The analysis of the Silicon Europe partners’

complementarities (strengths and potentials) for the

implementation of the EUs’ Digital Agenda and a
resource efficient Europe as well as the
development of the Key Enabling Technologies
D2.3

Version: 3.0 Final

Last Update: 28/1/2014

DisseminationLevel: PU

 Disseminationlevel
PU = Public,
RE = Restricted to a group of the specified Consortium,
PP = Restricted to other program participants (including Commission Services),
CO= Confidential, only for members of the 5GNOW Consortium (including the Commission Services)
 D2.3

“The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community's
Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement n° 320004”

Document Identity

Title: Analysis of the Silicon Europe partners’ complementarities

WP: 2–Analysis of research agendas
WP leader: Frank Bösenberg, Silicon Saxony Management GmbH
Main Editor Edmond Janssens
Version: 3.0
File name: D 2.3 C-C analysis.docx

Last Update: Tuesday, January 28, 2014

Revision History

No. Version Edition Author(s) Date

1 0.1 Ben Van der Zon 16.12.2013
Comments:
2 1.0 Edmond Janssens 31.12.2013
Comments: First Complete Draft
3 1.0 Michael Kaiser 6.01.2014
Comments: Review Silicon Saxony
4 2.0 Edmond Janssens 15.01.2014
Comments: Final draft after review from SiSax, HTNL, Minalogic and me2c
5 3.0 Edmond Janssens 28.01.2014
Comments: Final version
6 1
Comments:
7
Comments:
8
Comments:
9
Comments:
10
Comments:
11
Comments:
12
Comments:
13
Comments:
14
Comments:
15
Comments:

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 2 of 38

 D2.3

Content

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 7
2 European SWOT matrix. ................................................................................................ 8
3 Scientific Commonalities and Complementarities ..........................................................13
4 Commonalities and complementarities for the Human Capital .......................................15
5 The Technological Commonalities and Complementarities ...........................................17
6 The Economical Commonalities and Complementarities ...............................................19
6.1 Commonalities and Complementarities for the Smart Specialization Strategies .....19
6.2 Commonalities and Complementarities for the Value Chain ...................................20
6.3 Commonalities and Complementarities for the Markets ..........................................22
7 The Policy Commonalities and Complementarities ........................................................24
7.1 Complementarities and Complementarities for the Cluster Policies and Initiatives. 24
7.2 Economical Development Policies. .........................................................................25
7.3 Policies Evaluation of European and International Context. ....................................27
7.4 Policies on Business Creation. ...............................................................................29
7.5 Commonalities and Complementarities on Geographical aspect. ...........................31
8 Conclusions from the Analysis of the Commonalities and Complementarities. ..............32
9 Overview of the Consolidation. ......................................................................................33
10 Consolidation of the Commonalities and Complementarities with High Priority. .........35
11 Consolidation of the Commonalities and Complementarities with Intermediate Priority.
36
12 Consolidation of the Commonalities and Complementarities with Low Priority. ..........37
13 Conclusions from the Analysis of the Commonalities and Complementarities. ...........38

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 3 of 38

 D2.3

List of figures

Figure 1: example of the SWOT matrix .................................................................................12

Figure 2: Silicon Europe scientific C&Cs...............................................................................14
Figure 3 C&C for the Human Capital ....................................................................................16
Figure 4 Technological C&C .................................................................................................18
Figure 5 C&C for the Smart Specialization Strategies..........................................................20
Figure 6 C&C for the Value Chain ........................................................................................22
Figure 7 C&C for the Markets ...............................................................................................23
Figure 8: C&C for the Cluster Policies and Initiatives. ...........................................................25
Figure 9: C&C for the Economical Development Policies .....................................................26
Figure 10: C&C for the European and International Context of the Policies ..........................28
Figure 11: C&C for the European and International Context of the Policies ..........................30
Figure 12: Example of inputs from the regions for preferred actions for every C&C. .............32
Figure 13 Distribution of the C&C over the range of priorities. ..............................................34

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 4 of 38

 D2.3

List of tables

Table 1: Definition of the common SWOT indicators.............................................................11

Table 2 Silicon Europe Scientific C&C ..................................................................................13
Table 3 Silicon Europe C&C for the Human Capital. .............................................................15
Table 4 Silicon Europe technological C&C. ..........................................................................17
Table 5 C&C for the Smart Specialization Strategies. ...........................................................19
Table 6 C&C for the Value Chain .........................................................................................21
Table 7 C&C for the Markets ................................................................................................23
Table 8 C&C for the Cluster Policies and Initiatives. .............................................................24
Table 9 C&C for the Economical Development Policies. .......................................................26
Table 10: C&C for the European and International Context of the Policies. ..........................27
Table 11 C&C for the Policies on Business Creation. ...........................................................29
Table 12 C&C for the Policies on Business Creation. ...........................................................31
Table 13: Consolidation for the C&C with high priority ..........................................................35
Table 14: Consolidation for the C&C with intermediate priority 1,6 to 2,4..............................36
Table 15: Consolidation for the C&C with low priority ...........................................................37

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 5 of 38

 D2.3

List of abbreviations.
Austr Austria
B2B Business to Business
C&C Commonalities and Complementarities
FL Flanders
FFF Factory of the Future
IDM Integrated Device Manufacturer
JAP Joint Action Plan to be defined in WP3
KI Knowledge Institute
LE Large Enterprise
MNE Micro- and Nano electronic (systems/components)
PMC Product market Combination
R&A Rhône-Alpes
RDI Research, Development and Innovation
RTD Research, Development and Innovation
Sax Saxony
S&ENL South and East The Netherlands
SME Small and Medium size Enterprise
TBD To be defined
VC Venture Capital
WP4 Work package on Internationalization

