Macro Level Trends – UK Growth - From White Papers to White Space Opportunism (Part 2)

The previous weblog simply outlined the major issues addressed by the White Paper for Industry Strategy. Itself part of the outcome of the findings from The Industrial Strategy Commision.

The Commission's leading participant's comprised of few people: respected Economists and Public Policy Advisors, orientated around Manchester and Sheffield Universities, with one foot in the past (regards the Coal Board) and the notional 'future' (regards Nano-technology).

The academic centres and original candidates obviously chosen to illustrate the metamorphosis from old industry to new industry; and to support the notion of the regional transition toward the Northern Powerhouse as a prime element of the eventual Industrial Strategy.

The Commission itself then, seemingly created to fulfil the ideological need to be seen to re-invent and re-energise swathes of the 'long forgotten' North and elsewhere. As such it was obviously a politically generated totem, to provide new hope for large sections of 'down-trodden' and 'water-treading' society.

Its Key Recommendations were:

1. Universal Basic Infrastructure – for all citizens

2. Health and Social Care – well-being a focus

3. Place Matters – “something for everywhere, not everything for everywhere”

4. Further and Faster Devolution – decentralisation to empower local regions and cities

5. Innovation Policy – utilising the state's purchasing power to boost innivation

6. New Institutions – a Treasury led, new institutional framework

7. Monitoring and Measuring Success – via the Office for Strategic Economic Management

8. New Methods of Appraisal – overhaul of large project decision-making process

So as to meet the strategic goals...

A. Ensure Adequate Investment in Infrastructure

B. Decarbonise the Energy Economy

C. Develop a Sustainable Health and Social Care System

D. Unlock Long-Term Investment

E. Support High Value Industries and Build Export Capacity

F. Enable Growth in All Parts of the UK

These recommendations and goals are of course derived from the utopian idealism of a better and more socio-economically stable nation with greater local identity to motivate participants.

This the very necessary political message of the era, so it should be no surprise that the Commission was sited in the North and that its efforts were born largely from the considerations of Political-Economics and Social Public Policy generalists. Who (though experts in their respective fields, given prominent positions as advisors to various Boards) were themselves appointed to formulate what was effectively a predetermined formulaic message.

But it is (and will be) of course, thanks to the contribution of Commerce, Industry (small, medium and large), the insightful sections of Academia and other realistically informed economic stakeholders, upon which the basic framework of the ultimate Strategy rests.

They must formulate the detailed superstructure upon the underpinnings of national regional challenges and global macro socio-economic trends.

Thus, to utilise the parallel metaphor of the Construction sector, the Commission provided the broad brush strokes of the Architect's loose 'concept rendering', and the Strategy Council will seemingly operate as the Concept Engineers.

But it will be Industry Leaders (British and Foreign) who will have to actually undertake the vast majority of the work. Euphemistically acting as the : Structural Engineers, Site Surveyors, Quantity Surveyors, Groundworks, Scaffold Erectors, Brick-layers, Carpenters, Plumbers, Electricians, Second-Fix, Last-Fix and Snagging Inspectors

On to the White Paper itself....

To delve deeper, the following summarises the content of the White Paper's accompanying presentation.

Firstly, to repeat....

The Grand Challenges encompass -

• Artificial Intelligence and Data Economy
• Clean Growth

• Aging Society
• Future of Mobility

These themes operate both as individual forces at the micro-level (such the competition to create advanced electronics and software amongst rivals, or at the research level to make the leap from binary digital to 'neural-networks' to even the realms of the cyber-organic) , as a consequence of the human motivation for driving theoretical and part-proven innovation, yet also more presciently when the themes converged with new era innovative solutions derived from new exploratory solutions that provide various answers to mutually coalesced trends, from 2 to 4 of the Gran Challenges identified.

That November 2017 presentation states that...

….“A truly strategic government must do more than just fix the foundations: it must also plan for a rapidly changing future, look to shape new markets and industries, and build the UK's competitive advantage”.

