“Just think what Europe could be. Think of the innate strengths of our enlarged Union. Think of its untapped potential to create prosperity and offer opportunity and justice for all its citizens. Europe can be a beacon of economic, social and environmental progress to the rest of the world.”
No this is not Konrad Adenauer’s or Robert Schumann’s vision for Europe some 50 years ago, but President Barroso’s one, in February 2005, communicating on how Members States could better work together for growth and jobs and how the EU could take a new start for the Lisbon Strategy.
Based on policy recommendations for the Mid-Term Review of the Lisbon Strategy, all Members States had been asked in 2005 to put together Action Plans for National Lisbon Strategy in the framework of a new partnership for Growth and Jobs.
One year after, which conclusions can be made?
Continue reading ‘Any progress towards the Lisbon strategy?’
Scope for venture capital in financing SMEs has been, since the late nineties, subject of many discussions and debates. With regard to the flourishing literature and political support towards venture capital, this has appeared as a way to substantially improve SMEs’ access to finance. However, recent assessments have enlightened its decline.
Investment made possible through venture capital (VC) is commonly recognised as an important path to economic growth and innovation. The report Employment Contribution of Private equity and Venture Capital published by the European Private Equity and Venture Capital Association (http://www.evca.com/html/home.asp) identifies a growing role of VC in Europe, with a 40% increase in the number of companies supported since 1995. The positive impact in terms of employment is also generally agreed so as its contribution to R&D. But the same report also underlines difficulties faced by this sector since the burst of the Internet bubble in 2000-2001. For instance, amount of VC invested in 2000 was nearly 20 billion euros, compared to 10.3 billion euros invested in 2004. One of the major consequences of this decrease is a seed capital based investment decline in start-up companies. Thus, the number of companies in which VC was invested declined from 9,187 in 2000 to 5,557 in 2004.
Continue reading ‘SME access to finance in the EU-15: is venture capital so crucial?’
I am pleased to introduce Noweurope?s audience a new contributor from Belgium.
Claudie Tallineau (33) is a Senior Consultant at Pole Europe Conseil, a Belgian private consultancy company concentrating on assignments aimed at supporting socio-economic actors in the elaboration and implementation of policies or strategies, directly or indirectly, related to their growth and competitiveness through innovation, internationalisation and integration of the European dimension.
Pole Europe Conseil has a strong experience in advising SMEs and supporting them in their participation in European projects. Through a one off contribution, Claudie proposes to share with nowEurope’s audience her views on the difficulties faced by SMEs in meeting such challenges and how they can overcome the barriers of the 6th FPRD.
Scope for venture capital in financing SMEs has been, since the late nineties, subject of many discussions and debates. With regard to the flourishing literature and political support towards venture capital, this has appeared as a way to substantially improve SMEs’ access to finance. However, recent assessments have enlightened its decline.
Investment made possible through venture capital (VC) is commonly recognised as an important path to economic growth and innovation. The report Employment Contribution of Private equity and Venture Capital published by the European Private Equity and Venture Capital Association (EVCA) identifies a growing role of VC in Europe, with a 40% increase in the number of companies supported since 1995. The positive impact in terms of employment is also generally agreed so as its contribution to R&D. But the same report also underlines difficulties faced by this sector since the burst of the Internet bubble in 2000-2001. For instance, amount of VC invested in 2000 was nearly 20 billion euros, compared to 10.3 billion euros invested in 2004. One of the major consequences of this decrease is a seed capital based investment decline in start-up companies. Thus, the number of companies in which VC was invested declined from 9,187 in 2000 to 5,557 in 2004.
Continue reading ‘SME access to finance in the EU-15: is venture capital so crucial?’
Oseo Anvar, the French Agency for Innovation and the Paris metropolitan regional authority launched last year a joint action in order to enhance cooperation amongst SMEs of the region and their participation in FP6 programmes.
This pilot action aims at integrating SMEs and to give them the possibility of better targeting their project and prepare their technological strategy in the framework of the EU.
