Editör - Kırklareli Üniversitesi

Transkript

Editör
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Muharrem ÖZTEL
Arş. Gör. Hüseyin BURGAZOĞLU
Uluslararası II. Trakya Bölgesi
Kalkınma - Girişimcilik Sempozyumu
Bildiri Kitabı I
Kırklareli Üniversitesi Yayınları:
2
İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Yayınları:
1
Yayın Koordinatörü
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Baki Çakır
Editör
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Muharrem Öztel
Arş. Gör. Hüseyin Burgazoğlu
Kapak Tasarımı
Yrd. Doç . Dr. Mehmet Han Ergüven
Abdurrahim Yüce
İç Düzen
Abdurrahim Yüce
Baskı Sayısı
1. Basım
Baskı Adedi
2000
ISBN
---------------------Baskı Tarihi
Nisan 2011
Baskı Yeri
Erkam Matbaası
Organize Sanayi Bölgesi
Turgut Özal Cad.No: 117/2 A-D
İkitelli / İstanbul
Yayıncı adresi:
Kırklareli Üniversitesi Rektörlüğü
Kültür Merkezi A Blok / KIRKLARELİ
Tel: 0 288 212 96 70 (10 Hat)
Fax: 0 288 212 96 79
Web: www.kirklareli.edu.tr
© KIRKLARELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ
Bu kitabın bütün yayın hakları Kırklareli
Üniversitesi´ne aittir.
İÇİNDEKİLER
Takdim ............................................................................................................................. VII
Önsöz ................................................................................................................................
IX
Açılış Programı / Openning Program .................................................................
1
GİRİŞİMCİLİK ÖRNEKLERİ
EXAMPLES OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
The Relationship between Government Investments and Firm
Agglomerations at TR21 Sub-Region: Panel Causality Analysis
Research Assistant Ibrahim AL, Associate Professor Mustafa Kemal DEGER,
Research Assistant Murat Can GENC ...............................................................................
Role of Entrepreneurship of Private Sector: An Overview to Sugar
Industry
Samet KAVOĞLU ...............................................................................................................
Geleneksel Gıdalarda Pazarlama ve Girişimcilik: “Tekirdağ Peynir
Helvası Örneği”
Marketing and Entrepreneurship in Traditional Foods: ‘‘Tekirdag
Cheese Halva as an Example’’
Öğr. Gör. Tuna ŞENER , Öğr. Gör. Cem KOLUKIRIK, H. Selçuk ETİ ................................
29
39
47
GİRİŞİMCİLİK - KADIN GİRİŞİMCİLİĞİ
ENTREPRENEURSHIP - WOMEN ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Sosyal Girişimcilik
Social Entrepreneurship
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Tülay GÜZEL ................................................................................................
Kadın Girişimciliği ve Kooperatifler
Women Entrepreneurship and Cooperatives
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Gülen ÖZDEMİR, Arş. Gör. Dr. Emine YILMAZ .........................................
59
71
XI
Uluslararası II. Trakya Bölgesi Kalkınma - Girişimcilik Sempozyumu
Kadın Girişimcilerin Ekonomik Sürece Katılımları ve Örgütlenme
Yaklaşımları
Women Enterprises’ Participation to Economic Process and Organization
Approaches
Dr. Emine YILMAZ, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Gülen ÖZDEMİR, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Yasemin ORAMAN,
Dr. Sema KONYALI ............................................................................................................
81
ALTERNATİF ENERJİ KAYNAKLARI
ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES
Enerji Verimliliği Kapsamında Yapılarda Doğal Aydınlatma
Yöntemleri: Kırklareli Örneği
Natural Illumination Methods as Part of Efficient Use of Energy:
Kirklareli as an Example
Öğr. Gör. Sertaç GÖRGÜLÜ, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Süreyya KOCABEY,
Yrd. Doç. Dr. İzzet YÜKSEK, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Bahtiyar DURSUN ........................................
97
Trakya Bölgesinin Biyogaz Potansiyeli ve Mevcut Potansiyelin Bölge
Ekonomisine Katkısı Üzerine Bir İnceleme
A Review for the Biogas and Contribution of Present Potential to the
Economy of the Region
Arş. Gör. Cem DOĞRU ....................................................................................................... 113
Organik Atıklardan Biyogaz Üretimi
Production of Biogas from Organic Waste
Prof. Dr. Aydın GÜREL, Arş. Gör. Zeynep ŞENEL ............................................................. 123
GİRİŞİMCİLİK - EĞİTİM İLİŞKİSİ
ENTREPRENEURSHIP - EDUCATION
Innovative Entrepreneurship in Selected Countries: The Case of
Turkey, Bulgaria and Romania
Öğr. Gör. Dr. A.Orçun SAKARYA ...................................................................................... 137
Farklı Eğitim Düzeyindeki Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Girişimcilik
Konusunda Görüş Farklılığının Araştırılması
Research on Diversity of Views of University Students in Different
Levels of Education about Entrepreneurship
Prof. Dr. Cengiz YILMAZ, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Tuncer ÖZDİL, Arş. Gör. Didem TEZSÜRÜCÜ,
Öğr. Gör. Yasin KARADENİZ ................................................................................................. 157
Meslek Yüksekokulu Öğrencilerinin Girişimcilik Eğilimleri: Yalova Ve
Kadir Has Üniversitelerinde Yapılan Karşılaştırmalı Bir Araştırma
Inclination to Entrepreneurship of Vocational High School Students:
A Comparative Research by Yalova and Kadir Has Universities
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Orhan KOÇAK, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Ersin KAVİ ................................................... 175
KIRSAL KALKINMA
RURAL DEVELOPMENT
KÖYDES Project as a Instrument of Rural Development and Its Effect
on the Infrastructure of Villages of Kırklareli
Dr. Gökhan ZENGİN .......................................................................................................... 193
XII
İçindekiler
Şikago Kenti Örneğinde Ekonomik Coğrafyanın Yeniden Keşfi ve
Trakya Bölgesi İçin Çıkartılabilecek Dersler
Reassessment of Chicago Economic Geography and Lessons for Thrace
Mehmet Lütfi ARSLAN ...................................................................................................... 211
Trakya Bölgesindeki Tarımsal Üreticilerin Ek Gelir Olanakları: Tarım Turizmi
Additional Income Opportunities for the Agricultural Producers in
Thrace: Agricultural Tourism
Dr. Harun HURMA, Doç. Dr. Ahmet KUBAŞ, Öğr. Gör. Çağdaş İNAN............................ 219
TURİZM - MARKALAŞMA
TOURISM - BRANDING
Destinasyon Markalaşması: Vize’nin Turizm Destinasyonu Olarak
Pazarlanması ve Markalaşması
Destination Branding: Marketing and Branding of Vize as a Touristic
Destination
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Kamil MALKOÇLU, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Nihat Kamil ANIL, Öğr. Gör. Ebru BİLGEN 231
City-Branding and It’s Effect on the Local Development: Can Kırklareli
Become A City Brand?
