Planning Innovation Policy in Estonia
The surfeit of strategy documents, activity plans, programmes and projects is typical. The strategies do not form a harmonious system.
Confusion, disorganization and inconsistency have thus reigned in innovation policy planning. Consensus has not been achieved in identifying and describing the problem. We are not seeing clarity of thought and consistency in the thought process, and the articulating and documenting of objectives.
It is not possible to say what technology is planned for implementing innovation policy and achieving the set goals. Thus it is not possible to evaluate effectiveness or forecast the likelihood of achieving the set goals.
Based on several studies, it can be argued that, as to the various requirements for being a brilliant success story in innovation and innovation policy, Estonia will fall short in the following areas: people with an inborn head for business and business worldview, cultural background to support innovation, domestic financing capability, a big enough market to serve as an incentive for foreign financiers, the necessary number of educated people and talented scientists, the ability to protect intellectual property and the administrative environment, including sufficient legal and tax-related support. Estonia’s general innovative capacity is limited. Many of the reasons are objective, but the subjective factor is not insignificant.
The requirement for success is a well-thought-out and worded set of activities that is backed up by resources, supporting creativity, inspired thinking and openness in all social strata – and the freedom to enable all this.
All strategy documents should be inventoried and catalogued. The timeliness and content of each individual strategy should be evaluated; documents that serve no specific purpose should be invalidated; a hierarchy of strategic documents should be set up; conflicts within documents and impacts should be analyzed; and a systematic strategic planning model should be developed.