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 6 of 38

 D2.3

1 Introduction

In this deliverable, the conclusions from the regional SWOT analysis are established in order
to enable an adequate and efficient development of the Joint Action Plan in the next Work
Package.
The start is the regional SWOT analysis that has been elaborated in the deliverable D2.2
“Regional SWOT analysis from an economic, innovation and RTD perspective”. Now the
purpose of the Deliverable D2.3 is to explore the complementarities and commonalities from
the regional SWOTs from the different partners for the definition of possible actions for
improvement including an assessment of the priorities.
From the first analysis of the regional SWOT we experienced a large variety in the definition
of the different indicators used in the SWOT and therefore no simple consolidation was
possible.
Therefore as an intermediate step a common denominator SWOT is established with a
number of more generic indicators that could be mapped on each of the regional SWOT
tables.
These generic indicators have then been evaluated by each partners by qualifying the
relevant indicators as a Strength, Weakness, Opportunity or Threat for each region.
From this European SWOT the complementarities are defined. It is equally important to
define the commonalities because a common Strength or Threat can be further exploited or
cured by common actions.
In a third step the partners are requested to assign possible actions to the different
Complementarities and Commonalities (C&C) together with a priority assessment. This
allows consolidating the conclusions from the C&C analysis in a common and prioritized list
of actions that will be the basis for the JAP and a list of specific actions between one or more
partners.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 7 of 38

 D2.3

2 European SWOT matrix.

In D2.2 (Regional SWOT analysis from an economic, innovation and RTD perspective) a qualitative
approach was chosen to present the SWOT in a narrative way. For each region this
approach gives a very good overview of the elements in the SWOT that are deemed most
important for that particular region.

In this deliverable first a structured common European matrix is developed that spans the
performance indicators that are relevant for the Silicon Europe project. This approach does
allow proper comparison of the five regions as all SWOT statements are now based on an
agreed and common interpretation of the various aspects and the determination of the
complementarities and commonalities over the five regions is now possible.

In total 100 common indicators with a unique interpretation are identified. These are divided
in 11 categories and grouped in 5 sections as defined in the Silicon Europe project. The
overall structure is as follows:

1. Scientific
1.1. Knowledge transfer
2. Human Capital
3. Technological
4. Economical
4.1. Smart Specialization Strategies
4.2. Value chain
4.3. Market
5. Policies
5.1. Cluster policies/initiatives
5.2. Economic development policies
5.3. Evaluation of European and international context
5.4. Business creation
5.5. Geographical
The full definition of the SWOT indicators is presented in the Table 1 below.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 8 of 38

 D2.3

Indicator
Scientific
Knowledge transfer
interdisciplinary RDI
(open) innovation infrastructure
knowledge transfer infrastructure
innovation valorisation
Industry - Knowledge Institutes
(KIs) interaction
Asia as upcoming innovator
presence of platforms
application platforms
Human Capital
middle & high level education
technology interest of students
internationalisation
HW/SW balance
cost of labour
successors for SME management
female students for micro- and
nanotechnology MINT
demographic changes
dedicated education system on
worker level
Interpretation
cross cutting over more disciplines leading to real
innovations
is open innovation well established
is knowledge transfer well-structured or ad hoc
is there a good mechanism to valorise
innovations
is there a good relation between KIs and the
industry, in particular the SMEs
Asia will develop creative innovation
group of actors with a common interest
group of actors interested in a specific application
area
is the education level adequate
is the influx of technology students adequate
exchange of knowledge workers within EU and
global
a good balance is needed as HW/SW
development must be concurrently
does labour cost contribute to competitiveness
is changing management during SME growth
common practice
is technology pursued by female students
ageing society will lead to less senior knowledge
workers
is education towards craftsman well established

Technological
processes
CMOS
3-5 materials
SOI / FDSOI
digital
analog
mixed signal
RF
MEMS/sensors
Moore/More Moore
More than Moore how do these technologies rate on a regional
≤200 mm level
300 mm this section is rather an indication of available
450 mm technologies than a SWOT indication
natural resources
embedded software & systems
materials
imaging
design
silicon photonics
large area electronics
power electronics
mask manufacturing
software

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 9 of 38


Indicator
Economical
Smart Specialisation Strategies
national in practice
regional in practice
self-sustaining eco system
LE orchestrated eco system
Value chain
MNE-system design
MNE-component design
production tools (FE)
production tools (BE)
2nd and lower tier supply chain
dominant KIs
dominant LEs
dominant SMEs
LE fostering SMEs
multi disciplinarily
foundries
assembly houses
cost of production (eg energy,
labour)
application focus
technology focus
IDMs
Market
high mix - medium volume
(niches)
high volume market
market pull
international orientation
global competition
B2B professional market
consumer market
energy efficiency
agro-food
Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004
D2.3
Interpretation
are national smart specialisation strategies
executed
are regional smart specialisation strategies
executed
are the ecosystems organised from within
themselves
is the ecosystem dominated by a large company
presence of design house for micro- and nano
electronic components
presence of design house for micro- and nano
electronic components
RD&I on production tools for Front-End
RD&I on production tools for Back-End
is a 2nd and lower tier supply chain well
established
are Knowledge Institutions leading
are large enterprises leading
are SMEs leading
do large enterprises support SMEs
is multidisciplinary (cross value chain) RD&I well
established
availability of foundries (production sites for bare
die)
availability of assembly houses
as economical production possible
is MNE-design application driven
is MNE-design technology driven
availability of component design house with own
fab
is niche market a target market
is high volume a target market
is market pull dominant
is export a main driver
strong position or to be established
B2B focus on global level established?
availability of regional consumer market
is there a strong focus on energy efficiency in
application/production technology?
is there a focus on the impact for agriculture?
Page 10 of 38

Indicator
Policies
Cluster policies/initiatives
cluster role in RDI
cluster role in valorisation
cluster role in developing PMCs
fostering strategic cooperation’s
interdisciplinary coop. (biotech,
optical-, organic electronics)
cluster role in support to SMEs
Economic development policies
financial National RDI-support
regional financial RDI-support
regional support to Smart
Specialisation
smart public procurement
national SME-program
regional SME-program
"level" playing field for the industry opportunity situation across Europe
"level" playing field for the
Institutes
LE and KI driving the policy
SME driving the policy
tax incentives for R&D
Evaluation of European and international context
involvement in KET Pilot lines
participation of LE in EU projects
participation of SMEs in EU
projects
participation of SMEs in Horizon
2020
strategic cooperation with foreign
clusters
international visibility of the cluster is the cluster well recognised abroad
exports of SMEs products
competition from Asia and US
business creation
capital availability (VC)
SME creation, start ups
shared (RDI) facilities
geographical
transport accessibility
Table 1: Definition of the common SWOT indicators.
Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004
D2.3
Interpretation
does the cluster play a significant role in the RDI
(policy and/or operation)
does the cluster play a significant role in
valorisation
cluster role in developing product-Market-
Combinations
does the cluster arrange for strategic cooperation
((inter)nationally)
is the cluster open to interdisciplinary research
is the cluster crucial for the success of SMEs
how is financial support to RDI on a national level
how is financial support to RDI on a regional
level
is this well developed and adequate
is this in place
is this in place
is this in place
are efforts in place to assure an equal
are efforts in place to assure an equal
opportunity situation across Europe
are the policies driven by LE and knowledge
institutions
are the regional/national policies driven by SMEs
are tax incentives in place
is there already involvement in or application for
KET pilot-lines projects
participation of LEs in FP7 (ENIAC, CATRENE
etc)
participation of SMEs in FP7 (ENIAC, CATRENE
etc)
will Horizon 2020 and e.g. ECSEL provide
adequate opportunities for SMEs
is there international cooperation on cluster level
export capabilities of the SMEs
considered as …
ease of obtaining money
(financial) support of creating new businesses
are shared facilities available for start-up
companies
is the region infrastructural well connected to the
outside world
Page 11 of 38
 D2.3