“The public and private sector must work with universities, researchers and civil society....breaking down the conventional barriers within and between business sectors and academic disciplines. This is what the Grand Challenges will achieve”.

The White Paper cites Germany's 'Industrie 4.0' as a good example of government assiting industry, while in the USA (the well known) DARPA Competitions have spurred innovation such as the internet and smart phones.

[NB The history of innovation if often blurred, since typically (as with Marconi and Baird per Television) simultaneous but separate similar research-work will likely be underway in various laboratories. But more likely, the very nature of syndicated research, by academia, government and industry, will – with god national research policy – seek to connect the various aspects of an 'innovation chain' – that illustrated the innovative origins to come from multiple sources.

The Internet itself has been variously stated as deriving from Tim Berners-Lee at when at CERN, UK Universities, the US Military (fort then 3C Comms) and various US Universities. Thus we see that world changing innovation rarely stems from a single source].

The UK's competitive advantages are seen by the White Paper as:

- Cyber-Security

- Machine Learning

- Micro-Electronics Design

- Composite Compound Chip Technology

- Biotechnologies and Life Sciences

Thus, once again to reiterate historic experiences...

...“Simultaneously, new strengths must be built in emerging sectors, by deploying partnerships between Business, Scientists, Investors, Educators and Policy Makers”.

“These Partnerships must be nation-wide, in accordance with (successful achievement of) Devolution”.

“For each Grand Challenge leading figures from induetry and academia will act as Expert Advisors, led by a Business Champion, operating in tandem with Ministers, to raise the profile of the specific Challenge. How to make the most of a global opportunity, like buoying nascient markets with supply-side initiatives to boost initial low-level demand, and ensuring innovations can 'diffuse' and 'scale-up' “.

As regards each Grand Challenge, the following provides greate insight into the ambitions and levels of funding :

Artificial Intelligence:

Boosting of STEM subjects, Ethics, Linguistics, Datasets, Microchips, Microcomputers, Robotics and the Internet of Things.

(Since 2010 the CAGR of AI has been 57%, from £0.2bn to nearly £2.0 by 2016).

Aims: to make the UK a Global AI Centre, 'Next Generation of Services', 'Early Diagnostics and Precision Medicine', Regulaton to foster AI via ideas generation 'Sandbox' schemes.'

The Alan Turing Centre will become the National Research Centre for AI with Fellowships.

£45m for PhDs and related disciplines.

Industry funded Masters programmes, starting with 200 places.

Cross-Discipinary learning for professionals to apply AI in their fields.

The AI Council to perform a leadership role, reporting to new AI Gov't Office.

Promotion of greater Diversity in the AI labour force

6 Priority business sectors: Cyber-Security, Life Sciences, Construction, Manufacturing, Energy, Agriculture

The 'Digital Catapult' provides various assistance packages for Start-Ups, SMEs and large Corporations.

The 'Global Entrepreneur' programme to attract foreign ventures into the UK for HQs

New Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation – world's 1^st AI advisory body.

£406m for Skills Development in Education and Industry, with New National Centre for Computing Education.

National Re-Training Scheme to reskill and upskill.

Clean Growth:

(In tandem with published Clean Growth Strategy)

Low Carbon Technologies and Efficiency of Resources.(perhaps x4 nominal GDP growth)

New Industries created and Existing Industries transformed.

Paris Agreement of 2015 seeks to Revolutionise: Power, Transport, Heating, Cooling, Industrial Processes and Agriculture.

Public and Private Financing, (individually and cooperatively).

(Since 2011 Global Green Bond issuances risen from $3bn to $125bn in 2017)

Clean-Tech primarily directed to Autos, Aero and Construction sectors.

New Markets: eg Smart Energy Systems, 'Bio-Economy' (renewable bio-based resources from land and sea to produce food, materials and energy).

Cities – cleaner air, Rural – regenerated natural capital

Electric Vehicle Manufacturing, Off-Shore Wind Power, Smart Energy Systems, Sustainable Construction, Precision Agriculture, Green Finance.

