likes to specialize in in the future.
Overall it can be said that the WWTF concentrates on the funding of technical know-ledge with a stress on exploitability and doesn’t take into account socio-spatial polarization at all. Its success is measured by applications for new patents, career advancements, articles publicized in journals and so on. The WWTF sees itself as a sponsor of excellent scientific research and therefore doesn’t consider socio-spatial polarization as a part of its mission. According to them, that side of the knowledge economy lies in the field of operation of other actors.
4.3 ZIT: Center for Innovation and Technology
The ZIT Centre for Innovation and Technology is a subsidiary of the WWFF the 'Wiener Wirtschaftsförderungsfonds and was founded in the year 2000. It now employs 16 people. We interviewed Mag. Christian Bartik from the Department of promotion and funding to gather information about the dealings of this organization.
The main focus of the ZIT lies in the promotion of technology for companies located in the City of Vienna. This promotion takes on different forms that range from financial assistance given to companies to providing infrastructure necessary to work in the technology field as well as providing other services to create an optimal environment for local companies. Trends and developments in the technology sectors are closely monitored, and based on these observations this technology promoting agency develops strategies and measures to support technology-oriented companies in the City of Vienna.
The main idea of the ZIT is to enable companies to pursue new and profitable ideas with a minimum risk and high quality standards. With these measures, Vienna should be able to further strengthen its already well developed technology sectors such as life-sciences and creative industries.
Companies who apply for financial assistance in so called 'calls' are selected by the ZIT by comparing the projects of the applicants with each other; this enables the agency to select the best project - meaning the most profitable and competitive ones are chosen. These calls are one of the promotional instruments the ZIT uses to fund certain projects. The agency issues an invitation to tender for a certain project and companies willing to participate can hand in an application and are then - based on competitive criteria - granted the financial assistance. The evaluation of the projects is executed by a jury of independent experts varying from project to project, as well as in-house members who actually only hand in a suggestion on which a committee then decides which project will be funded.
As the Centre of Innovation and Technology is largely funded by the City of Vienna, those decisions are also politically motivated in the end. In their selection of projects the ZIT often refers to the “Viennese strategy for research and development”, a paper rendered on behalf of the City of Vienna and not yet published. It can be assumed that the individual agencies for technological development in Vienna and the agency assigned with the preparation of the “Viennese strategy for research and development” are in contact with each other; thus, there will be no surprises and this paper will only be the official seal on a strategy that the City had been following all along (for further information see chapter 4.4).
Another measure for promoting technology oriented companies used by the ZIT is to allocate real estate for companies. This happens in the 'Media Quarter Marx' located in Vienna's 3rd district and at the 'Campus Vienna Biocentre' also located in the 3rd district. The focus of the 'Media Quarter Marx' lies on highly specialized and creative small and medium enterprises and offers the advantage of strong networking possibilities. It brings together companies of one sector to facilitate cooperation on the basis of geographical closeness which ensures growth and development.
The 'Campus Vienna Biocentre' provides infrastructure for Vienna's growing Bio-technology sector. It provides an environment in which cooperation between various universities and academies in Vienna and corporate-driven research is possible.
In a wider sense the ZIT actively promotes not only companies and projects that are highly profitable but general research for the greater good. Medication and treatments developed here might help to cure cancer or other diseases one day. Other than that the Center of Innovation and Technology has little focus on socio-spatial polarization, with the exception of 'gender mainstreaming'. The ZIT tenders calls with a focus point on women doing highly qualified research work in order to increase the number of women who, at the moment, are underrepresented in this field. Still, the focus of the promotional and funding work lies in the high-end elite sponsorship with the aim of maximum growth and profit, so as to make Vienna an attractive location for international research.
4.4 MA 27: Municipal Department MA 27 (EU strategy and economic development)
Since the activities of this department are very diversified, it is impossible to sum up the field of work under one umbrella term. The official name of this department – “EU strategy and economic development” – does not mirror the whole area the department is working in. That is due to the fact that it is divided into subunits, each having their own agenda. According to our research question we decided to focus on the subdivision “Economic Development” and talk to the head of this division, Dr. Christian Wurm.
Dr. Wurm’s major task is to coordinate the project team who is working on the draft of a “Viennese Strategy for Research and Development”. This project was started by order of deputy mayor Rieger in 2006 and runs under the meaningful heading of “Vienna thinks Future”. In November 2006 a conference representing the official start of the project took place in the city hall where all the 450 people participating in the draft of the research strategy were present. Four different working groups were built, each focusing on one of the following emphases :
• Economy: research, technology and innovation in the enterprise sector
• Science: research emphases and knowledge transfer
• Society: science and society
• City: urban development with regard to Vienna as a research site
Each of the working groups consists of 20-25 experts. They have been chosen from enterprises, research institutions, universities and political organizations. Starting in November, they have been working on their specific issues. In June 2007 the compilation of the results gained in the 4 separate areas has started and will be finished by November 2007. Then this draft of the Viennese Research Strategy has to receive the blessing of the politicians. After that, it will be compulsory for all Viennese organizations working in the research, technology or innovations sector. Dr Wurm, however, indicated that this strategy will not include completely new issues, and that the basic orientation of institutions like WWTF and ZIT will not change because of the strategy. This is due to two facts: Firstly, members of WWTF and ZIT are participants in the working groups, so they are able to influence the draft of the strategy. Secondly, a strategy for Vienna has been developed on an oral basis during the last years. The current project is more concerned with putting this strategy down in writing than with inventing a completely new research strategy for the city. That is why it is not surprising that institutions like WWTF and ZIT are referring to the Viennese Research Strategy when talking about their emphases. Although it does not exist in writing yet, the institutions already know the content.