Gerneric SWOT parameters derived South and Silicon Europe

Saxony Rhône-Alpes Flanders Austria
from the 5 Regional SWOTs East Netherlands Cluster

1. Scientific S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T

Asia as upcoming innovat or 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 5

applicat ion plat f orms 1 1 1 1 0 2 0
Knowledge transfer

(open) innovat ion inf rast ruct ure 1 1 1 1 2 0 2 0

know ledge t ransf er inf rast ruct ure 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 0
innovat ion valorisat ion 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 0
Industry - Know ledge Institutes interaction 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 0
presence of plat f orms 1 1 1 3 0 0 0
int erdisciplinairy RDI 1 1 1 1 1 4 0 1 0
Know ledge t ransf er 5 clust er result 16 4 10 5

Figure 1: example of the SWOT matrix

Using these well-defined aspects the SWOT is assessed for each region separately and
combined in a five-regions Silicon Europe cluster view. The example below illustrates this
approach for the “knowledge transfer” category. This example also illustrates that not all
aspects are relevant for all regions. Even though the aspects are chosen to be as generic
and common as possible, this is an element to be aware of when assessing the
complementarities.

To reveal the complementarities and commonalities the consolidation result over the five
regions result must be analyzed. This is the subject of the next chapters.

We define a commonality a situation where each region has assigned the specific indicator to
the same class (Strength-Weakness-Opportunity-Threat). This is for instance the case with
the indicator;”Asia as upcoming innovator” in the Figure 1. In case a region that has not
assigned a class to the specific indicator because it was not considered relevant is
discarded. In the analysis we will show that there are only a few commonalities. These
communalities are an important tool to consolidate the impact of the common clusters on
international scale.

Complementarities are defined as a situation where a specific indicator is assigned to one

class by the majority of the regions. This is for instance the case with the indicator:
“knowledge transfer infrastructure” in the Figure 1. This is seen as a strength in Saxony,
Rhône-Alpes and Austria, but as a weakness or an opportunity by Flanders and S&E NL.
Most interesting situations are found when one or more regions qualify an indicator as
strength and the remainder regions qualify the indicator as being an opportunity or a
weakness.

In the next chapters the consolidated SWOT is analyzed for each mean category of
indicators.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 12 of 38

 D2.3

3 Scientific Commonalities and Complementarities

Table 2 and Figure 2 compare the SWOT analysis for the scientific complementarities related
to the transfer of knowledge between research and industry. Overall this is positively
appreciated as a strength or an opportunity. Looking more into the details the
interdisciplinary R&I, the presence of the European Technology Platforms, such as the actual
ECSEL and the previous ENIAC and Catrene, and the infrastructures fostering knowledge
transfer are considered a strength. The most important weaknesses are the difficulties for
innovation valorization perceived in Flanders and S&E NL. This is at the same time
considered a major opportunity by Austria and Saxony and a strength by Rhône&Alpes. All
partners agree that the strong innovation growth in Asia constitutes a major threat.

Silicon Europe 5 regions SWOT comparision

South and Silicon
Gerneric SWOT parameters Rhône-
Saxony Flanders East Austria Europe C&C
derived from the 5 Regional Alpes
Netherlands Cluster
SWOTs

1. Scientific S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T

interdisciplinairy RDI 1 1 1 1 1 4 0 1 0 Compl

(open) innovation infrastructure 1 1 1 1 2 0 2 0 Compl
Knowledge transfer

knowledge transfer infrastructure 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 0 Compl

innovation valorisation 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 Compl
Industry - Knowledge Institutes interaction 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 0 Compl
Asia as upcoming innovator 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 5 Threat
presence of platforms 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 0 Compl
application platforms 1 1 1 1 1 0 3 0 Compl
Knowledge transfer 5 cluster result 16 4 12 5

Table 2 Silicon Europe Scientific C&C

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 13 of 38

 D2.3

Scientific C&C

0,9

0,8

0,7

0,6

0,5 application platforms

presence of platforms
0,4
Asia as upcoming innovator
0,3 Industry - Knowledge Institutes interaction

0,2 innovation valorisation

0,1 knowledge transfer infrastructure

0 (open) innovation infrastructure

interdisciplinairy RDI

Figure 2: Silicon Europe scientific C&Cs.

This figure shows the quantitative validation of the SWOT results for the categories related to
the transfer of knowledge. The height of the bar is proportional to the number of votes
assigned to the specific qualification of the category. If for a specific category such as “Asia
as an upcoming innovator” is qualified as a threat by all regions, then it gets a weight of 1.
Commonalities are characterized by a weight of 1. Complementarities have a weight spread
over more than one qualification.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 14 of 38

 D2.3

4 Commonalities and complementarities for the Human Capital

The results of the SWOT analysis for the category of the Human Capital are summarized in
Table 3 and Figure 3. The educational system is seen as the most important strength. Also
the training on the job is generally appreciated as strength except for the Rhône&Alpes
region where for the latter an opportunity is seen to improve on the weakness. The labor cost
is generally perceived a threat except for Saxony. Other complementarities are seen in the
internationalization, on the move from hardware to software and on how to create the interest
of students for technical careers. Generally the Human Capital is rather seen as strength and
to a minor extent as a threat or an opportunity.