Partnership ideology between Industry, Academia, Government and Civil Society

Support Schemes to assist the upfront costs of Innovation development, roll-out and scale-up

(regulation, taxes, investment to promote new market growth) and so Commercialise

International initiatives (eg Mission Innovation)

To make Clean-Tech the more cost effective alternative to High-Carbon Trad-Tech.

Future Mobility:

UK as World Leader in Shaping Next Gen Mobility

Profound Changes in Mobility Models for People, Goods and Services

Innovation in Engineering, Technologies and Business Models

Major Investments in Electrification, Automation and Network Efficiency of Road Vehicles and Rail Networks.

Autonomous Aerial and Marine Transport

'On Demand' Ride-Hailing Services, Ride-Sharing, 'Mobility as a Service'...new perspectives

Potential to Transform Public Transport

Road and Rail De-Congestion and Improved Traffic Flow, De-Pollution and Efficiency

(Electric Cars (all but basic hybrids) sales risen from 1,000 in 2010 to 38,000 by 2016)

Government aim of testing fully self-driving cars on UK roads by 2021

New Flexible Regulatory Framework to Encourage Transport Innovation

Changes to Codes of Practice for Automatic Vehicle Testing

Law Commission projects to create Regulatory Frameworks for Automated Vehicles

£400m Charging Infrastructure Investment Fund (£200 of which by Gov't)

£100m Plug-In Car Grant (NB since retracted)

£40m (to be matched by Industry) for Charging Tech, On-Street and Wireless

Government to lead with 25% of Central Gov't cars Ultra-Low Emmisions by 2022.

Publication of a 'Transition to Zero Emissions Road Transport' Strategy.

To be World Leader in Development, Manufacture and Use of ULEV vehicles.

The blurring of distinction between private and public transport

A Mobility Marketplace that Functions Differently to the Transport System of Today

Publish 'The Future of Urban Mobility' Strategy

The National Infrastructure Commission's Innovation Prize per AI Road-Building

West Midlands a UK Centre of Expertise and Key Testing Location for best entries

£5m for the 5G Testbeds and Trials, as of 2018, including maximising productivity benefits

Support for Simulated Environments to accelerate developments

Centre for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles Research Competition

Ageing Society :

“We will harness innovation to help meet the needs of an ageing society”

Longer lifespans and reduced birth rates across the Developed world

Baby-Boomer generation reaching retirement

This prospect requires people to plan their lives differently

Older peoples will create new demands for tech, products and services,

eg new care tech, new housing models and innovative retirement financial instruments

Government's obligation to help older people lead independent, fulfilled lives, contributing

UK population aged 65 + : 1976 14%, 2046 25%

Innovative age related products and services assist Uk productivity and wellbeing

These solutions offered to a growing global marketplace

Without action, an aged society is a rediced labour force and so a poorly productive one.

“If we succeed, we will have an economy that works for everyone”

Increased support of Smart Home-Tech, 'Wearables', other Health-Tech

British businesses having redesigned jobs and workplaces to align to older needs

Workers will have more flexibility to balance work, caring and life.

Younger generations able to plan life-long careers with confidence

Japan - at the forefront of the Ageing Challenge.

Britain - NHS datasets, Design Institutes, AI Research, Life Sciences, Fininancial Services

4 Priority Areas identified:

- General Support : 'Healthy Ageing' project, New Markets, Foreign Markets,

- Sector Support : Business Champion to adapt business for older and all worker types

- Health Data : NHS data can help create new tools to diagnose and treat illness earlier

Regional Innovation Hubs to use data for research purposes, regulated by

National Data Guardian

Health and Social Care Devolved, but Tech opportunities can be taken

'Data to Early Diagnostics and Precision Medicine' programmes

- Care Provider Support : to alter business models and new models of care, and use of the

Growth Hub Network

The Five 'Foundations' to meet the abovementioned Challenges are, once again and expanded:

• Ideas
• People

• Infrastructure
• Business Environment
• Places

Ideas :

Ambition “to be the world's most innovative economy”

Past examples of Jet Engine, Bagless Vacuum Cleaner, World Wide Web etc

[herein questionable examples : 

Jet Engine - technology led by the Germans

Bagless Vacuum - tech transfer from industry processing

WWW – various sources.