It is obvious that the population cannot influence the focus of the strategy since there are no representatives of the population participating in the working groups. However, quite often taxes are used for the funding of research projects. It is the population who pays these taxes and thus finances parts of the research projects. Therefore, it would be more than justified to give the population a voice and let them participate in the process of formulating a research strategy.
3 of the 4 working groups deal with market-related issues and focus on aspects con-cerning enterprises and the attractiveness of Vienna as a location for them. Only one group places its emphasis on the relation between society and science. Dr. Wurm specified the following questions which are dealt with in the working group “Science and Society”:
• How is knowledge imparted?
• What is the concept of knowledge among the population? Are there any chances necessary?
• What is the investment climate like? Can and should it be influenced?
• Is science a field where reflections about general developments are taking place?
• Which role do the different sciences play in the field of support for innovation and research?
• Is innovation necessary for the cohesion of a society and the effectiveness of a democratic system?
• Is there enough space for innovation?
In the course of finding answers to these questions the issue of social or socio-spatial polarization may arise. However, it is not dealt with by posing a separate question concerning polarization. Therefore, it seems that the people involved are – at first sight – not concerned about a relation between research, knowledge and science on the one hand, and polarization on the other hand.
When talking about knowledge, MA 27 refers to highly sophisticated, technical knowledge that can be produced by research and that is a significant factor in the economy – at a national as well as at an international scale. Since being in a leading position concerning research, innovation and technology is implying to have a competitive advantage that can be beneficial for the economy of a whole region of a country, this position is desirable. However, it seems that the research strategy will only focus on producing more technical knowledge in order to boost the economy. It is obvious that this knowledge created by research and innovation will not be used to educate the general public. It will be knowledge created by and for a small elite who will benefit from it. (However, this is not true for the pharmaceutic industry where sick members of the population will benefit from innovations.) It is doubtful that the results of the working group “Science and Society” will influence the general orientation of the strategy.
5 Conclusion
The general impression that we gained by evaluating our interviews is that the three Viennese actors see themselves as part of the knowledge economy while they do not feel responsible for socio-spatial polarization at all. None of them used the term “polarization” during the interview unless we addressed it. The questions arising now are whether this separation between institutions responsible for the creation of knowledge on the one hand, and institutions responsible for the reduction of negative consequences of socio-spatial polarization on the other hand is illegitimate or not, and whether it would actually be possible to build bridges between these two fields. Answering these questions will be the effort of the following paragraphs.
The results of the evaluation are refuting our hypothesis. Contrary to our assump-tions, all three institutions are market-oriented rather than following the community development-approach. The production of economically exploitable knowledge represents the main focus of the WWTF, the ZIT as well as for the MA 27. However, two out of the three institutions are not financed by the private sector but by the state. (The third one – the WWTF – is apparently not directly financed by the state. However, the seed money for this fund was provided by the government.) Obviously, money contributed by the general public is used to improve the competitiveness of Vienna as a business location. Needless to say that the rise in quality and quantity of research and the attraction of more enterprises benefits a society in terms of the creation of new jobs or the development of new products. However, only a small part of the population is able to benefit from these advantages – namely people who are educated well enough to bring along the qualifications demanded by employers in the knowledge economy.
As far as new products are concerned it is not that easy to determine who exactly will benefit from them since on the one hand there are highly sophisticated goods produced for affluent consumers and on the other hand there are for instance new drugs developed for sick people irrespective of their financial status (at least in the case of drugs the Austrian social insurance system is paying for). Yet it can be said that only a specific group of people will benefit from the activities WWTF, ZIT and MA 27 are involved in, while the whole society is paying for these activities. This discrepancy could be smoothed out by following a community development approach and trying to spread the benefits created by a knowledge economy across the whole society. Therefore, a dialogue between institutions working in the field of the knowledge economy and institutions dealing with community development (such as organizations focusing on the avoidance of socio-spatial polarization) is necessary.
Moreover, like mentioned above some people are likely to be left out and to be una-ble to find a place in the system of the knowledge economy. These people have to be supported by giving them access to education and thus empowering them. Institutions working in the field of socio-spatial polarization know about these groups of people and are therefore important dialogue partners for the actors of the knowledge economy. Both dialogue partners – actors of the knowledge economy on the one side, actors dealing with socio-spatial polarization on the other hand – form the basis of the bridge-building process.
In order to sum up our findings it can be said that there is no dialogue between two political fields where actually a dialogue should take place. By following a community development approach the necessity of a dialogue would become more obvious. Unfortunately, naming the exact form of this dialogue surpasses our competences and would require an additional research project.
6 References
• Europaforum Wien: http://www.europaforum.or.at/project.php?PROJECT_ID=129, 10.7.2007
• Jarboe, Kenan Patrick (2001): Knowledge Management as an Economic Development Strategy. U.S. Economic Development Administration: Reviews of Economic Development Literature and Practice: No. 7.
• Lundvall, Bengt-Ake (2002): Innovation Policy in the Globalizing Learning Economy. The Globalizing Learning Economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 273-310.
• Lundvall, Bengt-Ake/Archibugi, Daniele (2002): Introduction: Europe and the Learning Economy. The Globalizing Learning Economy. 1-19.
• Moulaert, Frank/Nussbaumer, Jacques (2005): The social region – Beyond the territorial dynamics of the Learning Economy. In: European Urban and Regional Studies 12 (1), 45-64
• Wien denkt Zukunft: http://www.wiendenktzukunft.at/de/strategie.html, 10.7.2007
• WWTF: http://www.wwtf.at/, 16.8.2007
• ZIT (2007): Campus Vienna Biocenter. Standortinformationen. Wien
• ZIT: www.zit.co.at, 16.8.2007
Andrea Visotschnig - 31. Aug, 20:02