Arş. Gör. İskender GÜMÜŞ, Arş. Gör. Gökhan ÖVENÇ .................................................. 247
Şehir Markası Yaratma Süreci ve Marka Şehir Çerçevesinde Kırklareli
İlinin Değerlendirilmesi
Contributions of City-branding to Socio-economic Development
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Gülnur ETİ İÇLİ, Arş. Gör. Beste Burcu VURAL ................................................... 259
TURİZM VE BÖLGESEL KALKINMA
TOURISM AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Bölgesel Kalkınmada Turizmin Etkisi: Bozcaada-Gökçeada Arz Kesimi
Üzerine Araştırma
The Role of Tourism in Regional Development: A Research on Tourism
Supply of Bozcaada and Gökçeada
Öğr. Gör. Murat AKSU, Öğr. Gör. Bahadır SEZER, Öğr. Gör. Ali ÇAKIR .......................... 281
Çiftlik Turizminin Sosyoekonomik Kalkınmaya Etkileri: Trakya
Bölgesi İçin Oluşturulabilecek Stratejiler
Effects of Farm-based Tourism on Socio-Economic Development:
Possible Strategies for Thrace Region
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Kaplan UĞURLU .......................................................................................... 295
Bölgesel Kalkınma Farklılıklarının Giderilmesinde Turizm Sektörünün
Rolü ve Önemi
The Role and Importance of Tourism Industry about Removing
Regional Development Differences
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Nur ERSUN, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Kahraman ARSLAN .......................................... 317
XIII
YENİLENEBİLİR ENERJİ VE KALKINMA
RENEWABLE ENERGY AND DEVELOPMENT
Kırklareli İlinde Yenilenebilir Enerji Kaynakları Kullanımının Bölgesel
Kalkınmaya Olan Etkilerinin İncelenmesi
A Research on Effects of Using Renewable Energy Resources on Regional
Development in Kirklareli
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Bahtiyar DURSUN, Öğr. Gör. Tarkan PERAN ............................................. 335
Kırsal Turizmde Yenilenebilir Enerji Kaynaklarının Kullanılması:
Poyralı Köyü’nde Uygulanabilirliği
Use of Renewable Energy Sources in Rural Tourism: Practicability in
Village of Poyrali
Öğr. Gör. Ali ÇAKIR, Öğr. Gör. Gülay ÇAKIR, Sibel DURSUN,
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Bahtiyar DURSUN ........................................................................................ 347
1990-2010 Dönemi Organik Tarım Uygulamaları, Trakya Bölgesi’nin
Görünümü ve Gelecek Perspektifi
Organic Agricultural Applications Between 1990-2010, The Current
Outlook of Thrace and its Future Perspective
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Mustafa CANBAZ, Arş. Gör. Can Ahmet GENERAL, Arş. Gör. Ülfet İŞÇİ .. 357
Tarımsal Atıkların Değerlendirilmesinin, Yenilenebilir Enerji
Kaynakları Ve Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Açısından Değerlendirilmesi,
Tekirdağ İli Uygulaması
Evaluation of Using Agricultural Waste as Renewable Energy Resources
and Sustainable Development: An Application in Tekirdag
Prof. Dr. Necdet ÖZÇAKAR, Hasan BAKIN ...................................................................... 375
BÖLGESEL VERİMLİLİK
REGIONAL PRODUCTIVENESS
Kriz Ortamında Kırklareli İlinde Bulunan Firmaların Verimlilik Analizi
Efficiency Analysis of Firms in Kirklareli in Economic Crisis
Öğr. Gör. Fatma BUTUŞ, Öğr. Gör. Ayşe ANIL, Öğr. Gör. Tülay TOP ............................... 405
ISO 9001 Kalite Yönetim Sisteminin KOBİ’lerin Performanslarına
Etkisi: Kırklareli İlinde Bir Uygulama
Effects of ISO9001 Quality Management Systems on SMEs: An
Application in Thrace
Arş. Gör. Öznur AYDINER, Öğr. Gör. Yasin ÇAKIREL, Öğr. Gör. Ali GÖRENER ............. 413
Otel İşletmelerindeki İşgörenlerin İş Tatmini: Kocaeli ve Yalova Örneği
Work Satisfaction of Employees in Hotels: Kocaeli and Yalova as examples
Prof. Dr. Derman KÜÇÜKALTAN, Arş. Gör. Duygu TALİH, Öğr. Gör. Şeniz ÖZHAN ........ 433
EMEK - İSTİHDAM İLİŞKİSİ
LABOR - EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP
Sosyal İçerme Açısından Eski Hükümlülerin Girişimciliğe Yönlendirilmesi
ve Denetimli Serbestlik Faaliyetleri
Orientation of Old Prisoners to Entrepreneurship in the Perspective
of Social Inclusion and Applications of Supervised Liberty
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Ersin KAVİ, Öğr. Serdar Altun ........................................................................... 449
XIV
İçindekiler
Labor Market in Health Sector in Republic of Bulgaria,
Ass. Prof. N. Atanasov, PhD, Ass. R. Stoianova ................................................................. 463
Edirne Sanayi Sitesinde Çalışan İş Görenlerin Mobbinge Uğrama
Düzeylerinin Belirlenmesine Yönelik Yapılan Bir Araştırma
A Research Conducted to Determine Level of Mobbing on Employees in
Edirne Industrial Estate
Doç. Dr. Agah Sinan ÜNSAR .............................................................................................. 473
FİNANSAL GELİŞMELER VE TİCARET
FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND TRADING
Trakya Bölgesinin Kalkınmasında Bölgesel Planlama Yaklaşımı İhtiyacı ve
Planlama Modeli Önerisi
The Need for a Regional Planning Perspective on Development of Thrace
and Planning Model Suggestion
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Nur ERSUN, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Kahraman ARSLAN ............................................... 487
Türkiye’de Kalkınma Ajansları: Trakya Kalkınma Ajansı Örneği
Turkish Development Agencies: Thracian Development Agency as an
Example; Thracian Development Agency
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Nihat Kamil ANIL, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Kamil MALKOÇLU,
Öğr. Gör. Ömer Sinan PEHLİVAN ....................................................................................... 507
BÖLGESEL KALKINMANIN TARİHSEL BOYUTU
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Osmanlı Döneminde Balkan Kökenli İşgücünün ve İşletmecilerin
Ereğli Madenlerinin Gelişmesine Katkıları
The Contributions of Balkan Labor Force and Businessmen to the
Development of Eregli Mineral Resources in Ottoman Empire
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Hamdi GENÇ ............................................................................................... 525
Customs Registers In The Second Half Of The Nineteenth Century On
Ottoman Danubian Ports: Rules Of The Game In Ottoman Trade
Arş. Gör. Gökçen COŞKUN ALBAYRAK .......................................................................... 535
TARIMSAL VERİMLİLİK
AGRICULTURAL EFFICIENCY
Effects of Dietary VITASIL® on the Growth Performance of Carp
(Cyprinus caprio) Cultivated in a Recirculation System
Assist. Prof. Alexander ATANASOV, Assist. Prof. Zhivko ZHELEV,
Assoc. Prof. Veselin IVANOV, Galin NIKOLOV ................................................................ 551
Protein Levels in the Feed of Carp (Cyprinus caprio) on Cultivated in
Recirculation System
Prof. Yordan STAYKOV, Assist. Prof. Zhivko ZHELEV, Assoc. Prof. Veselin VIDEV,
Assist. Prof. Alexander ATANASOV ............................................................................... 555
Tarım Havzaları Üretim ve Destekleme Modelinin Bölgesel Kalkınma
Açısından Değerlendirilmesi
Regional Development-based Evaluation of Production and Support
Model for Agricultural Production Areas
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Gökhan UNAKITAN, Dr. Harun HURMA, Dr. Celal DEMİRKOL .............. 559
XV
KIRSAL KALKINMA VE REKABET
RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND COMPETITION
Contribution of Thrace Region to Competitive Sectors of Turkey
Assist. Prof. Adem BALTACI, Res. Assist. Huseyin BURGAZOGLU,
Res. Assist. Selver KILIC ................................................................................................... 573
Kendi İşini Kurma ve Girişimcilik Ruhu Ticaret Meslek Liselerinde
Girişimcilik Ruhu Üzerine Bir Alan Araştırması
Setting One’s Own Business and Spirit of Entrepreneurship
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Selami ÖZCAN, Yrd. Doç. Dr. H. Yunus TAŞ ............................................. 585
Kırsal Kalkınma Açısından İletişim ve Girişimcilik İlişkisi
Communication-Entrepreneurship Relationship in terms of Rural
Development
Arş. Gör. Zeynep ŞENEL, Prof. Dr. Aydın GÜREL ............................................................. 599
BÖLGESEL KALKINMA VE FİNANS
REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCE
Türkiye’de Finans Piyasasının Gelişim Seyrinde Katılım Bankacılığının Yeri
The Role of Participation Banking in the Development of Turkish
Financial Market
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Ferhat SAYIM, Arş. Gör. Özlem ÖZMEN ..................................................... 611
2008 Küresel Finansal Krizinin Türkiye ve Trakya Bölgesi Üzerine
Etkileri: Mukayeseli Bir Analiz
The Impacts Of Global Financial Crisis On Turkey and Thrace: A
Comparative Analysis
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Ayfer GEDİKLİ .............................................................................................. 635
Trakya Bölgesi’nde Tarım Sektörünün Finansmanında Kullanılan Banka
Kredilerinin Gelişimi: 2000–2010 Dönemi Karşılaştırmalı Bir Analiz
Development Process of the Bank Loans for the Agricultural Sector in
Thrace: A Comparative Analysis Covering 2000-2010
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Mustafa CANBAZ, Arş. Gör. Mevlüt CAMGÖZ ......................................... 665
BİLGİ - İLETİŞİM VE DIŞ TİCARETİN GELİŞİMİ
INFORMATION - COMMUNICATION AND
DEVELOPMENT OF FOREIGN TRADE
Şehirlerin Markalaşması ve Şehir Markası Oluşturmada Sembol
Yapılar: Çanakkale Örneği
City-branding and The Role of Symbolic Structures in City-branding
Process: Canakkale as an Example; (The Dardanelles)
Doç. Dr. Mehmet MARANGOZ, Prof. Dr. Günal ÖNCE, Arş. Gör. Hale ÇELİKKAN ....... 681
In the Thrace Region Use of Information and Communications Equation,
in the “Integrated Management Information Systems” for the
Information Production Process Development and Entrepreneurship
Dr. Filiz GÜLTEKİN KÖSE ................................................................................................. 701
XVI
İçindekiler
EĞİTİM, BÜTÇE VE PLANLAMA
EDUCATION, BUDGET AND PLANNING
E-commerce Security