Besides a concrete support (case studies, know-how transfer, etc.) on the preparation of projects within FP programmes, Amorce Europe networks SMEs during seminars and contributes to the identification of possible partnerships. SMEs intending to participate in European projects benefit from tailor-made consulting and financial support.
Launched for a period of 18 months, Amorce Europe will end in June 2006.
Launched at the beginning of 2005, BIOCOP project is bringing together research expertise on new techniques to screen a variety of food products containing multiple toxic substances, including pesticides, heavy metals, toxins and drugs. This Integrated Project is funded by the European Commission with ten million euro under the “Food quality and safety” thematic area of the Sixth Framework Programme (FP6). This five year project, coordinated by Professor Chris Elliott from the Veterinary Sciences Division of Queens University, Belfast, involves 23 partners from universities, research centres, regulatory agencies and 10 SMEs, from 15 European countries, as well as Canada.
Continue reading ‘BIOCOP: A broad and ambitious Integrated Project between universities and SMEs under the Sixth Framework Programme’
Given, in some countries, difficulties faced by SMEs to their participation in European projects, the question whether European mechanisms are adapted or not to SMEs is more and more frequent.
One answer consists of saying that FP regulations are too complicated or that EC procedures are too lengthy and bureaucratic. Besides, SMEs often had bad experiences from previous projects given EC requirements. On SMEs’ activities’ side, it is often said that companies are too active in areas, which are not covered by FP projects or that companies do not have the capacity to prepare project proposals.
Another type of answer can be given, based on companies’ competitiveness and on a better understanding of FP projects’ objectives.
Continue reading ‘Are current European mechanisms adapted to SMEs?’
Statice Santé , a French SME specialised in micro-technical transformation and biomaterials has taken part in two different FP projects for the development of a bio-artificial pancreas for diabetes therapy thanks to its high technical expertise and its networks with research organsiations.
The first project named BARP was a Craft project within the 4th Framework programme. The second project, BARP +, in the continuation of BARP was launched within the 6th framework programme (Priority Nan technologies and Nan sciences ) and is still active. BARP + is a Specific Targeted Research Project and is coordinated by the European Center for research on diabete. It includes 14 partners.
The project aims at developing artificial pancreas for human application and integrates various types of skills from clinical research to advanced technologies (including nano-technologies).
Beyond an undisputable scientific and research excellence, success of this project essentially lies in complementarities of skills, cooperation and alliances, which have been built between partners. This project was made possible thanks to the links established between research organisation and the industry. Statice? highly technical skills in the use and moulding of silicone and Biodegradable and composite materials for medical use and research was a central factors for its participation. Besides, international dimension of the French SME and European “culture” facilitated the partenship.
It is important to say that BARP project was put together with the support of a French consulting company, Essor Europe specialised in R&D, and demonstration or technology transfer projects. Essor Europe got involved in the selection and the preparation of the project as well as in the management of the project, acting as a general secretariat (technical and and strategic management). Participants in BARP+ built on their previous experience of BARP.
The total cost of the project amounts to 3.62 million euros and the European funding allocated to this project to 2.5 million euros.
Given, in some countries, difficulties faced by SMEs to their participation in European projects, the question whether European mechanisms are adapted or not to SMEs is more and more frequent.
One answer consists of saying that FP regulations are too complicated or that EC procedures are too lengthy and bureaucratic. Besides, SMEs often had bad experiences from previous projects given EC requirements. On SMEs’ activities’ side, it is often said that companies are too active in areas, which are not covered by FP projects or that companies do not have the capacity to prepare project proposals.
Continue reading ‘Are current European mechanisms adapted to SMEs?’
If you ask French specialists in Innovation issues whether results of SMEs’ participation in FP programmes are satisfactory, the answer is clearly no.
Why is that so?
Despite an active participation of French SMEs in FP programmes (at the second rank in the EU 25 after Germany), they get only 9% of FP programmes? funding that benefits to France. This figure must be compared to a general objective set at a 15% rate and 14% for German SMEs.
Continue reading ‘Insight into French SMEs’ participation in European FP Programmes’
Loading ...
Recent Comments