Silicon Europe 5 regions SWOT comparision

South and Silicon
Gerneric SWOT parameters Rhône-
Saxony Flanders East Austria Europe C&C
derived from the 5 Regional Alpes
Netherlands Cluster
SWOTs
2. Human Capital S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T

middle & high level edu 1 1 1 1 1 5 0 0 0 Strength

technology interest of students 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 Compl
internationalisation 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 4 0 Compl
Human Capital

Hw/SW balance 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 2 Compl

cost of labour 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 3 Compl
successors for SME management 1 1 0 0 1 1 Compl
female students for MINT 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 Compl
demographic changes 1 1 1 0 0 1 2 Compl
dedicated education system on worker level 1 1 1 1 3 1 0 0 Compl
Human Capital 5 cluster result 13 5 9 10

Table 3 Silicon Europe C&C for the Human Capital.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 15 of 38

 D2.3

Human Capital C&C

dedicated education system on worker level

1 demographic changes

female students for MINT

0,8
successors for SME management

0,6 cost of labour

Hw/SW balance
0,4
internationalisation
0,2

0 technology interest of students

middle & high level edu

Figure 3 C&C for the Human Capital

From Figure 3 we see that education and training obtain a high score as strength,
Internationalization is validated as the most important opportunity and the demographic
changes followed by the cost of labor are seen as the largest threat. Complementarities can
be defined on all categories except for the education at high and middle level that can be
further exploited as common strength.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 16 of 38

 D2.3

5 The Technological Commonalities and Complementarities

In total 24 basic semiconductor technologies have been identified. The SWOT analysis is
rather indicative for the availability and the needs for the future.

Silicon Europe 5 regions SWOT comparision

South and Silicon
Gerneric SWOT parameters Rhône-
Saxony Flanders East Austria Europe C&C
derived from the 5 Regional Alpes
Netherlands Cluster
SWOTs

3. Technological S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T

processes 1 1 1 1 1 5 0 0 0 Strength
CMOS 1 1 1 1 3 1 0 0 Compl
3-5 materials 1 1 1 1 1 0 3 0 Compl
SOI / FDSOI 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 Compl
digital 1 1 1 1 4 0 0 0 Strength
analog 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 Strength
mixed signal 1 1 1 1 4 0 0 0 Strength
RF 1 1 1 1 4 0 0 0 Strength
MEMS/sensors 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 0 Compl
Moore/more Moore 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 0 Compl
More than Moore 1 1 1 1 1 4 0 1 0 Compl
Technology

200 mm 1 1 1 1 4 0 0 0 Strength
300 mm 1 1 1 1 4 0 0 0 Strength
450 mm 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 Compl
natural resources 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 5 Threat
embedded software & systems 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 2 0 Compl
materials 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 Compl
imaging 1 1 1 2 1 0 0 Compl
design 1 1 1 1 1 5 0 0 0 Strength
silicon photonics 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 Compl
large area electronics 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 4 0 Compl
power electronics 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 0 0 Compl
mask manufacturing 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 Compl
software 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 Compl
Technology 5 cluster result 66 8 20 5

Table 4 Silicon Europe technological C&C.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 17 of 38

 D2.3

Technological C&C

1
0,9
0,8

software
mask manufacturing
0,7

power electronics
large area electronics
0,6

silicon photonics
design
imaging
0,5

materials
embedded software & systems
0,4

natural resources
450 mm
300 mm
0,3

≤200 mm
0,2 More than Moore
Moore/More Moore
MEMS/sensors
RF

0,1
mixed signal
analog

0
digital
SOI / FDSOI
3-5 materials
CMOS
processes

Figure 4 Technological C&C

As is seen from the SWOT analysis several technologies are qualified as common strength.
These include design, technologies for state-of-the-art wafer diameters up to 300 mm,
technologies for RF, mixed signal, analog, digital and also process development.
Remarkable is the unanimous consent regarding the unique threat to the technological
developments attributed to the scarceness of natural resources and the sustainability of the
technological developments.
For several other technologies synergy between the partners can be exploited. These
include in the first place the technologies considered strength for the majority of the partners
and a weakness or an opportunity for a single cluster. These apply for the technologies such
as power electronics, embedded software and systems, imaging, MEMS and sensors, basic
CMOS, More than Moore.
There is also sufficient complementarity potential available to cooperate on the remaining
technologies.
In the section regarding the consolidation the priorities will be established for a possible
implementation in the Joint Action Plan.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 18 of 38

 D2.3

6 The Economical Commonalities and Complementarities

The section on the Economical SWOT analysis contains three categories:
 Smart Specialization Strategies
 The Value Chain
 The Market Situation

6.1 Commonalities and Complementarities for the Smart Specialization

Strategies

Here we see a clear perception of the Smart Specialization Strategy as strength on regional
level and except for Flanders also on national level. Most regions see also the self-sustaining
eco-system as strength.

Silicon Europe 5 regions SWOT comparision

South and Silicon
Gerneric SWOT parameters Rhône-
Saxony Flanders East Austria Europe C&C
derived from the 5 Regional Alpes
Netherlands Cluster
SWOTs
4. Economical S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T
Specialisation

national in practice 1 1 1 1 4 0 0 0 Strength

Smart

regional in practice 1 1 1 1 1 5 0 0 0 Strength

self sustaining eco system 1 1 1 1 1 4 0 1 0 Compl
LE orchestrated eco system 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 Compl
Smart Specialisation Strategies 5 cluster result 15 1 1 1

Table 5 C&C for the Smart Specialization Strategies.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 19 of 38

 D2.3

Economical C&C - Smart Specialization

0,9

0,8

0,7

0,6

0,5

0,4

0,3

0,2 LE orchestrated eco

system
0,1
self sustaining eco system
0
regional in practice

national in practice

Figure 5 C&C for the Smart Specialization Strategies

Generally spoken the Smart Specialization Strategies are clearly perceived as strength for all
clusters

6.2 Commonalities and Complementarities for the Value Chain

The presence of the IDMs and the multidisciplinary aspect of the value chain are perceived
as a common strength. The remainder indicators are perceived on the average as strength
with many complementarities towards weakness or opportunity. This leaves a lot of room for
cooperation to take advantage of the complementarities. These opportunities can be
identified in the production tools, both backend and frontend, MNE component and system
design and in the technology focus and to a lesser extend in the application focus, in the
presence of a lower tier of the supply chain and in the dominance by research institutes and
large enterprises.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 20 of 38

