We have the ambition to become a driving economy in Europe. That is, a highly productive economy, embedded in the best European value chains and generating good salaries. That's why we need an economy not only based on knowledge but also with a significant component of our own knowledge (intellectual property). A necessary, but not sufficient, condition to achieve this is having a world-class research ecosystem. Everything can be improved, but I would say we have it. The public sector has contributed decisively to this. We must take care of it and maintain it.
Now we have a challenge: to maximize the high-value-added economic activity generated from knowledge in the public research system. These have already been generated, through licensing and company creation (startups). But it would be a shame, as well as irresponsible, not to fully capitalize on the powerful lever of quality knowledge generated in our public laboratories. Rest assured, this knowledge will eventually be incorporated into economic activity. It may be that we haven't gone beyond academic publication here and a company from another country takes advantage of it, or that we have protected it with a patent that we license to a multinational, in which case we'll gain something. But the desirable thing is for it to be incorporated into economic activity, generating companies in Catalonia.
I note that there are examples in the EU where the described challenge has been brilliantly resolved. In particular, in Flanders. It would be wise to learn from the Flemish. To move forward, it is necessary to progress in three mutually reinforcing directions:
1. Regulations. If, as I believe, we have not fully exploited the innovative potential that public research can offer to the economy, it is because it is inherently difficult. A major difficulty is that innovation must be deployed in the market (local, European, and global), and the latter operates under private law, while the public centers where knowledge reside operate under administrative regulation, a legal framework that does not align well with business economic activity. It is necessary to build bridges, and it is not easy.
There is another major public support for companies to move toward a high-productivity economy: technology centers, which act by providing the expertise necessary to innovate and compete. Technology centers are not integrated into any public administration and enjoy very adequate regulatory treatment, better than research centers. They can receive base subsidies from the public sector, as long as they do not exceed 30% of their budget. However, in this regard, research centers are not in a very different situation. In Catalonia, in 2023, spending by Cerca centers was €687 million, and the base subsidy from the Generalitat did not exceed €181 million, less than 30%. If public research centers are rightly intended to be drivers of the economy, they must be able to operate within a regulatory framework at least similar to that of technology centers.
2. Financing: proof of concept. To generate intellectual property, or better capitalize on it, it's necessary to advance projects with market potential to the stage where we've at least conducted proof of concept. This requires venture capital focused on very early stages (pre-seed capital). The amounts are small, but the risk is so great that public participation is essential, or they won't be there. At more advanced stages, financing is better. There's plenty of venture capital available, and we're no longer unknown.
3. Managerial strengthening. Managing transfer shouldn't be the sole responsibility of researchers. They should do what they are experts in. We shouldn't distract them. To bring research to market, they need to be complemented with other experiences and other experts. We also have them in the public system, but on a scale and subject to administrative regulations that severely limit them. It's essential that innovation management within our public research ecosystem have easy access to professionals with a high capacity to manage projects, or an equally high level of both technical and scientific experience (which implies, for example, being able to communicate well with scientists) and experience in identifying lines with market potential (which implies being able to communicate well with senior managers). The day we have this, we can be more certain that, in a highly competitive world, we won't miss out on good opportunities. It's happened to us.