Instructor Serdar CANBAZ ............................................................................................... 715
Implementation of ICT in education – case study in Trakia University
Associate Prof. Lina YORDANOVA, Chief Assist. Prof. Gabriela KIRYAKOVA,
Senior Assist. Prof. Nadezhda ANGELOVA ...................................................................... 735
Merkezi Yönetim Bütçesi İle İlişkileri Açısından Trakya Bölgesinin
İncelenmesi
An Analysis On Thrace Based On Its Relations With Central
Administration Budget
Prof. Dr. Naci B. MUTER, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Selçuk İPEK ................................................................ 757
Bölgesel Kalkınma ve Girişimci Üniversite İlişkisi: Anadolu
Üniversitesi Örneği
Relationship between Regional Development and Entrepreneur
University: Anatolia University as an Example
Öğr. Gör. Sevgi SEZER ......................................................................................................... 771
KIRSAL KALKINMA VE TARIM
RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND AGRICULTURE
Cumhuriyetin İlk Yıllarında (1923–1930) Kırklareli’nde TarımHayvancılık, Ticaret ve Sanayinin Gelişimi
Development of Agriculture, Stockbreeding, Trade and Industry in
Kirklareli in the first years of Republic (1923-1930)
Yrd. Doç. Dr. V. Türkan DOĞRUÖZ ............................................................................................. 795
Üretici Örgütlerinin Kırsal Kalkınma Yönünden Değerlendirilmesi:
Kayalıköy ve Kırklareli Barajları Sulama Kooperatifleri Örneği
Development-based Evaluation of Agricultural Production Organizations:
Example; Irrigation Associations for Kayalıköy and Kirklareli Dams
Dr. Erol ÖZKAN, Dr. Harun HURMA, Uzm. Başak AYDIN, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Erkan AKTAŞ,
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Gülen ÖZDEMİR, Doç. Dr. Ömer AZABAĞAOĞLU .................................... 811
Biyolojik Çeşitliliğin Korunmasının Önemi ve Hayvancılık Sektöründe
Sunduğu Ekonomik Fırsatlar
Importance of Protecting Biological Diversity and Its Economic
Opportunities for the Stockbreeding Sector
Hasan BAKIN, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Eser Kemal GÜRCAN ........................................................... 825
DOĞA VE SOSYOEKONOMİK DEĞERLER
NATURE AND SOCIOECONOMIC VALUES
Korunan Alanların Sosyo-Ekonomik Değeri Ve Yöre Halkının Yararlanma
Olanakları: İğneada Longoz Ormanları Milli Parkı Örneği
Socio-economic Value of Protected Areas and Opportunities for Local
Population to Benefit From These Areas: Example; Longoz Forest in
Igneada
Dr. Harun HURMA, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Murat ÖZYAVUZ, Dr. Murat CANKURT ................... 847
XVII
Sürdürülebilir Kalkınmada Biyosfer Rezervlerinin Önemi: İğneada
Longoz Ormanları Örneği
Importance of Biosphere Reservoirs on Sustainable Development:
Example of Igneada Longoz Forest
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Murat ÖZYAVUZ .............................................................................................. 859
Yıldız Dağları Kırsal Mimari Mirasının Turizm Amaçlı Kullanımı
Use of Yıldız Mountain Rural Architecture as a Touristic Area
Yrd. Doç. Dr. İzzet YÜKSEK ............................................................................................... 875
TARİHSEL SÜREÇTE SOSYOEKONOMİK YAPI
HISTORICAL PROCESS OF SOCIOECONOMIC STRUCTURE
20.yy Başlarında Rumeli Vilayetleri’nin Mali Gücü (1325–1329/1909–1912)
Financial Capabilities of Rumelian Provinces in Early 20th century
(1325 - 1329 / 1909 – 1912)
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Muharrem ÖZTEL ........................................................................................ 885
Kapanış Oturumu / Closing Session ............................................................. 901
İndeks ................................................................................................................... 927
Sempozyumdan Görüntüler ............................................................................. 931
XVIII
GİRİŞİMCİLİK - EĞİTİM
İLİŞKİSİ
ENTREPRENEURSHIP - EDUCATION
Innovative Entrepreneurship in Selected
Countries: The Case of Turkey, Bulgaria and
Romania
Öğr. Gör. Dr. A. Orçun SAKARYA1
Abstract
Following the Lisbon Decisions, innovation became as an important priorities
for increasing the competitiveness throughout the European Union. In this
context, innovation performances of the member states as well as some of the
candidate ones are evaluated on yearly basis. The common tool used for monitoring
innovation performance is Summary Innovation Index of European Innovation
Scoreboard. Summary Innovation Index assesses innovation under four sections:
human resources, firm activities, economic effects and innovators among which
entrepreneurship is one of the important indicators.
At the firm level, innovation is important notably in value creation stage not
only for new start-ups but also existing firms. Commercialization of new ideas,
search for the new domains and markets require an innovation approach to business
making which underlines the relation between innovation and entrepreneurship.
Accordingly, this relationship has been increasingly considered in order to foster
sector-based competitiveness and also became an important policy issue in the
related countries’ macroeconomic agenda.
The aim of this descriptive study is to compare innovative entrepreneurship
policies of Bulgaria, Romania, and Turkey. Following the introduction, first
part of the study involves investigation of the linkage between innovation and
1. Çankaya Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi
137
entrepreneurship. Then, based on the recent data, an outlook of innovation
performances of three countries has been examined. Third part of the study involves
the assessment of similarities and differences of innovative entrepreneurship
profiles of the related countries as well as the effects of applied policies. At the
discussion part, it has been deduced that innovation enablers in all countries
look similar; however, there are significant differences in product and process
innovation activities. Possible policy alternatives for improving the innovation
supported entrepreneurship initiatives and further research areas have also been
mentioned in the conclusion part.
1. Introduction: Dimensions of innovation
Concern with both emerging sources of global competition and the necessity
of continuous improvement focused firms’ attention on the available strategies
to respond to these challenges where innovation is one of the important ones.
Innovation basically includes; technological change of new products, new
services, new operations, processes, new information technologies as well as new
implementations in management. Here, the commercialization of the products and
services and the added value determines the innovation performance.
Innovation is not only important for firms; it also influences countries’ economic
policies. As an important agenda item it also involves multiple dimensions. One
of them is about the coordination between industrial and the countries’ wealth
policies; therefore it includes many indicators including economic and social
indicators as gross domestic product, productivity growth and so on. In such an
environment, especially the sustainability of innovation requires the presence of
a proper institutional infrastructure both in public and the private sector sides in
order to leverage innovation inputs2. To attain the derivative effects of innovation,
the related actors’3 cooperation is also vital especially for dissemination effects.
The actors’ role can be observed in a systematic concept which can also be defined
as the national innovation system (NIS); an institutional network which leads
imports or implement new technologies. Alternatively, NIS can be the relations
that are used for production and diffusion of new useful economic information
or “institutions cluster” which may define innovative performances of the related
firms. Lastly, NIS can also be defined as a dynamic system that defines information,
regulation and finance flow between the institutions or firms. Typical indicators to
assess the structure of the NIS are research and development (R&D) efforts, the
quality of educational systems, collaborations between universities and industry,
and the availability of venture capital (Negro and Hekkert, 2008)4
2. According to EIS the innovation inputs (enablers) adds up to 29 under the headings of “human
resources” “firm activities” and the outputs “economic effects” and “innovators”
3. The actors are the ones in the National Innovation System (NIS), see Sharif, N. and Chan, I. (2004)
“Conceptualizing Innovation Management and Culture in the Hong Kong Special Administrative
Region (HKSAR): An Exploratory Study of Organization-Specific Critical Success Factors”
Innovation,Entrepreneurship and culture: The Interacton Between Technology, Progress and Economic
Growth, Edward Elgar Publishing, Massachusetts, 255 p. for the linkages between the related actors.
4. See Engelbrecht. H.J. and Darrogh, J. (1999). A Comparative macro-level assessment of New Zealand’s
‘ national innovation system. Prometheus 17: 283 for alternative aspects of NIS
138
Girişimcilik - Eğitim İlişkisi / Entrepreneurship - Education
The second dimension is the importance of innovation for the firms. Similar
to regional development, innovation dynamics are primarily used for increasing
a firm’s competitiveness. For example, firms may use the advantages of radical
and incremental innovations5 while stressing on the increase in the intellectual
capital6 pool providing a basis for a better innovative environment, facilitating
market research and leading to the generation of new ideas at a firm level. Other
firm-basis possible consequences include increase in research and development
(R&D) activities, collective bargaining power with authorities in relation with the
needs of the firm, supply chain improvement as a result of effective networking
activities, development of foreign trade opportunities and technology support
which may result in productivity increase in the firm level. Some of these dynamics
have a direct impact on the firm’s competitive advantage.
