1. The Experience of a Leader in Innovation. The Case of Finland Professor Reijo Vihko President and Director General The Academy of Finland

2. Structural development of the Finnish R&D system Science Policy Council, 1963 Expanding the university system in 1960’s and 1970’s Finnish National Fund for Research and Development (SITRA), 1967 Academy of Finland, 1970 National Technology Agency, TEKES, 1983 Science and Technology Policy Council, 1987

3. Public R&D funding actors Parliament Science and Technology Policy Council Government Ministry of Education Ministry of Trade and Industry Other Ministries Academy of Finland National Technology Agency, Tekes Sitra Fund Universities and government research institutes Business enterprises and private research institutes

4. In the 1990’s 490 new doctors, 1990 Research and development 1,9% of GDP, 1990 CERN- membership, 1991 Nomination of 12 Centres of Excellence by the Ministry of Education, 1994 Graduate school system launched (93 schools), 1995 Finland became a member of European Union, 1995 Government decision of the additional public R&D funding, 1996 Post doctoral system started, 1997 Decision of the Academy of Finland to start 26 new Centres of Excellence (2000-2005), 1998 Research and development 3,1% of GDP, 1999 1.156 new doctors, 2000

5. R&D in Finland in 2002 Employs nearly 70,000 people Total input roughly 5 billion euros, of which business enterprises account for over 73% R&D input about 3.5% of GDP Finland’s share of OECD countries’ R&D input about 0.7% 20 universities and 31 polytechnics 1,224 doctoral graduates in 2002 Rovaniemi (1) Jyväskylä (1) Tampere (2) Lappeenranta (1)Turku (3) Helsinki (7) Espoo (1) Joensuu (1) Kuopio (1) Vaasa (1) Oulu (1) Universities

6. Source: DG Research Data: Eurostat, Memger State, OECED Notes: (1) FIN, JP, E, P: 2000; UK,A: 1998; US: 1997. All other ccuntries: 1999. (2) EU average does not include Luxembourg Researchers are full –time Equivalents (FTE); labour force are headcounts (HC) Researchers per thousand labour force: latest available year (1)

7. National strengths and preferences A national innovation system includes not just the institutions performing research and development National background of firms is not irrelevant National structural preferences

8. University “It is no longer a public reservoir of knowledge, where firms come to fish for the knowledge they need, but a public reservoir of competendes mobilised by actors in society, both public and private, to help them resolve the problems they face”. Philippe Laredo & Philippe Mustar, 2001

9. Finland’s strategy for the future Effective strategy implementation requires continuous development of the innovation system High quality Effectiveness Scientific and societal relevance Evaluation of impacts Sustained internationalisation Findand’s economic, social and cultural welfare is increasingly based on knowledge and know-how generated by research and education

10. On the Way to Becoming a System of Innovation: European Research Area Research policy as a central pillar of Europe’s strategy towards the most competitive knowledge-based economy in the world Sixth Framework Programme. 95% of European R%D resources is national Raising EU research expenditure from 1.9 to 3.0% of GDP by 2010 (23 form the private sector) Human resources: 700 000 additional researchers needed by 2010 (1.6 millon in 2000) European Research Council Enlargement of the Union

11. Reacting globalisation Strengthening the knowledge base Deregulation and opening the national markets Increasing competition Taking actively advantage of the new opportunities National and international cooperation

12. How to reach the national targets? Intensifying the utilisation of new knowledge and know-how Strengthening cooperation between the public and private sectors Advancing national and international networking Increasing research funding allocated on a competitive basis Securing research funding

13. Strengths of Finnish science policy A steady growth and high level of investment in research and development Political consensus and interest in scientific research Well-functioning system of planning, decision-marking and funding Regionally convering system of universities High standard of education Strong interest by young people in research career An efficient system of researcher training Cooperation between funding bodies Company-university cooperation Active internationalisation