F2C Innovation: French agri-food “super cluster”

A French partnership among three agri-food clusters is an interesting model for how to further utilize the synergies and dynamics created within a cluster. First announced  during IFT earlier this year, Vitagora,  Valorial and AgriMip have joined forces under the brand F2C: Field to Consumer.

By doing so, the three clusters will allow its collective members of 370 companies, 130 public and private R&D organizations and 35 academic institutes collaborate, share information and build intra-cluster partnerships.

This is yet another example of how clusters realize the opportunity of creating brands to further advance its position and recognition globally. Branding of clusters is a practice that seems to have gotten most traction in Europe (we are aware of 11 branded food related clusters in Europe alone – but I am sure there are more). There are certain regions in North America as well that have either established a brand (e.g. Montréal InVivo), or in the process of doing so. Our organization is currently working with two North America metropolitan regions, in two different industry sectors that are in the process of developing a “branded” Cluster Initiative similar to those mentioned above.

Video presentations by European Cluster Managers as a part of CLUNET: cross-border cooperation initiatives to support Cluster Growth and Innovation

As a part of a cluster assessment project today, I came across an interesting (although not very comprehensive) collection of video presentations from European cluster managers.

The cluster managers present their cluster, international activities (partnering) as well as touching upon future strategy and past success.

The video presentations are a part of CLUNET (launched in 2006) is a European initiative (Montreal, Canada is also participating) aimed at sharing experiences and implementing cross-border cooperation initiatives to support Cluster Growth and Innovation,  CLUNET consists of  14 regions: England’s Northwest through the Northwest Development Agency (lead partner) , Hamburg, Karlsruhe, Berlin-Brandeburg, Madrid, Aragón, Lazio-Rome, Tuscany, Provence- Alpes-Côte d’Azur, Brittany, Slovenia, South Great Plains, Lahti and Montreal (Canada)

The network partners are looking to develop an international network for collaboration, innovation and and development policies.

Cluster strategy central to future economic development in Portland, Oregon (U.S.)

Last month, the City of Portland presented its five year economic development strategy with the ambitious goal of creating 10,000 new jobs in the city in the next five years. This aggressive objective has been gaining some questions in the local media, but is probably a welcomed addition to an economy that has been hit hard,  losing more than 44,000 jobs over the past 12 months according to the strategy document.

The cluster strategy will  be implemented by The Portland Development Commission (PDC), and the plan outlines four industries that will serve as the city’s target clusters:

• Cleantech/Sustainable Industries
• Activewear/Outdoor Gear
• Software
• Advanced Manufacturing

Although some of he local media has questioned the absence of life science as the fifth cluster, the PDC has in our opinion a very sound reasoning, basing the selection of the four cluster focus industries based on what industries are already thriving and have a critical mass in the region. Granted the analysis behind this is correct, the PDC is probably facing a favorable situation as they are building their clusters upon the existing strengths and momentum of the local industry. Although life science is attractive and trendy, we are glad to see that the PDC is taking a activation rather creation approach to its cluster development strategy.

A quick read through the development strategy document shows that PDC  may still have some work to do with regards to funding of the effort. Also, although the document briefly touches upon a strategy for how these cluster will be developed, there is a far step from an economic development plan based on labour and financial data to a successful and realistic cluster development plan. We will stay tuned.

North Bay, Ontario (Canada) charting out a Biomass Cluster

Last month renewable industry stakeholders from all over the descended upon the city of North Bay, Ontario to take part in the two day conference: Harness Biomass – from the forest to the market place. The event that hosted over 400 delegates was yet another milestone achieved by the The Biomass Innovation Centre ( created by the Nipissing University in partnership with the local industry ) in the pursuit of establish a leading Biomass cluster in the North Bay region.

Building on the rich forest industry in the Northern part of Ontario (referred to as the Biomass Belt by the cluster’s stakeholders), the objective is to create a world-leading centre of R&D, commercialization and entrepreneurship in the are of production of biomass fuel.

Cluster stake holders have previously visited and hosted other Biomass centers around the world, including Austria, Finland and Sweden.

Biomass as a fuel alternative is certainly nothing new, and several jurisdictions has announced and launched Biomass cluster initiatives, but the North Bay emerging cluster may be enjoying some tailwind ahead thanks to the Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG) Biomass Energy Program in particular.

