Berlin The new transfer agency Dati is the central instrument of the traffic light government for the “start of a decade of innovation”. The project, which is being promoted equally by the FDP and the Greens, aims to ensure that knowledge from German research is not turned into innovative products in the USA or Asia, but in this country and thus into prosperity.
But the government’s independent innovation consultants gave the concept a devastating verdict: the plans presented by the economics and research ministries at the beginning of April were far too narrow and would possibly do more harm than good, writes the Expert Commission for Research and Innovation (EFI) in their new policy letter that is available to the Handelsblatt. Instead, the headline calls for a big hit: “If so, then so!”
In general, such an agency “only makes sense” if it takes on tasks in the German research and innovation system “that were not previously covered” and if institutions “that do not yet exist” are required for this. “Both of these cannot be recognized by the commission of experts in the case of the data,” writes the team led by the Jena economist Uwe Cantner.
The Dati concept provides for regional coaches to bring together and promote the key players – small universities and companies – quickly and unbureaucratically on site. A central service center is to offer training courses in science entrepreneurship, develop standards for technology transfer and, in the medium term, also develop investment and start-up concepts and raise venture capital.
Top jobs of the day
Find the best jobs now and
be notified by email.
The EFI is also particularly upset by the focus on technical colleges and smaller universities on the one hand and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and start-ups on the other. That doesn’t go far enough, because successful innovation ecosystems must “include all relevant actors”.
Funding should only be given in selected regions
According to the previous concept, the data would be “a funding instrument that large universities and non-university research institutions as well as large companies systematically neglect, although they are of central importance as actors in the transfer and for the dynamics of an innovation ecosystem,” according to the experts. The establishment of the new agency even threatens to “solidify or even create new barriers to cooperation with these actors”.
While the coalition agreement still states that one wants to create and strengthen “regional and national innovation ecosystems”, the key issues paper by the research and economics ministries no longer mentions the national ones. The EFI warns that this does not go far enough, and calls for a “geographically broader approach”. After all, if you restrict yourself regionally, you waste potential if key partners are not located in the immediate vicinity.
The Commission of Experts is also critical of the fact that funding from the Dati should only take place in selected regions. Because the promotion of excellent transfer projects “is important everywhere”.
>> Also read here: The new president of the Stifterverband, ex-Zeiss boss Michael Kaschke, warns of a new “innovation dent” in Germany
Praise is given to the goal that data should work in an unbureaucratic and agile manner. However, the price for lean committees is that the selection of the individual projects should be made locally in the regions and not in the central data committees. Here, the EFI sees the danger that the selection will be made “ignoring excellence criteria” – that is, that second- and third-class projects will also be funded with state funds.
Innovation coaches could “quickly be overwhelmed”
The regional coaches could also quickly be overwhelmed because they have to shoulder “a bundle of complex tasks”: advising the management committee, coaching the funded regional partnerships, advising on the establishment of transfer structures and stimulating community building on site. The Cantner team therefore has “the great fear that the regional coaches will not be able to meet the very extensive requirements”. In addition, there is a risk of double structures because it is unclear what should happen on site and what should happen in the data center.
If the government really wants to make the data a research and innovation flagship project, it would have to be “designed to be much more open”. As it is now designed, it will also be very difficult to finally bundle the various relevant funding programs from different departments under the umbrella of the data, as was actually intended in the coalition agreement.
However, this is essential so that “synergies between different funding measures can be better used, double and multiple funding can be avoided and funding gaps can be closed”.
What the EFI does not say: The data would then also be significantly more expensive. When the new government took office, there was still talk behind the scenes of up to two billion euros that would be needed for the project in the legislature. The Ministry of Research is now estimating 20 million euros for this year and from 2023 “increasing three-digit million contributions”.
More: The inconspicuous: Why the FDP ministers of the traffic light are currently hardly noticed.