In this context, new regional policies have been developed where much attention
is focused on innovation and networks of cooperation between companies as strong
elements that must integrate actions undertaken by the regional administration
and supported by all the existing institutions in the region (Diez, 2001). When
the geographical proximity issues are considered, innovation can also be focused
in a regional dimension; going along with the “regional innovation policies”
which are generally economic, such as welfare creation in a certain zone and its
sustainable development. These policies generally interact with national R&D and
science policies and overlap with industrial, labor and social policies. Some of the
examples of regional innovation initiatives can be stated as the ones in which tacit
and explicit information is shared throughout platforms, clustering activities, all
becoming an integral part of regional development activities7.
Entrepreneurship being one of the input indicators and acting as the motivator
of innovative implications in all areas of the industry; keeps its relative important
place in the innovation-based economic policies. The input/output dimensions we
already mentioned provide the mainstream of our theoretical approach. In our
study, some of the inputs and outputs will be analyzed in detail for three countries
in a comparative point of view where entrepreneurship indicator is specifically
used as a benchmark. Accordingly, the goal of this descriptive study is to compare
Turkey, Bulgaria and Romania regarding their innovation-based entrepreneurship
and to reach some conclusions concerning their competitiveness. The link between
5. Incremental innovation leads to small improvements to existing products and business processes. It can
be thought of as an exercise in problem-solving where the goal is clear but how to get there needs to be
solved. At the opposite end, radical innovation results in new products or services delivered in entirely
new ways (Davila, T, Epstein, M.J. and Shelton, R.D. (2006) “Making Innovation Work: How to Manage
It, Measure It and Profit from It”, Wharton School Publishing Upper Saddle River, N.J., 334 p).
6. Keeping its relatively important place in the literature of knowledge economics (Amidon, D.M. (2003).
“The Innovation Superhighway” Butterworth-Heinemann, Amsterdam, 379p.) intellectual capital, (or
intangible assets), are operating as “business brains” in organizations and convert the tacit and explicit
knowledge into added value in basic terms.
7. It is also possible to mention the systematization of innovation at the regional level. Regional Innovation
Systems which comprises five core elements: (1) the internal organization of firms, (2) the inter-firm
relationship, (3) the role of the public sector, (4) the institutional set-up of the financial sector, (5)
Research and Development (R&D) intensity and R&D organizations’ infrastructure (Zhu, D. and Tann,
J. (2005) “A regional innovation system in a small-sized Region: A clustering model in Zhongguancun
Science Park”, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 17(3),pp.375).
139
innovation, entrepreneurship and competitiveness is overviewed in the second part;
whereas the innovation and innovation-based entrepreneurship performances of
the related countries are analyzed in the third and fourth parts respectively. Last
part of the study includes the conclusion and brief political recommendations.
2. Going back to roots: The link between innovation, entrepreneurship
and competitiveness
Why should entrepreneurs also be good innovators? Search for the answer
takes us back to the classical definitions of both entrepreneurship and innovation.
We already mentioned that the innovation should include an added value8 and
possible creation of a commercial product. Commercialization of products also
involves decision making by the creator, or the manager, which might affect the
product success in the related market. Here, the innovative strategic decision9
made by the entrepreneur is shaped by the knowledge infrastructure and vocational
abilities. Such strategic decisions also identify the process of (e.g. new technology
adoption10, the degree of manufacturer and user innovations11 and so on) which
is required for product or service innovations as well as the diffusion of the
innovative ideas. During the process, an entrepreneur is the person who searches
value creation, pursues others who create new value and comes up with new ideas
to generate opportunities for maximizing the benefits12 on the road to innovation.
We should also note that some of the innovations require risk-taking behavior,
which is also one of the characteristics of an entrepreneur. While entrepreneurs
also compete with each other, entrepreneurship is distinct as a factor of production
in that other people‘s innovations can pave the way for one‘s own innovations
by creating further opportunities for new ventures (Henrekson and Sanandaji,
2010). On the other side; innovative companies have an entrepreneurial culture13
8. Innovation might increase the tangible benefits of the product or service that appeal to the recipients’
senses, in the form of better value; perhaps a product with a larger range of functions, better durability,
or better design, is easier to use or is lower priced than the competition for a similar specification.
The intangible benefits take the form of a better designed or functioning product or service, efficient
customer service, a better experience, and a feeling of greater satisfaction or enjoyment from the
purchasing and usage process (Lowe, R and Mariott, S. (2006) “Enterprise: Entrepreneurship and
Innovation:Concepts, Context and Commercialization” Elsevier, Burlington, 444p.).
9. Entrepreneurial aspiration reflects the qualitative nature of entrepreneurial activity (Bosma, N., Acs, J.A.,
Autio, E., Coduras, A. and J.Levie (2008). “Global Entrepreneurship Monitor” Executive Report, 2008, 66p.)
10. The classical sequence of research, discovery, patenting and approval, production, marketing and
adoption of new technologies.
11. An innovation is a user innovation when the developer expects to benefit by using it; an innovation is
a manufacturer innovation when the developer expects to benefit by selling it.
12. With a Schumpeterian point of view, as entrepreneurs innovate rather than invent, they are “first
movers”, a position rendering them temporary monopoly power with associated huge monopoly
profits. In turn, the profits entrepreneurs make attract imitators. Moreover, Te Velde, R. (2004)
“Schumpeter’s Theory of Economic Development Revisited” Innovation, Entrepreneurship and
culture: The Interacton Between Technology, Progress and Economic Growth Edward Elgar Publishing,
Massachusetts, 255 p.clarifies the role of entrepreneur in his study.
13. See Ulijn, J and Brown, T.E. (2004) “Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Culture, A Matter of Interaction
Between Technology, Progress and Economic Growth? An introduction” Innovation, Entrepreneurship
and culture: The Interaction Between Technology, Progress and Economic Growth, Edward Elgar
Publishing, Massachusetts, 255 p. for a detailed explanation of the link between entrepreneurship and
corporate culture.
140
driven by inspirational leaders, skilled management, and informed and engaged
employees. As a result, entrepreneurs need to search purposefully for the sources
of innovation, the changes and their symptoms that indicate opportunities for
successful innovation (Drucker, 1984).
Moving towards the country scope, the relation between innovation and
entrepreneurship becomes more visible in the area of competitiveness. Highpotential entrepreneurship is consistently linked to national competitiveness
measures (competitiveness, government efficiency, technology index, information
and communication technologies (ICT)); it is also strongly linked with a strong
science, education and technology base (participation in secondary and tertiary
education, scientific publications per capita (adopted from DTI, 2003). These links
is strengthened by the dissemination and efficient exploitation of the generic
technologies by the entrepreneur’s efforts.
It is possible to mention countries in which entrepreneurship is the key driver
for the innovation in economic terms where, the entrepreneurs are assumed to
drive the innovation in a country and initiate structural changes in the sectors. In
this framework, some of the main issues towards competitiveness is the creation
of the new and innovative jobs for employment and implementation of the new
technologies. The productivity contribution to the country economy is another
advantage which is especially retrieved from small incumbents, where, the number
and intensity of the small-scale entrepreneurs might have a significant contribution
towards the competitiveness.
Some of the components for competitiveness can also be assumed as
the innovation inputs of a country, hence, a mutual relationship between
entrepreneurship and innovation can be imagined at this stage. The most important
inputs that is related to innovative environment is the ones that basically concerns
government support for entrepreneurship (such as firm and market structure,
education, finance, related R&D activities as well as the legal framework). Moreover,
other inputs such as technology readiness, macroeconomic stability and financial
market sophistication are also among the significant ones that might affect the
entrepreneurship based innovation.
In most of the entrepreneurial activities intellectual capital plays a vital
role. Human capital development can be considered as an initiator of the
entrepreneurial environment which has to be supported by the broad access to
skills and competencies and it especially evolve with the capability to learn. In this
stage, the broadband formal education, life-long learning, labor skill improvement
are also important elements. Regarding the industry, Government’s main role
is to improve institutional frameworks (e.g. incubators, management of public
research organizations) and incentive structures (e.g. regulations governing
researchers’ mobility and entrepreneurship) (OECD, 2004). Hence, assessment of
the relation between innovation and entrepreneurship can also provide insights
for benchmarking countries’ innovative performances, which we deal in the next
sections.
141
3. Turkey, Bulgaria and Romania: The innovative performances
Country innovation assessment requires certain methodologies to be followed.
European Innovation Scoreboard (EIS) of the European Union (EU) is one of the
most popular ones. As a result of the Lisbon Strategy which aimed to develop a
European area for innovation, research and development; European TrendChart
on Innovation gives a general idea in the framework of innovative performance
evaluation for the countries. One the of the main indicators that has been used in
the TrendChart is EIS which collects and analyses trends in key indicators across
the EU27, candidate countries and the US and Japan. In this framework, Summary
Innovation Index (SII) which gives an “at a glance” overview of aggregate national
innovation performance. In SII scale highest value is 1 whereas lowest value is 0.
In EIS, countries are divided into 4 groups;
1-Innovation leaders are the ones with national overall innovation scores are
above the EU mean.