 D2.3

Silicon Europe 5 regions SWOT comparision

South and Silicon
Gerneric SWOT parameters Rhône-
Saxony Flanders East Austria Europe C&C
derived from the 5 Regional Alpes
Netherlands Cluster
SWOTs

4. Economical S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T

MNE-system design 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 0 Compl

MNE-component design 1 1 1 1 1 4 0 1 0 Compl
production tools (FE) 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 0 Compl
production tools (BE) 1 1 1 1 2 0 2 0 Compl
2nd and lower tier supply chain 1 1 1 1 3 1 0 0 Compl
dominant KIs 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 2 0 Compl
dominant LEs 1 1 1 1 3 1 0 0 Compl
Value chain

dominant SMEs 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 Compl

LE fostering SMEs 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 Compl
multi disciplinarity 1 1 1 1 1 5 0 0 0 Strength
Foundries 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 0 Compl
assembly houses 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 Compl
cost of production (eg energy, labour) 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 2 Compl
application focus 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 2 1 Compl
technology focus 1 1 1 1 1 4 0 0 1 Compl
IDMs 1 1 1 1 1 5 0 0 0 Strength
Value chain 5 cluster result
0 0
42 10 17 4

Table 6 C&C for the Value Chain

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 21 of 38

 D2.3

Economical C&C - Value Chain

1
0,9
0,8
0,7

IDMs
0,6

technology focus
0,5

application focus
cost of production (eg energy, labour)
0,4

assembly houses
Foundries
0,3

multi disciplinarity
LE fostering SMEs
0,2

dominant SMEs
dominant LEs
0,1
dominant KIs

0
2nd and lower tier supply chain
production tools (BE)
production tools (FE)
MNE-component design
MNE-system design

Figure 6 C&C for the Value Chain

Except for the cost of production very little threats are perceived in the Value Chain.

6.3 Commonalities and Complementarities for the Markets

The SWOT analysis on the Markets reveals a clear strength in the markets for high-mix and
medium volumes and with international orientation. The high-volume market is perceived as
an important weakness and only the competition from globalization is seen as a minor threat.
Complementarities that exploit the strength of one or more partners are found in the markets
related to energy efficiency and the professional B2B market. Opportunities that can be
developed by collaboration are found in the consumer market and the agro-food market. The
details of the potential collaboration are further elaborated in the section on the consolidation.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 22 of 38

 D2.3

Silicon Europe 5 regions SWOT comparision

South and Silicon
Gerneric SWOT parameters Rhône-
Saxony Flanders East Austria Europe C&C
derived from the 5 Regional Alpes
Netherlands Cluster
SWOTs
4. Economical S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T

High mix - medium volume (niches) 1 1 1 1 1 5 0 0 0 Strength

high volume market 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 0 Compl
market pull 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 Compl
international orientation 1 1 1 1 1 5 0 0 0 Strength
Market

global competition 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 3 2 Compl

B2B professional market 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 0 Compl
consumer market 1 1 1 1 0 1 3 0 Compl
energy efficiency 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 0 Compl
agro-food 1 1 1 1 1 0 3 0 Compl
Market 5 cluster result
0 0 0

19 7 14 2

Table 7 C&C for the Markets

Economical C&C - Markets

0,9

0,8

0,7

0,6

0,5 agro-food
energy efficiency
0,4 consumer market
0,3 B2B professional market

0,2 global competition

international orientation
0,1

0 market pull

high volume market

High mix - medium volume (niches)

Figure 7 C&C for the Markets

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 23 of 38

 D2.3

Figure 7 shows that the potential of the B2B professional and the energy efficiency related
market while agro-food and consumer is perceived as a good opportunity. The only threat is
seen from the globalization which at the same time is considered also an important
opportunity.

7 The Policy Commonalities and Complementarities

The section on Policies covers the following categories:
 Cluster Policies and Initiatives
 The Economical Development Policies
 The Evaluation of the European and Regional context
 The Policies for Business Creation
 The Geographical Policy

7.1 Complementarities and Complementarities for the Cluster Policies and

Initiatives.

The cluster policies and initiatives are mainly seen as an opportunity. The SWOT analysis
shows that among the clusters an interesting mix exists where at least one partner can share
his strength with the other actors to further exploit the opportunities. The most important
opportunities are assigned to the role of the cluster in research for innovation, and fostering
interdisciplinary cooperation in the field of biotechnology, optical and organic electronics.

Silicon Europe 5 regions SWOT comparision

South and Silicon
Gerneric SWOT parameters Rhône-
Saxony Flanders East Austria Europe C&C
derived from the 5 Regional Alpes
Netherlands Cluster
SWOTs

5. Policies S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T

Compl
Cluster policies/initiatives

cluster role in RDI 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 4 0

cluster role in valorisation 1 1 1 1 1 0 3 0 Compl
cluster role in developping PMCs 1 1 1 1 1 0 2 3 0 Compl
fostering strategic cooperations 1 1 1 1 1 0 3 0 Compl
interdisciplinairy coop. (biotech, opto-, organic electronics) 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 4 0 Compl
cluster role in support to SMEs 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 0 Compl
Cluster policies/initiatives 5 cluster result 7 2 18 0

Table 8 C&C for the Cluster Policies and Initiatives.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 24 of 38

 D2.3

Policy C&C - Cluster Policies and Initiatives

1
0,9
0,8
0,7
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0
cluster role in RDI
cluster role in valorisation
interdisciplinairy coop. (biotech, opto-, organic electronics)
fostering strategic cooperations
cluster role in developping PMCs
cluster role in support to SMEs

Figure 8: C&C for the Cluster Policies and Initiatives.

For the clarity the sequence of the categories THREAT, OPPORTUNITY, WEAKNESS and
STRENGTH has been reversed.
Concerning opportunity, the cluster role in RDI, in valorization, in interdisciplinary cooperation
and for strategic cooperation is highly appreciated. The cluster role to support SMEs is seen
as the major strength while the role in developing product-market combinations is seen as
the major weakness.