Perhaps, citing more convincing examples would engage more people, since STEM enthusiasts themselves (as 'born researchers') can easily investigate each's origins].

However, to continue

UK is home to 4 of the top 10 Universities in the world.

Must ensure New Discoveries are translated into applications in Industry / Commerce

Need for greater investment by Private sector and Government.

The biggest increase in Public Investment in history

Key Policies : Research Expenditure of 2.4% of GDP by 2027, Increase Research Tax Credit to 12%, Invest £725m in Industrial Strategy Fund

Innovation is about New Ideas in Technologies, Products and Services

From Radical Transformation or Incremental Improvements, from In-House Incumbent or New Insurgent Business, a major Scientific Advancement or Technology Transfer

Ideas = Productivity Gain = Higher Earnings Power

The UK Research Base (field weighted) shows a marginal shift away from Business, Humanities and Social Sciences....marginally toward....Engineering, Physical Sciences, Environmetal Sciences, Biological Sciences and Clinical Sciences.

“Over half UK firms Innovatng” in Business Practice, Organisational Methods, Marketing, Processes, New Products.

23% above EU average performance

Product Leaders: Life Sciences, Aero, Auto, Technology, Energy, Creative Industries.

Service Leaders : Law, Accounting, Financial Services, Insurance, Architecture

The UK attracts foreign talent (into Universities and into Professional fields)

Four Key Challenges the Industrial Strategy will address:

1. Level of Public and Private Investment: 1.7% vs 2.9% USA, 2.8% Germany
   (this even so [likely because] a Services dominated economy). Innovation most seen in a small number of big firms in Autos, Pharma, Technology; 75% of Investment by 400 firms. SME's perform worse than EU counterparts. New Research strengths within EM countries. Public spending stimulates the Private by 140%.
2. Ability to Commercialise : historically seen than UK ideas can founder or are quickly purchased by MNCs (eg MRI scanner, Lithium-Ion Battery, Monoclonal Anti-bodies, Genetic Sequencing. “the D aspect of R and D needs boosting”. Much UK innovation is in Software and Branding. Uk is good at low-cost innovation and flexible start-ups, but poor at the long-haul process regards Technology. In general, UK businesses favour quick routes to market, rather than long development times. And selling businesses rather than growing them.
3. Growing Research and Innovation : need to maximise University, Public Project and Leading Business innovation activities. Bolster these strengths and the Local Eco-Systems that support Innovation and Sustained Growth.

(Britain sits 20^th in the world for % of GDP R and D Expenditure)

Science and Innovation Audits (led by a consortia of business, universities and local enterprise partnerships) reveal distinct local and regional strengths, and opportunities for inter-regional collaboration. But also recognise Barriers against building Eco- Systems by attracting Investment and Talent.

4. Remain as a Global Collaborator : 17% FDI and >50% activity in Foreign MNCs

Grow International Connections to be part of Foreign Innovation Stories.

“By 2030 to be the most innovative country in the world”.

Vision for a Knowledge Led Economy

'Innovation Clusters' around Universities (Research / Business / Entrepreneurship),

driven by STEM subjects academic enhancement.

To jump-start, £12.5bn Public Expenditure for 2021/22 (£9.5bn in 2016/17)

New Innovation Roadmap focused on Key Sectors and Technologies and Clusters,

aswell as Access to Finance, Altered Regulatory Frameworks, Intellectual Property

£725m (as 2^nd wave) of the ISC programmes

£300m (over 3 years) in world class talent

Create better relations between Research and Investment, just 50 businesses responsible for 40% of private sector investment globally. (Attracting +5% from this top 50 would add +/- 30% to R and D funding.