2-Innovation followers are the ones with national overall score below the
innovation leaders but equal or above of the EU 27,
3-Moderate innovators are the countries, whose scores are below the EU 27,
4-Cathcing –up countries with national innovation scores are well below the EU
27 but increasing over time.
In the next two sections, EIS in fact has been considered as a methodology
in three country’s innovation assessment as well as the entrepreneurship. The
respective countries are Romania and Bulgaria, two of the newest members of EU
and Turkey one of the candidate countries.
3.1. Innovation in Bulgaria
To begin with, it can be observed that EU accession has contributed on the
innovation activities in Bulgaria. Although Bulgaria is one of the catching-up
countries, the increase in the innovation performance is satisfactory. Possible
reasons for such an improvement can be cited as the clear understanding of the
innovation policies by the government and the establishment of the facilitating
institutions such as the technology transfer centers, National Science Fund and
National Innovation Fund, latter as the financing institution.
In fact, the main objectives of the national innovation policy are formulated
in the National Innovation Strategy (NIST), adopted in 2004. This is the most
important document that is crucial for the development of the innovation
system and growth in the innovation potential of the Bulgarian economy. The
other document underlining the goals for the innovation policy is the National
Reform Programme (2008-2010) (EC, 2009(1)). The detailed formulation of goals,
activities, timeline and resources for their implementation presented in the NIST
are the background for the development of the innovation capacity in the country.
142
(Adopted from EC, 2009(1)) Moreover, a number of Framework Programme 7
(FP7) projects in progress in the area of innovation, innovation oriented business
culture and contributing to policy making efforts.
Regarding the innovation governance system, the policymaking is basically
handled by the ministries whereas the implementation by the state agencies. In
this framework, Bulgarian Small and Medium Enterprises Promotion Agency
(BSMEPA), the Ministry of Education and Science (MES) The Ministry of Economy,
Energy and Tourism (MEET) are the contributing institutions. The Ministry of
Education, Youth and Science (MEYS), National Council for Science and Research,
The Ministry of Labor and Social Policy are also acting as additional main
innovation policy-related government bodies on the policy formulation side. Also
the establishment of a National Innovation Council is also aimed in recent policy
formulations.
We can assess the innovation in Bulgaria in the basis of strengths and
weaknesses. One of the strengths is the increasing number of R&D staff, mostly
condensed in the public sector. Besides, the promising role of the ICT is another
potential for innovative implications in the country. Such implications are reflected
in the market side by the organizational innovations in the first place, marketing
innovations in the second and lastly product and process ones respectively. New
product and process innovations are generally implemented simultaneously.
Among the companies dealing with innovation; half of them increased their sales
with as a result of the related innovaton efforts. Basically, around three quarter of
the process innovation is related to the ICT capacity in the field in the EU, whereas
this situation is quite similar for Bulgaria. On the education side, the strongest
point is the increase in the Science Citation Index publications as a recent trend.
At the same token, the participation of the universities to FP7 programs is also
expanding.
Regarding the weaknesses, R&D funding and recruitment of qualified staff can
be observed as the first problem. Especially, in the area of recruitment; sectoral
distribution of R&D staff had a decreasing trend in recent years. One of the basic
reasons can be imagined as that the education is not focused as the prior issue
notably for innovation, rather, sector integrated innovations is mostly preferred in
the country. Moreover, innovation funding which has been negatively affected by
the recent economic crises also caused a decline in the R&D activities and patent
activities are also weakened. Recent economic crises in question also slowed down
the economic and educational reforms in the country. Another weakness can be
seen as lack of innovation awareness jeopardizing the dissemination of innovation
throughout the country. Although the NIS system as well as the related actors
is properly established, the coordination between the public and private sectors
seems to have more refinement.
As a result, innovation policies needed to be renewed in the country. To solve
the problems stated above some new policies as well as activities are anticipated in
addition to current NIS which is the backbone for innovation activities. They can
be counted as follows;
143
1-Establishment of technology transfer centers,
2-Establishment of entrepreneurship centers in universities,
3-Supporting existing clusters, developing new financial support schemes for
innovation (Bulgarian Development Bank, business angels etc) and the operational
program: competitiveness in which the innovation is the mainstream.
3.2. Innovation in Romania
Similar to Bulgaria, Romania is also one of the catching-up countries in which
innovation lives its developing stages. Although innovation level is lower in
comparison to other EU countries, the increase ratio is the one of the highest.
Regarding the governance system, there are basically two administrative bodies
in the design and implementation of the innovation policies in the country, the
National Authority for Scientific Research (NASR) and Ministry of Education
and Research and innovation (MERI). While NASR remains as the key player in
the design and implementation of innovation policies, it now collaborates with
a wider range of government agencies that took up responsibilities directly or
indirectly related to innovation management (EC, 2009 (2)). On the other hand,
in developing its policies, MERI is advised by a number of bodies, one of which is
the Advisory Board for R&D and Innovation, comprised of representatives from
the science, technology and industrial communities; which can be imagined as
important assets for the innovativeness. Moreover, in order to foster the innovation
process in the country, more than 600 research organizations (half of which are
public owned) are active. Their basic goal is to foster R&D technical services. Such
research organizations provide an efficient infrastructure for the implementation
of innovative activities.
One of the strengths for innovative implications in question is the EU
membership. In political terms, improvements in the competitiveness and
capacity of the R&D via upgrading of scientific and technical competence, including
equipment and facilities; a focus on key centers of scientific and technological
excellence; collaborative R&D projects involving research institutes, universities
and firms; and the development of clusters and networks of key innovation system
actors are aimed in project basis. Related funding is undertaken in competitive
basis. An additional strength is the increasing trend in the technology intensive
industries such as ICT. It can be noted that there are more innovative companies
in industry than in the service sector. It has been observed that the large scale
companies are more innovative than the small and medium ones. In here, total
spending for innovation, the spending on machines, equipment and software has
the biggest weight an out of all number of innovative companies and approximately
19% declared the innovation has been achieved through co-operation. The main
effects on innovation are the improvement in quality of goods and services and the
increase in manufacturing capacity (Dragan, 2009). Lastly, the internationalization
of the Romanian firms are legally promoted, which is also another potential factor
for fostering firm-based innovations especially at the technology transfer level,
meaning that the R&D at the firm side is considered as an important issue.
144
Need for improvement for R&D activities, especially at the firm side can be
observed as the first weakness, despite the presence of the strong infrastructure.
Similar issue can also be observed in the academia in together with the quantity
of R&D staff which showed a decreasing trend in recent years. Funding problems
and brain drain appear as two important reasons of these problems. Similar to
Bulgaria, recent economic crises had different negative effects on the industrial
and firm-based innovative processes. In a wider context, the dissemination of
innovation culture can be considered as problematic both in industry and academia.
Moreover, it has also been observed that the enterprise innovation level has not
been consistently supported by an operational technology transfer system despite
the R&D centers opened up by the firms in the country.
Regarding the general performance of the country over the past five years, finance
and support and throughputs have been the main drivers of the improvement in
innovation performance, in particular as a result from strong growth in Public R&D
expenditures (18.0%), Private credit (17.4%), Broadband access by firms (24.3%),
Community trademarks (36.0%) and Community designs (44.3%). Performance in
firm investments and Innovators has increased at a lower pace (EC, 2009 (2))
The main objectives for innovation policy in Romania are defined in one of
the most important innovation policy documents, the 2007-13 National Strategy
for Research, Development and Innovation which has two key dimensions: (i) an
internal, national dimension, which aims to strengthen the national research,
development and innovation (RDI) performance, economic competitiveness
and social well being; and (ii) a European and international dimension, which
aims to ensure the convergence of national RDI policies to EU RDI orientations
and priorities in view of a smooth integration of the country into the European
Research Area (ERA) and reduce the gap in relation to other EU Member States
(EC, 2009(2))
3.3. Innovation in Turkey
Turkey is one of the catching up countries and its increase ratio is above the
EU countries in terms of innovation. Supreme Council of Science and Technology
(BTYK) acts as the highest authority in the NIS. Its primary duties are supporting the
government during the identification of long-term science and technology policies,
setting R&D goals in science and technology areas, mobilizing public institutions
within R&D plans/programs. Second institution is The Scientific and Technological
Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) which is the main implementer of the
policies designed by BTYK. The mission of TUBITAK is to develop scientific and
technological policies in line with national priorities and in cooperation with all
sectors and related establishments. Moreover, a number of ministries are also
active in the process.
Regarding the strengths, Turkey has a well established national innovation
infrastructure and input variables are not badly affected from the recent economic
crises except the ones that are related to funding of innovation, having a negative
145
effect on firms’ (most of them being as SMEs in general) competitiveness. Human
resources at the academia side are another potential for the innovative activities,
which yielded a dramatic increase in the scientific outputs especially in the last
five years. Investments in knowledge (education, R&D, innovation training) and
innovation infrastructures (broadband penetration) is another strength, and the
R&D expenses at both and public sides look promising. As a result, the ratio of
high technology exports increased as well as the number of innovative companies.