7.2 Economical Development Policies.

Overall the clusters perceive the different aspects of the Economic Development Policies as
an important strength and an opportunity in the second place. Very few indicators are
perceived as a threat or weakness. For every aspect at least one partner considers it his
strength and this opens the possibility to share his experiences and convert the opportunities
seen by other partners into strengths. The exception to this is the indicator for SMEs driving
the policy. Here the role of the clusters needs to be clarified.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 25 of 38

 D2.3

Silicon Europe 5 regions SWOT comparision

South and Silicon
Gerneric SWOT parameters Rhône-
Saxony Flanders East Austria Europe C&C
derived from the 5 Regional Alpes
Netherlands Cluster
SWOTs
5. Policies S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T

financial National RDI-suppot 1 1 1 1 3 1 0 0 Compl

regional financial RDI-support 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 2 0 Compl
Economic development policies

regional financial support to Smart Specialisation 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 3 0 Compl

smart public procurement 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 3 0 Compl
national SME-program 1 1 1 1 3 1 0 0 Compl
regioanl SME-program 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 0 0 Compl
"level" playing field for the industry 1 1 1 1 3 0 0 1 Compl
"level" playing field for the Institutes 1 1 1 1 3 0 0 1 Compl
LE and KI driving the policiy 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 Compl
SME driving the policy 1 1 1 1 0 1 3 0 Compl
Taks incentives for R&D 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 Compl
Economic Development policies 5 cluster result
0 0 0 0
25 4 12 4

Table 9 C&C for the Economical Development Policies.

Policy C&C - Economical Development Policies

1
0,9
0,8
0,7
0,6
0,5
Taks incentives for R&D

0,4
SME driving the policy
LE and KI driving the policiy

0,3
"level" playing field for the Institutes

0,2
"level" playing field for the industry

0,1
regioanl SME-program

0
national SME-program
smart public procurement
regional financial support to Smart Specialisation
regional financial RDI-support
financial National RDI-suppot

Figure 9: C&C for the Economical Development Policies

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 26 of 38

 D2.3

Most indicators have a high score as strength. The biggest opportunity is seen from the
SMEs driving the policy, while the biggest threat is seen from the large enterprises and the
knowledge institutes driving the policies.

7.3 Policies Evaluation of European and International Context.

Except for the competition from Asia and US, the international and European context is seen
as a combination of strengths and opportunities, among which the Horizon 2020 program is
considered important especially for SMEs. Since the program is only recently launched, no
cluster has already built important experience on this program. Saxony is well placed to
share its experience on the internationalization aspects of cluster activities. Regarding the
other aspects, always more than one partner claims already good experience.

Silicon Europe 5 regions SWOT comparision

South and Silicon
Gerneric SWOT parameters Rhône-
Saxony Flanders East Austria Europe C&C
derived from the 5 Regional Alpes
Netherlands Cluster
SWOTs

5. Policies S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T
Evaluation of European and international

Involvement in KET Pilot lines 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 2 0 Compl

Participation of LE in CATRENE projects 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 0 Compl
Participation of SMEs in CATRENE projects 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 0 Compl
Participation of SMEs in FP7 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 Compl
context

Participation of SMEs in Horizon 2020 1 1 1 1 0 0 4 0 Opport

Strategic cooperations with foreign clusters 1 1 1 1 1 0 3 0 Compl
International visibility of the cluster 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 0 Compl
Exports of SMEs products 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 1 Compl
competition from Asia and US 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 5 Threat
EU-Int-context 5 cluster result
0 0 0 0

13 9 11 6

Table 10: C&C for the European and International Context of the Policies.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 27 of 38

 D2.3

Policy C&C - European and International Context

0,9

0,8

0,7

0,6

0,5

0,4
competition from Asia and US
0,3 Exports of SMEs products
International visibility of the cluster
0,2
Strategic cooperations with foreign clusters
0,1 Participation of SMEs in Horizon 2020
0 Participation of SMEs in FP7
Participation of SMEs in CATRENE projects
Participation of LE in CATRENE projects
Involvement in KET Pilot lines

Figure 10: C&C for the European and International Context of the Policies
The most important indicators are the competition from Asia and the US as threat, the
participation of SMEs to Horizon 2020 and the strategic cooperation with foreign cluster as
opportunity, the international visibility of the clusters as weakness and the involvement in the
KET pilot-lines as strength.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 28 of 38

 D2.3

7.4 Policies on Business Creation.

On the average the clusters of Silicon Europe perceive the actual policies for business
creation mostly as strength or opportunity. Again for each aspect at least one cluster is
available existing experience that can be used by the other clusters to exploit the
opportunities. This will be further elaborated in the section of the consolidation of the
complementarities.

Silicon Europe 5 regions SWOT comparision

South and Silicon
Gerneric SWOT parameters Rhône-
Saxony Flanders East Austria Europe C&C
derived from the 5 Regional Alpes
Netherlands Cluster
SWOTs

5. Policies S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T

capitatal availability (VC) 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 Compl

business
creation

SME creation, start ups 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 Compl

shared (RDI) facilities 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 3 0 Compl
Business Creation 5 cluster result 5 3 5 2

Table 11 C&C for the Policies on Business Creation.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 29 of 38

 D2.3

Policy C&C - Business Creation

0,9

0,8

0,7

0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0

shared (RDI) facilities

SME creation, start ups

capitatal availability (VC)

Figure 11: C&C for the European and International Context of the Policies
The most important opportunity in the context of the policies for business creation is the
shared research facilities.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 30 of 38

 D2.3

7.5 Commonalities and Complementarities on Geographical aspect.

Silicon Europe 5 regions SWOT comparision

South and Silicon
Gerneric SWOT parameters Rhône-
Saxony Flanders East Austria Europe C&C
derived from the 5 Regional Alpes
Netherlands Cluster
SWOTs
5. Policies S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T S W O T
geogra

Strength
phical

transport accessibility 1 1 2 0 0 0
Geographical 5 cluster result 2 0 0 0

Table 12 C&C for the Policies on Business Creation.

Saxony and S&E NL consider their geographical situation as strength. The other clusters
consider this aspect not relevant.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 31 of 38

 D2.3

8 Conclusions from the Analysis of the Commonalities and

Complementarities.

From the previous analysis the regions have been requested to propose a suitable action to
exploit the C&C. At the same time the relevance of the specific indicator is evaluated by
means of an assigned priority.

The possible scores on priority are from first to less important:

= 1: Means a must for Silicon Europe.

= 2: Means optional for Silicon Europe

= 3: Means not relevant or not applicable for Silicon Europe

To enable later consolidation, the proposed actions should fit into one of the following
categories:

 Action to be part of the Joint Action Plan (WP3).