Operate with UKRI to develop a Strategic Priorities Fund per a 'Common Fund'

This to identitify multi-disciplinary and inter-disciplinary Research topics

Also to provide +20% budget rise for 2019/2020.

'Quality Research' also highlighted via Research England at university level

Innovate UK to also be better assisted to help business collaborate, with piloting of:

- £50m innovation loans
- Investment Accelerator for private equity 'seed-funding' alongside grant funding

British Business Bank to have new Investment Fund, for access to Venture Capital so as to 'scale-up' the nascient business.

Grant competitions run in 2017/18 worth £150m in assisted funding.

Agile Regulation to promote innovation yet protect the citizenry via Digital Charter

Improved Public Procurement as important source of finance to innovative firms...

...so as to not dilute equity and so endorses others to invest.

The USA's Small Business Innovation Research programme seen as guide...

- the GovTech Catalyst Fund >£20m/3 years to gain more efficient public services

- the 'nquiringminds' case study (per dataset exchange in Belfast)

The new Umbrella organisation of UK Research and Innovation better integrates:

- 7 Research Councils

- Innovate UK

- Higher Education Funding Council (for England)

The Industry Challenge Fund – Wave 1 assisted:

- Batteries to design, develop, produce Electric Vehicles and Remewable Energy

- AI and Robotic Systems for Extreme Environments (space / nuclear)

- Satellites

- Medicines manufacture

Wave 2 assists:

- Eco-Construction and Low-Impact Use

- Renewable Energy and Smart Systems

- Global Food and Clean Water Production

- Audio-Visual Immersive Technologies

- Next Gen Services (across various disciplines)

- Early Diagnosis and Precision Medicine

- Healthy Ageing

UK Research and Innovation to create:

- New Knowledge Exchange Framework across Universities....alongside

- (Research Excellence Framework)

- (Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework)

The 5 Foundations Demonstrate that :

Under the heading of 'Ideas', obviously Research and Development investment was the prime issue, with a sought total economic input of 2.7% of GDP by 2027.

With also £725m put into the Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund.

Under 'People', the creation of a Technical Education system that mimics the best of UK Higher Education; so as to redress the much declined capabilities in the STEM subjects.

With £406m invested, and a retraining scheme focused on IT and Construction.

Under 'Infrastructure', an increase in the 'National Productivity Investment Fund' to £31bn, regards Transport, Housing, Digital Infrastructure.

To support Electric Vehicles with £400m in Charging Infrastructure and £100m additional to the Plug-In Car Grant.

£1bn public investment in infrastructure including 5G and £200m for local Full-Fibre Networks.

The 'Business Environment' improved with 'Sector Deals' as partnerships between government and industry to improve sector productivity.

Initially in Life Sciences, Construction, Artificial Intelligence and the Automotive Sector.

Over £20bn of Investment in Innovation and high potential businesses via an initial £2.5bn Investment Fund incubated within the British Business Bank.

To review how to assist productivity in SMEs.

Specifically the 'long tail' of lower productivity firms.

[NB The 'long tail' idiom is the idea of a small firm to gain sizeable profits from selling many various niche-volume products: this focusing upon 'Niche' instead of 'Volume' or 'Differentiation'.

A good example – with its own recent 'aero-induced long-tail' vehicle variant is McLaren sports cars. All part of the apparent customer preferance for non-mainstream as a way of self-identification of being different, this at all levels of the price spectrum, from Hyper-Cars to Hyped-Coffee]

As regards 'Places', the desire to agree Local Industrial Strategies that utilise local strengths and economic opportunities. Creation of a Transforming Cities Fund via £1.7bn worth of intra-city projects, that drive productivity with improved physical connections. And a pilot Teacher Development scheme at a cost of £42m with £1,000 for professional development in 'fallen behind' subjects.

Quite obviously, thus far a broad and shallow overview.