Although Turkey is not an EU member, candidateship integration projects’ effect
is also significant on developing innovation activities throughout the sectors.
Lastly, increasing ratio of the private funding for innovation can be considered as
another asset.
One of the most significant weaknesses is the commercialization of innovation
due to the lack of qualified human resources in the business side. The deficiencies in
the firm investments in innovation in general terms are among the other problems
weakening the commercialization process. Consequently, although increased in the
last years, patent activities are still far below the EU level14. This situation is also
another reflection of the lack of innovation awareness in the country, where, the
culture promoting the intellectual property rights needs to be improved. Another
weakness is the early stage capital, that is, the lack of venture capital mechanisms,
as well as demand, reflecting the second negative effect of the deficiencies in
innovation culture. In the area of commercialization again; empowerment of
cooperation between universities and industry may yield positive results, despite
increasing demand for similar independent collaboration projects. Last problem is
about the innovation governance system where the coordination and cooperation
among the institutions has still more to achieve.
The goals and objectives of innovation policy in Turkey are covered in the
following main official documents: The Ninth Development Plan (2007-13), the
Medium-Term Programme (2008-10) issued by the State Planning Organization
(DPT), the Implementation Plan for the National Science and Technology Strategy
(2005-10) and the National Innovation Strategy (2008-10) prepared by TUBITAK
and approved by the BTYK (EC, 2009 (3)). Some of the guidelines are; increasing the
gross domestic expenditure of R&D as a percentage of GDP 15as well as GERD per
capita, increasing number of researchers as well as the number of SMEs innovating
in house and their mutual cooperation. Regarding the ones that concern the output
variables, increasing the number of patents and scientific outputs as a whole in
conjunction to high-tech products can be noted. 2008-2010 National Innovation
Strategy is especially important as it provides a reference for Turkey’s short-term
innovation strategies and principally includes tips for increasing innovation-based
competitiveness of the country by stressing on focal innovation strategies such
as; promotion of entrepreneurship, innovation and productivity, encouragement
14. Between years 1995 and 2009 domestic applications constituted about 23,5% of total (domestic+foreign)
applications in the country (TPI. (2010) Yearly Patent Statistics, Turkish Patent Institute. Obtained
through Internet, http://www.tpe.gov.tr/portal/default_en.jsp?sayfa=124).
15. The ratio is 0,78 as of 2008 (TUBITAK, 2010. R&D statistics, The Scientific and Technological Research
Council of Turkey. Obtained through Internet, http://www.tubitak.gov.tr/tubitak_content_files/
BTYPD/istatistikler/BTY01.pdf)
146
and creation of sustainable, strong and competitive markets throughout the
country, establishment of infrastructures convenient for innovation in all fields,
development of international cooperation, development of the innovation system’s
governance and coordination across stakeholders.
3.4. Entrepreneurship In Three Countries
In this section we only concentrate in one of the input variables, the
entrepreneurship for the latest year available, 2006. Table 1 provides a brief
overview of the entrepreneurship performances in three countries.
Table 1. Entrepreneurship performance for selected countries in 2006
(Adopted from EC, 2009(1);(2);(3))
Linkages & entrepreneurship
SMEs innovating in-house
Innovative SMEs collaborating
with others
Public-private co-publications
(2-year avg.)
Turkey
Growth
Bulgaria
Growth Romania
Growth
28.2%
0.0%
15.1%
0.0%
17.9%
2.6%
5.3%
0.0%
3.8%
5.0%
2.9%
0.6%
0.3%
1.2%
0.5%
19.4%
3.1%
6.4%
It can be observed from Table 1 that the ratio of the SMEs innovating in-house
is the highest in Turkey followed with a ratio of 28,2% followed by Romania
(17,9%) and Bulgaria (15,1%). Same theory holds in the area of innovative SMEs
collaborating with each other by percentages of 5,3; 5 and 3,8 for Turkey, Romania
and Bulgaria respectively. However, Romania takes the lead when public-private
co-publications are in question (3,1%). It is followed by Bulgaria and Turkey. For
the same years in question; EU mean value for SMEs 40% and 9,45% for SMEs
innovating in house and innovative SMEs collaborating respectively, meaning that,
three countries are still below the EU average. To be able to discover the variables
affecting the entrepreneurship in all three countries, section below overviews the
entrepreneurship performances.
Reasons for the relatively low level of development of entrepreneurship
in Romania can be related to the restrictions faced by small firms, in terms of
resources and their vulnerability to environmental change and uncertainty, good
understanding of the factors and mechanisms that explain the development
of firms (Nicoleta and Simona, 2009). In brief, we can mention two important
characteristics of the innovative entrepreneurship in the country: First; the
most important innovators are the large enterprises in the country as we already
mentioned. Secondly, it can be observed that the some of the enterprises belong
to a group of companies that are based abroad. It should be quickly noted that;
foreign partnerships are anticipated to foster technology transfers and increase the
innovativeness of the firms in general.
147
The first group of barriers behind innovative entrepreneurships is the financial
problems that we already mentioned. Some of the entrepreneurs suffered of limited
access to innovation funds in the past. Moreover, the allocation of the funds also
showed a heterogeneous profile, however, in a way it also contributed to the
technological infrastructure required for innovative activities. An example for this
situation is the recent technological profile of machinery and equipment which can
be seen as a factor for facilitating innovation16 and speeded-up process innovations.
One of the indicators of this situation is the fact tat the main part of innovation
expenditures was allocated to machines, installations, equipments and software.
This shows an increase by 20% compared to the previous periods (Adopted from
Sipos, 2009) Another important point is the allocation of funds for the quality,
where, investment on goods and services quality seems like the most important
opportunity for increasing the innovativeness of the existing entrepreneurships.
For the resolution of the problem, a risk capital fund is planned to be established
in the period covering 2007-13. In this framework, following schemes promoting
entrepreneurship and can be efficient solutions for innovative enterprise setups;
*Grant Support Scheme for Start-up businesses covering all regions, Micro
Enterprises and new SMEs under the joint EU-Romania Programme for economic
and social cohesion.
*The micro-credit scheme entitled as The Micro-Loan Programme developed by
the Romanian- American Investment Fund.
*The National Council of Private SMEs agreed special partnerships for SMEs
access to credits (Adopted NASR, 2006)
Second group of barriers is the one that is related with the qualified human
resource potential which might slow down required intellectual capital for the new
innovations as well as innovation management efforts. The lack of qualified human
capital can be somehow related with the limited cooperation among the industry and
the research institutions (e.g. the universities) in addition to the lack of a qualified
human resource pool and related databases. Moreover, weakening of the “research”
profile of the institutes after privatization can also be perceived as a negative effect
on innovativeness. Here, evolving training programs for entrepreneurs appears as
a solution for improving the human resources that are willing to innovate.
Third group of barriers can be stated as the low level of cooperation between
ending up as a shading effect for knowledge spin-offs. The focus on the low-cost
production factors for competitiveness can be assumed as another barrier behind
the innovativeness in this group.
However, it is also possible to mention a group of potentials for innovation.
At a first glance; it can be stated that the privatization empowered the
16. Facilitating innovation can be defined as the one that make the access to information easier. In
this framework, enabling technologies (e.g. information technologies’ infrastructure) also enhance
interactive learning capacities especially in order to reach the goals of open-innovation strategies. See
Van de Vrande, V., De Jong, J., Vanharbekec, W. and M.De Rochemont (2009) “Open Innovation in
SMEs : Trends, Motives and Management Challenges”, Technovation, 29, pp.423 for the explanation
of open innovation.
148
establishment of new SMEs, some of the regions gained a competitive ground
and consequently, the diversity of the activities and companies in certain regions
expanded both in production and service sectors. Accordingly, the concern for
innovation and technological development also improved. Another opportunity
for the development of innovative activities is the intensified usage of information
technologies. However, strong regional differences still exist among the SMEs and
limited development profile of the SMEs in less-favored areas seems like a current
problem.
In Bulgaria, highly entrepreneurship is definitive for the development of some
industries of the national economy (e.g. telecom). Especially small or micro scale
enterprises are dealing with organizational innovation, but their number is not
many and innovative entrepreneurships slightly decreased in recent years. Control
and measuring instruments and apparatus takes the export leadership. In here, it
can also be said that some local-techno hubs are specifically dealing with novelty in
entrepreneurship.
One of the most significant problems entrepreneurs are facing is the high R&D
costs. On the other hand, where R&D is independently conducted within business
enterprises, including the cases when entrepreneurial activities evolve directly
from it, it may remain unreported and not formally recorded from time to time. The
cooperation among business, science and other institutions in innovative projects
in Bulgaria is weak; the percentage of innovative SMEs collaborating in innovation
is lower (EC, 2009 (1)). Although the cooperation between industry and academia
can be stated as leverage for a satisfactory base for the knowledge spin-offs, the
informality of such cooperation seems not exactly reflected in statistics. Last group
of problems is related with the intellectual capital. Notably the small enterprises
are suffering of a lack of qualified human resources. SMEs also suffer from a
lack of sufficient information financial inflows for creating innovative products
implementing information and communication technologies and establishing the
required technological infrastructure for innovative purposes.