 Action to be part of the Internationalization Strategy (WP4).
 Action to be part of the Dissemination (WP6).
 Action specific for some partners. This may include: Workshop, sharing of
experiences, specific collaboration and others.
 No action considered
Figure 12 shows a sample of the inputs from the regions for the section on the scientific
C&C. A similar table is completed for the other sections of C&C.

Silicon Europe 5 regions SWOT comparision Conclusions

Priority

Priority

Priority

Priority

Priority
Gerneric SWOT parameters South and East
C&C Saxony Rhône-Alpes Flanders Austria
derived from the 5 Regional Netherlands
SWOTs
1. Scientific
Sax to collaborate with Sax to collaborate with
get to know needs from
interdisciplinairy RDI Compl others to convert 3 2 others to convert 3 3 3
applications/market
opportunity in strength opportunity in strength
Sax and Austr to Sax and Austr to
Learn from Best
collaborate with others collaborate with others
(open) innovation infrastructure Compl 2 2 2 2 Practises from the 2
to convert opportunity in to convert opportunity in
other regions
strength strength
Define action in JAP for Define action in JAP for learning through
Open Industrial
knowledge transfer infrastructure Compl collaboration between 1 2 collaboration between 1 1 installed technology 1
Infrastructure for SME's
S&ENL, FL and others S&ENL, FL and others platforms
Knowledge transfer

Define action in JAP for Define action in JAP for

innovation valorisation Compl workshop given by 2 2 workshop given by 2 2 2
R&A R&A
Sax and R&A Sax and R&A Learn from Best
use experience of other
Industry - Knowledge Institutes interaction Compl exchange experience 2 2 exchange experience 2 2 Practises from the 2
to improve for E-NL
to the others to the others other regions
Develop a proposal for
important (reason for
Asia as upcoming innovator Threat Action in JAP 1 and in WP4 1 Action in JAP 1 1 changes in European 1
SilEur project)
Competition Law
S&ENL, FL learn from S&ENL, FL learn from S&ENL, FL learn from
presence of platforms Compl the others to convert to 3 2 the others to convert to 3 the others to convert to 1 Drive standardisations 1
strength strength strength
Sax and R&A learn
application platforms Compl Action in JAP 1 Action in JAP 1 from others to convert 2 Action in JAP 2 1
to strength
Knowledge transfer 5 cluster result

Figure 12: Example of inputs from the regions for preferred actions for every C&C.
This example considers only the section of the Scientific C&C.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 32 of 38

 D2.3

9 Overview of the Consolidation.

For the consolidation of the evaluation of the C&C we apply the following process:

Concerning the assignment of consolidated priority:

- The consolidated priority is taken as the average from the 5 regions. In case the
region did not quantify the priority a default of 3, meaning the lowest priority is
assigned for that region.
- Consolidated “high priority” means that the majority of the regions has assigned the
highest priority level and that no other region has assigned a lowest priority level. This
means an average score of maximum 1,4.
- Consolidated “low priority” means that the majority of the regions has assigned the
lowest priority level and that no other region has assigned the highest priority. This
means a priority score of minimum 2,6.
- For the average consolidated priority score between 1,5 and 2,5 the C&C is
categorized under “Intermediate priority”
Concerning the proposed actions:

- Specific actions between one or more of the partners are assigned the generic label
TBD (to be defined)
- A common action meaning an action assigned to the JAP, WP4, WP6 or a “No
Action” by the majority of regions is categorized under Agreement.
- Other actions are categorized under :To be discussed. Here the 3 categories of
actions are kept:
o Common actions for the JAP, WP4 and WP6
o Specific actions TBD
o The No actions
In the next chapters you will find the results of the consolidation for the C&C separated in
high priority, intermediate priority and low priority. The different C&C are no longer structured
according to the sections; Scientific, Human Capital, Technological, Economical and Policies
but are listed in descending order of priority.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 33 of 38

 D2.3

Number of C&C
25

20

15

Number of C&C
10

0
1,0 1,2 1,4 1,6 1,8 2,0 2,2 2,4 2,6 2,8 3,0
Consolidated Priority Score

Figure 13 Distribution of the C&C over the range of priorities.

Priority 1 means the highest priority and 3 means the lowest priority.
A high priority between 1,0 and 1,4 is assigned to 24% of the C&C, intermediate priority
between 1,6 and 2,4 is assigned to 39% of the C&C and 37% obtain a low priority.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 34 of 38

 D2.3

10 Consolidation of the Commonalities and Complementarities

with High Priority.
SWOT comparision Consolidation

Priority
Gerneric SWOT parameters
derived from the 5 Regional C&C Agreement To be discussed
SWOTs
Common action Specific action Blanks / No Action
Knowledge
Asia as upcoming innovator Threat 1
Action in JAP and WP4
transfer
Smart national in practice Strength Action in JAP
Specialisation
1
Strategies regional in practice Strength 1 Action in JAP

Economic Part of JAP

regional financial support to Smart
development
Specialisation
Compl commitment of
policies authorities
1
Evaluation of involvement in KET Pilot lines Compl 1 Action in JAP
European and
international
participation of SMEs in Horizon 2020 Opport 1
Action in JAP
context exports of SMEs products Compl Action in JAP
1

Technology power electronics Compl Action in JAP

1
international orientation Strength 1 Action in JAP
Market global competition Compl 1 Action in WP4
energy efficiency Compl 1 Action in JAP
Knowledge
transfer
knowledge transfer infrastructure Compl Action in JAP
1,2
Economic Part of JAP
development regional financial RDI-support Compl commitment of
policies 1,2 authorities
Participation of SMEs in CATRENE
projects
Compl 1,2
Action in JAP
Evaluation of
European and Strategic cooperations with foreign
clusters
Compl 1,2
Action in JAP
international
context International visibility of the cluster Compl 1,2 Action in JAP
competition from Asia and US Threat 1,2 Action in JAP
Technology 450 mm Compl 1,2 Action in JAP
Human Capital internationalisation Compl 1,2 Action in WP4
Market market pull Compl 1,2 Action in JAP

business creation SME creation, start ups Compl Action in JAP

1,2
Knowledge
transfer
application platforms Compl Action in JAP
1,4
Cluster
policies/initiative cluster role in developping PMCs Compl Action in JAP
s 1,4
Technology More than Moore Compl 1,4 Action in JAP

