Why is Catalonia still trapped in the “valley of death” of innovation?

In Catalonia, we like to say we're a land of talent. And we are. We have brilliant scientists, leading research centers, top-tier hospitals, and networks like ICREA and iCERCA that have put the region on the European map. Our publication figures, our success in securing competitive funding from the European Research Council (ERC), and our research impact all attest to this. So far, so legitimate.

But there is an uncomfortable truth that we rarely voice in public: we don't lack research; we lack the ability to translate that research into economics. Hundreds of patents are generated each year, but only about 15% are licensed. spin-offs They are born with enthusiasm, but many of them are on life support. Revenue from intellectual property is meager compared to the volume of knowledge produced. Meanwhile, universities like KU Leuven in Belgium transform research into hundreds of millions of euros annually in licenses and industrial collaborations.

It's not a problem of scientific intelligence. It's a problem of channels, incentives, and ladders. And therein lies the paradox: we invest heavily in research, but we industrialize very little. Creating companies doesn't necessarily mean creating industry.

The countries ahead of us share a structural characteristic: the private sector leads R&D investment. In Belgium and Sweden, over 60% of research spending comes from businesses. In Spain, we lag behind in Europe. If companies don't buy innovation, innovation doesn't materialize into products. And without products, there is no technological GDP. Our business fabric is largely made up of SMEs, often with limited resources and little capacity to take on significant technological risk. Universities generate knowledge, but the market isn't always ready to absorb it. The result is an ecosystem dependent on annual calls for proposals, designed according to the logic of the public sector, not the global market.

All this leads us to the famous "valley of death": that space between the laboratory and the market where good ideas run out, not for lack of quality, but for lack of journey.

What does real innovation need? Robust proofs of concept, working prototypes, regulatory validations, pilot plants, and multi-year projects that don't end just as they begin to mature. Professional teams that understand both the language of the lab and that of industry. And yes, money. But above all, sustained political commitment beyond a single election cycle. And this is where we often stumble: too many small programs. Too many one- or two-year calls for proposals. Too much bureaucracy. Too many intermittent cuts. Too much instability. Innovation doesn't flourish in an ecosystem designed to minimize risk.

The countries that have made the leap haven't created just another pilot project. They've transformed transfer into a national infrastructure. They've professionalized the process: powerful transfer office technicians, product managers technological, entrepreneurs-in-residenceThey have legislated to accelerate, not to slow down: sandboxes Regulatory measures, genuinely innovative public procurement, and contractual flexibility have been key. Too much criticism has been focused on specialized clusters. And, above all, they have created a market. Without demand, research never leaves the laboratory.

Recently We were celebrating ICREA's 25th anniversary, An undeniable collective success. We have been able to attract talent. We have built scientific excellence. What we haven't done with the same determination is to transform that excellence into a productive economy.

What would a true national pact entail? Five- or ten-year programs for prototyping and validation. Agile flexibility in technology procurement. Academic evaluations that seriously assess technology transfer, not just academic achievements. Mechanisms to enable SMEs to purchase technology without going bankrupt. Taxation that incentivizes genuine collaboration. Public procurement that fosters markets and international benchmarks.

And perhaps also a cultural shift: measuring less quantity and more quality. Less counting. spin-offs and further ask ourselves if they invoice, if they export, if they create skilled jobs and if they compete globally.

Catalonia will always need scientific excellence. But it also needs to transform that excellence into industry. Without this step, we will remain a country that invests heavily in research but produces little in its transformation. A country that accumulates patents but only licenses them to a minority. A country of great ideas that never reach the market.

The good news is that a technological miracle isn't necessary. What is necessary is a decision. A sustained political decision. A national decision. And this time, we cannot afford to postpone it.