Regarding the policy implementations for some of the problems’ stated above,
it can be observed that the category ‘markets and innovation culture’ is of a
marginal significance as to the range of support. A major part of policy measures
in this category is focused on consultancy services, entrepreneurship education
and fiscal incentives to the use of intellectual property rights. Attention is also
paid also to the diffusion of innovative technologies, products and services (EC,
2009 (1)). Moreover, the largest number of innovation policy measures in Bulgaria
supports diffusion of technologies in enterprises (35% of all measures). Having in
mind the nature of innovation activities in the country is mainly based on adopting
advanced technologies and processes, this policy focus appropriately reflects the
present needs of the innovation enterprises in Bulgaria. It should also be noted
that two aspects of the innovation process, i.e. awareness raising amongst firms on
innovation and the promotion of entrepreneurship/start up, which are addressed
by a significant number of measures, correspond to the existing challenges in the
national innovation system (EC, 2009(1)) .
149
Alike in Romania, EU funds establish an important step for funding innovative
entrepreneurships. In order to tackle the financial problem we already stated,
a positive sign can also be assumed as the establishment of the The Bulgarian
Development Bank (BDB) started its activities in the end of 2008. One of the 3
programmmes of the BDB is the high technologies programme. The BDB aims
support every economically sound and environmental investment in the area
of high technologies (EC, 2009 (1)). In conjunction with some other measures
for start-ups such as venture capital, BDB also serves for capital scheme as an
instrument supporting innovation and technologies in SMEs. EU practice also
shows that micro-financing is important for innovative entrepreneurship. At
this stage; the middle-sized enterprises can be assumed as more innovative when
compared to the other ones. Analysis of the number, structure and dynamics of the
legal entities registered in the non-financial sector indicates that micro, small and
medium start-up enterprises have steadily increased in the period 1996 – 2008.
Their number as a relative share compared to the preceding year dwindled during
two periods (2001 – 2002 and 2008), mostly in 2008 when the overall number
of micro, small and medium businesses decreased by 2.4 % compared to the year
before (Arc Fund, 2010).
Considering the fact that majority of the firms are SMEs in Turkey; innovationSME connection is very important in Turkish industry because SMEs are mainly
responsible of transforming science and technology to the products, production
methods and services that satisfies the market demand.
Basic problems regarding the SME innovativeness can be summarized in three
groups;
a)Cost factors: It has been observed that some of the private sector firms view
innovation R&D as a costly process in because of a lack of monetary resources
and disability of getting funds from outside resources. Accordingly, knowhow purchase seems as a cheaper option in this case.
b)Knowledge factors: As a result of the problems of education problems
mentioned at the first group of variables, Firms also suffer from a lack of
qualified staff especially at vocational basis. Moreover, they do also suffer
from a lack of technologies and market knowledge being as the additional
factors that accelerates the related pitfall. These two factors slow-down R&D
activities at firm basis.
c)Demand factors: Some of the SMEs in Turkey also suffer from the weak
demand for innovative products in the markets that they operate.
Involvement in new innovation management activities plays a key role for
solving some of the problems stated above. Innovation culture in conjunction with
the organizational innovation displays a potential for the implementation of future
innovation activities. The main leverage in here is that the second generation of
managers in SMEs gives importance to organizational innovation as a result of a
paradigm shift in managerial implementations providing a strong basis for future
innovative activities.
150
Similar to Romania, another problem appears as the lack of cooperation among
some of the firms preventing the firms from benefiting of the knowledge spillovers,
primarily at sector basis. Consequently, this situation causes a decrease in the
sector competitiveness as well as its development. The essence of the problem is
related to the fact that they do not undertake common innovative activities but
they undertake them uniquely. Another dimension of the related problem is its
negative reflection to the cooperation between the university and the private sector.
Remaining problems can be briefly counted as the extension of the innovation
culture among the regions and the vulnerable situation of the patent activities.
In Turkey financing of innovation shows an increasing trend. When we take
firm-based R&D funding as an example for the promotion of innovative activities,
we can say that its financing was basically handled by the public side and that in
recent years, the funds afforded for the innovation is gradually increasing at the
private sector side. Similar to the other countries investment in high technology
and uniquely the know-how transfer is quite popular in the medium and above sized
enterprises; however, smaller ones are suffering of a lack of funds for establishing
an efficient innovative infrastructure.
Another potential is about the role of the independent projects, some of which
are EU supported ones. Such independent projects serve for optimal dissemination
of innovation throughout the country as well as the firms17, in other words,
they act as leverage mechanism within for the firms. Being mostly cooperation
projects, such initiatives are also assumed to foster the innovation capability of
the related stakeholders as well as regions being as the “pilot projects” in certain
ones. However we should also note that required conditions such as the number of
entrepreneurships, technical and scientific infrastructures highly differ in regions.
Especially, focus for firm-based innovativeness is one of the main missions of the
cluster projects that became recently popular in the country18. As a result, increase
in such bottom-up projects yields the effectiveness of policy implementations in
the long run.
3.5. Discussion
In the first place, we can deduce that innovation enablers in all countries
look similar; however, there are significant differences in product and process
innovation activities yielding a promising potential for Turkey19. Assuming that
firm-based innovativeness is related to the same input and output variables
17. “R&D and Industrial Application Support Program” a program implemented by Small and Medium
Industry Development Organization (SMIDO) aims to develop SMEs and entrepreneurs’ innovative
scientific ideas and findings as well as supporting the techno-entrepreneurs. Another goal of the
program is the development of the current R&D capability and supporting innovative ideas in general
in the road to commercialization of the results.
18. In this context, EU supported project entitled as “Development of a National Clustering Policy” has
been launched with the participation of Undersecretariat of the Prime Ministry for Foreign Trade
of Turkey as the main project implementer. Concerning various sector concentrations, 2007 total
number of cluster projects is 10 in Turkey since 2007.
19. As of 2006; product and process innovator SMEs percentage is 29,5; 17,8 and 19,4 for Turkey, Bulgaria
and Romania respectively.
151
(funding, intellectual capital, high tech exports and so on) it can be observed some
similarities and differences among three countries. First of all in Romania and
Bulgaria, funding of innovation can be assumed as problematic; however, different
policy measures are anticipated to solve it, such as the creation of BDB in Bulgaria
and credit schemes in Romania. Although evolving, funding still seems as a problem
for the smaller scale firms in Turkey which also undertakes similar projects.
Cooperation20 appears a problem in three countries in addition to that of
the academia-university partnerships21. In all countries dissemination of the
innovation culture should be evaluated and similar improvements should also be
observed in the medium run for fostering innovation involvement. This is especially
important for the resolution of the innovative start-ups22 for Turkey and Romania
although the number of incubators is increasing especially in technoparks. Such an
opportunity, while developing the innovativeness capacity of the firms, may also
speed-up the dissemination of the innovation among the firms by the common use
as well the development of the spin-offs among the firms.
For Romania, integration within the EU projects can be assumed as an
opportunity for the know-how transfer. Such a know-how and technology transfer
towards companies working in loan system, which are able to develop if they could
have their own brand and an exterior-oriented image (Tamasila et al. 2008). Lastly,
technology transfer centers and high-tech incubators are expected to foster the
firm innovativeness as well as the innovative outputs such as patenting. Besides
enhancing innovation ability; these factors are also anticipated to make a positive
effect on the innovation management as well as on the knowledge transfer which
we mention.
For Bulgaria, new funding and training schemes can assumed as a positive
contribution for the new start-ups in the long-term. Long-term incentives for
promoting both academic and business entrepreneurship are advised as a solution.
Also entrepreneurship training is an important asset for promoting the sector wide
entrepreneurship. Establishment of entrepreneurship centers within universities
and increase of entrepreneurship training activities can be considered as positive
signs for increasing the firm-level innovativeness.
For Turkey; government investment programs and national innovation
strategy can be used as effective tools for fostering firm-based innovations. When
these two are considered in a nutshell, two potential outputs can be mentioned.
20. Besides academia-university partnerships, different cooperation models can also be proposed. New
cooperative strategies include models such as joint ventures, strategic alliances, joint-productions,
coalitions, clusters and networks (Elfring, T. and Hulsink, W. (2003), Gils, A.V. and Zwart, P. (2004),
“Knowledge acquisition and learning in Dutch and Belgian SMEs: the role of strategic alliances”,
European Management Journal, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 685. “Networks in entrepreneurship: the case of
high-technology firms”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 21, pp. 409).
21. Such cooperation can also be generalized for the actors of triple helix. See Bosco, M.G. (2007).
“Innovation, R&D and Technology Transfer: Policies towards a Regional Innovation System. The Case
of Lombardy.”, European Planning Studies, 15(8), pp.1085 and Edgington, D.W. (2008) “The Japanese
Innovation System: University-Industry Linkages, Small Firms and Regional Technology Clusters”
Prometheus, 26(1), pp.1 for a definition of triple helix actors.