Table 13: Consolidation for the C&C with high priority

High-priority between 1 and 1,4 is assigned to 24 indicators. There is a general consensus

for including the related actions mostly in the JAP. In two instances actions in the WP4 on
internationalization have to be considered.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 35 of 38

 D2.3

11 Consolidation of the Commonalities and Complementarities

with Intermediate Priority.
SWOT comparision Consolidation

Priority
Gerneric SWOT parameters
derived from the 5 Regional C&C Agreement To be discussed
SWOTs
Common action Specific action Blanks / No Action
cluster role in valorisation Compl 1,6 TBD
Cluster fostering strategic cooperations Compl 1,6 TBD
policies/initiative interdisciplinairy coop. (biotech, opto-,
s organic electronics)
Compl 1,6
TBD
cluster role in support to SMEs Compl 1,6 TBD
Evaluation of
European and Participation of LE in CATRENE
international projects
Compl Action in JAP
context 1,6
Technology design Strength 1,6 Action in JAP
production tools (BE) Compl 1,6 Action in JAP
Value chain
assembly houses Compl 1,6 TBD
technology interest of students Compl 1,6 TBD
Human Capital
Hw/SW balance Compl 1,6 TBD
Market High mix - medium volume (niches) Strength 1,6 Action in JAP

business creation capitatal availability (VC) Compl Action in JAP

1,6
Economic
development smart public procurement Compl TBD
policies 1,8
Technology embedded software & systems Compl 1,8 TBD
MNE-system design Compl 1,8 TBD
Value chain MNE-component design Compl 1,8 TBD
production tools (FE) Compl 1,8 Action in JAP

business creation shared (RDI) facilities Compl TBD

1,8
(open) innovation infrastructure Compl 2 TBD

Knowledge
innovation valorisation Compl 2 Action in JAP
transfer Industry - Knowledge Institutes
interaction
Compl 2
TBD
presence of platforms Compl 2 TBD
Cluster
policies/initiative cluster role in RDI Compl TBD
s 2
Economic regioanl SME-program Compl 2 TBD
development SME driving the policy Compl 2 Action in JAP
policies 3-5 materials Compl TBD
2
Foundries Compl 2 Action in JAP
cost of production (eg energy, labour) Compl 2 Action in JAP/FFF
Value chain
application focus Compl 2 Action in JAP
IDMs Strength 2 Action in JAP
Economic
development LE and KI driving the policiy Compl TBD
policies 2,2
Evaluation of
European and
international
Participation of SMEs in FP7 Compl No priority / No action
context 2,2
SOI / FDSOI Compl 2,2 TBD
Technology MEMS/sensors Compl 2,2 TBD
imaging Compl 2,2 TBD
Value chain LE fostering SMEs Compl 2,2 TBD
Human Capital cost of labour Compl 2,2 TBD
Market consumer market Compl 2,2 Action in JAP
Technology Moore/more Moore Compl 2,4 Action in JAP

Table 14: Consolidation for the C&C with intermediate priority 1,6 to 2,4

24 out of the 39 complementarities require specific actions for cooperation between one or
more partners in the project. These actions will be further specified in the WP 3. Common
actions in the JAP can be defined for another 14 C&Cs. Finally one complementarity on the
participation of SMEs in FP7 requires no action since it is obsolete.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 36 of 38

 D2.3

12 Consolidation of the Commonalities and Complementarities

with Low Priority.
SWOT comparision Consolidation

Priority
Gerneric SWOT parameters
derived from the 5 Regional C&C Agreement To be discussed
SWOTs
Common action Specific action Blanks / No Action
Economic national SME-program Compl 2,6 TBD
development
Taks incentives for R&D Compl 2,6 TBD
policies
processes Strength 2,6 TBD
natural resources Threat 2,6 No priority / No action
Technology
large area electronics Compl 2,6 No priority / No action
mask manufacturing Compl 2,6 No priority / No action
Human Capital middle & high level edu Strength 2,6 No priority / No action
Market agro-food Compl 2,6 No priority / No action
Knowledge
transfer
interdisciplinairy RDI Compl TBD
2,8
Smart
Specialisation LE orchestrated eco system Compl No priority / No action
Strategies 2,8
300 mm Strength 2,8 No priority / No action
Technology
silicon photonics Compl 2,8 No priority / No action
Value chain technology focus Compl 2,8 No priority / No action
Human Capital demographic changes Compl 2,8 No priority / No action
high volume market Compl 2,8 No priority / No action
Market
B2B professional market Compl 2,8 No priority / No action
Smart
Specialisation self sustaining eco system Compl TBD
Strategies 3
Economic financial National RDI-suppot Compl 3 No priority / No action
development "level" playing field for the industry Compl 3 No priority / No action
policies "level" playing field for the Institutes Compl No priority / No action
3
CMOS Compl 3 No priority / No action
digital Strength 3 No priority / No action
analog Strength 3 No priority / No action
mixed signal Strength 3 No priority / No action
Technology
RF Strength 3 No priority / No action
200 mm Strength 3 No priority / No action
materials Compl 3 No priority / No action
software Compl 3 No priority / No action
2nd and lower tier supply chain Compl 3 No priority / No action
dominant KIs Compl 3 No priority / No action
Value chain dominant LEs Compl 3 No priority / No action
dominant SMEs Compl 3 No priority / No action
multi disciplinarity Strength 3 No priority / No action
successors for SME management Compl 3
No priority / No action

Human Capital female students for MINT Compl 3

No priority / No action
dedicated education system on worker
level
Compl 3
No priority / No action

geographical transport accessibility Strength No priority / No action

3

Table 15: Consolidation for the C&C with low priority

From the 37 C&C with low priority, 32 have “no action” assigned. The remainder 5 concern
possible specific actions between one or more partners in the project.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 37 of 38

 D2.3

13 Conclusions from the Analysis of the Commonalities and

Complementarities.

The result of this deliverable is a detailed list of C&C resulting from the analysis of a generic
“European” SWOT. To each C&C a priority is attached and a preferred category of action.
The list is consolidated from inputs from the 5 involved regions.

Finally this consolidation should be the starting point for the WP 3: Development of a Joint
Action Plan, where a selection and a detailed elaboration of actions to be implemented will
take place.

Silicon Europe FP7 – RoK – GA 320004 Page 38 of 38