We look forward to see how the cluster stakeholder will further stake out their cluster development strategy moving forward.

Cluster Activation vs. Cluster Creation

When I am interacting with cluster stakeholders, either through project work or presentations, there is always a significant interest on the issue of cluster activation vs. cluster creation when planning and launching a cluster initiative.

The vast majority of clusters are a result of an activation effort – or more specifically the government or policy makers have taken on the role as a catalyst and enabler in a collaborative process to engage stakeholders and activate a cluster around the resources, strengths and assets native to the region. Leaning on the industry and existing asset base, this approach will typically have a strong market pull. In other words, the need of industry and the market will define the cluster.

On the other hand, there are also examples of how policymakers attempt (and succeed) in creating a cluster around a technology sector industry that is not significant or perhaps native to the region.  Hence these economic development efforts will typically be a “push” effort, where economic incentives, investments and asset creation from the government will be important ingredients.

When a cluster activation approach is executed, the government and policy makers will focus on removing the most serious bottlenecks and hurdles for higher productivity, improved collaboration and innovation within a cluster by mobilizing the capacity of a cluster and participants to act jointly.

One will see cluster development efforts by changing the business environment, and by creating institutional structures that help to speed up the process of cluster evolution over time.  This approach can obviously be applied to any industry, but will perhaps be most applicable to a sector that has critical mass by numbers and activities. Further on, there are many motivations to launch such an effort. It can be the need to better coordinate efforts and assets in a growing industry (life sciences) or perhaps used as a tool to rejuvenate industry sectors that has reached more of a mature level with regards to innovation and entrepreneurship (food and agriculture).

Cluster creation on the other hand, is typically found within emerging sectors (one example could be the effort of creating a solar energy cluster in New York) or where there is a policy decision in place to create new set of assets or a skill base within a jurisdiction/region.

Another example of a cluster creation effort could be the effort to attract The Scripps Research Ins

titute to the Jupiter campus of Florida Atlantic University in 2004. Authorities committed at the time US $310 million in state

incentives, opened a 40,000 square foot research facility on the campus. An analysis by Florida economists predicted that Scripps would generate about $1.6 billion in additional income and boost the state’s GDP by $3.2 billion in 15 years.

Both cluster activation and creation are feasible approaches – each building on different policies and commitments. Both will have a fairly similar end-objective, economic development through increased commercialization, entrepreneurship and inward investment.

French approach to cluster based innovation policy seems to pay off

In 2004, the French government  announced shift towards a “functional approach” in their national innovation policy. This was anchored in an initiative (Pôles de Compétitivité initiative) to develop a number of Cluster Initiatives around the country.

As a part of this process, a consortium of French governmental organizations committed to fund the development of 66 clusters with 1.5 billion Euros over 3 years.

The clusters selected to receive funding was selected based on 105 proposal submitted by regional economic and industrial development organizations.

The selection was based on the following criteria:

• The clusters must be anchored into a regional dynamic economy, able to compete internationally. The fit with local industry and strengths was perhaps the most critical criteria.
• The clusters must be built around leading and world-class technology, being able to provide credibility and take a leadership role in its sector worldwide.
• The cluster must incorporate R&D partnership among academia, R&D centers, industry etc.
• The cluster must demonstrate a governance policy / model.
• The overall goal of the cluster is to help bring R&D and innovation to market, and further grow the knowledge based economy in France – improving the country’s competitiveness and create jobs.

Since the initial launch in ’04/’05, an additional 5 clusters have been launched.

Following the Cluster Initiative model, each cluster has a governance model, membership structure, central management and marketing activities.

Since the inception, more than 2,000 R&D projects have been launched within the clusters, and  more than 5 billion euros have been committed (half funded by the French government).

In all, there are 10,000 researchers working on these projects with 5,000 businesses, including SMEs. The French government has committed to maintain the funding until 2011,  with 1.5 billion euros over three years.

Local and regional authorities are funding projects launched by their respective clusters.

As of today, 500 foreign businesses are involved in the clusters and their projects.

Backed by a significant public funding, it seems that the French government continue to believe in the Cluster Initiatives as a central pillar in the country’s innovation and economic development policy.