22. Especially, non-financial issues are considered.
152
The first one is the creation of more innovative markets (including both process
and product innovation as outputs in relatively stronger sectors such as textile,
automotive, agribusiness). Second output is the improvement in innovative market
management mechanisms in a way yielding with an increased competitiveness level
in general terms. In order to achieve this, additional economic policy implications
may be required in parallel to sophistication of the innovative inputs needed such
as the R&D activities, intellectual capital and scientific infrastructure at the firm
side (e.g. labs). Regarding the increase in the number of universities, increase in the
university/industry cooperation can also contribute to the process. For solving the
innovation awareness problem, creation of a brokerage system among the firms or
institutes for collaborations (IFCs)23 which may especially facilitate the innovation
networking process.
4.Conclusion
Based on the recent data and policy reports, the study briefly analyzed general
situation of innovation by examining some of the differences in policy measures
and levels of firm-based innovativeness in three countries.
It can be assumed some common policy framework keeping in mind that the
sectors and regional characteristics differ among three countries. As innovation is
used as also used a tool for competitiveness, it is possible to perceive the related
measures in a regional development nutshell. Here, the industrial district policies
can be assumed as an example. In this framework, the usage of the innovation
fostering tools such as technoparks and technocenters within industrial districts
can be efficient motivators for fostering innovative entrepreneurships such as the
formation of the new incubators for the new start-ups, localization of knowledge24
for efficient spin-offs and exchange of both tacit and implicit knowledge among
the firms, creation of efficient pools for qualified human resource and effective
allocation of the funds for the existing firms. Such a concentration may also
enhance targeting of the academia/business cooperation and exchange of technical
information in conjunction of the related consultancy services for increasing firmbased innovations. Therefore, regional policies (e.g. industrial district formation
ones) can be somehow end up with the leverage of innovative entrepreneurs in
the market and improvement of the promising position of innovation related
competitiveness. Regional concentration may also serve as important tools for
lobbying activities and efficient channels for dissemination and evolution of the
innovation culture among the firms. However, investigation of the innovativeness
between the regions and different ways of implementation for Turkey remain as
areas of further research.
23. Different local institutions (including independent ones) can assumed as examples; universities may
also act exceptionally as IFCs.
24. In this case, proximity advantages of the knowledge producing institutions and firms in some of the
regions in a way to foster knowledge spillovers can be an efficient solution (Filippi, M. and. Torre,
A. (2003). “Local organizations and institutions. How can geographical proximity be activated by
collective projects?”, International Journal of Technology Management 26, pp.386)
153
References
Amidon, D.M. (2003). “The Innovation Superhighway” Butterworth-Heinemann,
Amsterdam, 379p.
Arc Fund (2010) “Bulgarian Innovation Policy: Options for the Next Decade”
Report. Applied Research and Communications Fund, Sofia.
Bosco, M.G. (2007). “Innovation, R&D and Technology Transfer: Policies
towards a Regional Innovation System. The Case of Lombardy.”, European Planning
Studies, 15(8), pp.1085-1111.
Bosma, N., Acs, J.A., Autio, E., Coduras, A. and J.Levie (2008). “Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor” Executive Report, 2008, 66p.
Davila, T, Epstein, M.J. and Shelton, R.D. (2006) “Making Innovation Work:
How to Manage It, Measure It and Profit from It”, Wharton School Publishing
Upper Saddle River, N.J., 334 p
Diez, M.A. (2001). “The Evaluation of Regional Innovation and Cluster Policies:
Towards a Participatory Approach”, European Planning Studies, 9(7): 907-923.
Dragan, N. (2009) “Innovation–Condition for Sustainable Development
Romanian Policy regarding the Innovation and the Scientific Research” Paper
Presented at the 5th International Vilnius Conference EURO Mini Conference
“Knowledge-Based Technologies and OR Methodologiesü for Strategic Decisions of
Sustainable Development”
Drucker, P.F. (1984). “Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Practices and
Principles”, Harper Business, Clermount, 277p.
DTI. (2003). “Competing in the Global Economy” Innovation Report, Dept. of
Trade and Industry, 145p.
EC, (2010)(1). “INNO-Policy TrendChart Innovation Policy Progress Report:
Bulgaria” , European Commission Enterprise Directorate General, Obtained Through
Internet http://www.proinno-europe.eu/trendchart/annual-country-reports
Romania” , European Commission Enterprise Directorate General, Obtained Through
Turkey” , European Commission Enterprise Directorate General, Obtained Through
Edgington, D.W. (2008) “The Japanese Innovation System: University-Industry
Linkages, Small Firms and Regional Technology Clusters” Prometheus, 26(1), pp.1-19.
Elfring, T. and Hulsink, W. (2003), “Networks in entrepreneurship: the case of
high-technology firms”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 21, pp. 409-22.
Engelbrecht. H.J. and Darrogh, J. (1999). A Comparative macro-level assessment
of New Zealand‘s ‚ national innovation system. Prometheus 17: 283-98
154
Filippi, M. and. Torre, A. (2003). “Local organizations and institutions. How can
geographical proximity be activated by collective projects?”, International Journal of
Technology Management 26, pp.386-400
Gils, A.V. and Zwart, P. (2004), “Knowledge acquisition and learning in Dutch
and Belgian SMEs: the role of strategic alliances”, European Management Journal,
Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 685-92.
Henrekson, M. and Sanandaji, T. (2010) “The Interaction Between
Entrepreneurship and Institutions” IFN Working Paper No. 830, SSRN ID: 1592400.
Lowe, R and Mariott, S. (2006). “Enterprise: Entrepreneurship and
Innovation:Concepts, Context and Commercialization” Elsevier, Burglinton, 444p.
OECD. (2004). “Science and Innovation Policy: Key Changes and Opportunities”
Meeting of the OECD Committee for Scientific and Technological Policy at Ministerial
Level 29-30 January 2004, Paris, 54p.
NASR. (2006). “National Research Development and Innovation Strategy Report”
Ministry of Education and Research, National Authority for Scientific Research. Obtained
Though Internet http//: www.mct.ro/img/files_up/1188316504strategia%20eng.pdf
Negro, S.O. and Hekkert, M.P. (2008). Explaining the success of emerging
technologies by innovation system functioning: The case of biomass digestion in
Germany. Technology Analysis and Strategic
Management 20:465-82.
Nicoleta, B. and Simona, B.(2009). “Entrepreneurship and Female
Entrepreneurship” Obtained Through Internet http://www.steconomice.uoradea.
ro/anale/volume/2009/v1...relations.../13.pdf
Tamasila, M., Mocan, M.L. and I.M.Taucean (2008). “Study Regarding Innovation
and Entrepreneurship in Romanian SMEs” Paper presented in 6th International
DAAAM Baltic Conference 24-26 April 2008, Tallinn, Estonia
Sharif, N. and Chan, I. (2004). “Conceptualizing Innovation Management and
Culture in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR): An Exploratory
Study of Organization-Specific Critical Success Factors” Innovation,Entrepreneurship
and culture: The Interacton Between Technology, Progress and Economic Growth,
Edward Elgar Publishing, Massachusetts, 255 p.
Sipos, G.L.(2009). “The Romanian Innovation Performance in Innovation
Context” Analele Stiintifice Ale Universitai Alexandru Ioan Cuza pp. 502-511.
Te Velde, R. (2004). “Schumpeter’s Theory of Economic Development Revisited”
Innovation, Entrepreneurship and culture: The Interacton Between Technology,
Progress and Economic Growth Edward Elgar Publishing, Massachusetts, 255 p.
TPI. (2010). Yearly Patent Statistics, Turkish Patent Institute. Obtained through
Internet, http://www.tpe.gov.tr/portal/default_en.jsp?sayfa=124
TUBITAK, 2010. R&D statistics, The Scientific and Technological Research Council
of Turkey. Obtained through Internet, http://www.tubitak.gov.tr/tubitak_content_
files/ BTYPD/istatistikler/BTY01.pdf
155
Van de Vrande, V., De Jong, J., Vanharbekec, W. and M.De Rochemont (2009).
“Open Innovation in SMEs : Trends, Motives and Management Challenges”,
Technovation, 29, pp.423-437.
Zhu, D. and Tann, J. (2005). “A regional innovation system in a small-sized
Region: A clustering model in Zhongguancun Science Park”, Technology Analysis &
Strategic Management, 17(3),pp.375-390.
156

Editör - Kırklareli Üniversitesi

Transkript

Benzer belgeler

The Future of Social Entrepreneurship: Civil Society Relations and

27.05.2016 Application To The Capital Markets Board

Effect of Innovative Culture on Intrapreneurship

şi̇ftrap 150 ml şi̇fa ki̇mya i̇laç koz. san. ti̇c. a.ş