At press release, the accompanying slide presentation's qouted that... “We are a location of choice for businesses at the cutting edge of innovation and technology, attracting more overseas investment in R and D than many other major countries, including Germany, France and China”. And beyond, flexible labour, a competitive environment and rule of law were cited as strong incentives for FDI. Ranked 7^th globally per the World Bank's 'Ease of Doing Business' Index.

Strengths were recognised in Automotive, Aerospace, Food and Drink, the Creative Sectors and elsewhere in Financial Services and Business Services.....from Satellites to Synthetic Biology to General Healthcare.

The 'Core Cities' of London, Birmingham, Manchester and Glasgow cited as obvious economic hubs, whilst vibrant local economies in areas like Milton Keynes, Oxford and Cambridge, are seen as model towns; to be replicated if possible. Within this regional development schema, the age old recognition of the need to promote growth via inter-connection and the cluster-effect; even in a notional cyber age.

National weaknesses were also recognised by way of under-use of 'Export Potential', itself hampered by Under-Investment in Education, Skills and Plant.

It is recognised that too many cities outside London 'under-perform' against the national average, and so National Productivity is poor compared to international peers. However, the advantages of Flexible Labour structures must be matched by Sustained Higher Productivity, so as to promote higher wages; the key to improving living standards across the country.

Critically, the 'Long Tail' problem seen as crucial to resolve.

This term a euphamism for the apparent large chasm that exists between the performance of the Best Corporates and SME firms.

[NB though the previous McLaren Cars example and that of revived Harris Tweed illustrate that not always so. Though obviously far easier to reserect a famous name that to start from scratch – hence the rebirth of Brabham and Lister; though brands such as 'House of Hackney' (domestic interiors) as once new start-ups are able to do so if themselves reviving specific historical design trends]

As of 2016 Britain's GDP per Hour Worked was behind Germany, France, the USA and (even) Italy, only slightly above Canada (with small population) and Japan (aged population).

To re-invigourate, one (now presently concerning) clarion call was made at the timeof release...

“We successfully rebuilt our Automotive Industry by deliberately attracting investment from abroad, most notably from Japan and most recently from India and continental Europe”

[NB Though of course presently in Q1 2019, we see the slow-down and possible closure of Honda's Civic production in Swindon, Nissan's altered plans for X-Trail production in Sunderland via 'repatriation' to Japan, BMW's altered plans for production at Oxford to include only higher margin Minis and likely new 1-series so as to cover costs, and JLR's retrenchemnt of people and model programmes given parent TATA's cautiousness (the idea of a hardly aesthetically altered even higher priced Range Rover 'Coupe' always a bad idea and thankfully no more), whilst Jaguar seeks to reconsider and rationalise its model-line (combing XE and XF...presumably to create room for a smaller B-C category car) whilst also effectively sponsoring the rebirth of Lister as a revived UK brand.

Turbulant times for volume UK Autos, but at last the appearance of rationalisation, given the unjustified concept and production exuberance seen in the latter half of past decade].

Beyond Autos, deployed initiatives to date included the 'Advanced Manufacturing Strategies', the 'Eight Great Technologies' and the 'Catapult Network'.

This then followed in the footsteps of other successful economies, which through strategic leadership were able to “coordinate and convene efforts to develop and disseminate new technologies and industries. Individuals, businesses and researchers are motivated by ambitious missions”.

“Governments can make long-term investment that no single commercial of academic player can take alone. The modern nation state is the most powerful means we have of pooling risk”.

[NB Hereafter the presentation talks of 'risk' and plays-up the Silicon Valley idiom of elevating risk, even if “accepting not all will work out successfully. An Industrial Strategy that avoids risk is no Industrial Strategy at all.”

This is somewhat non-sensical, since the whole point of strategy is to avoid and reduce risk, whether upon sector by sector, business by business, or product by product basis.

Small-scale inevitabilities of 'risk' do occur, since a Capitalist and Mixed Economy is obviously not a fully Planned Economy (which itself is known to become dysfunctional).

That said, there should be little risk in the overall Industrial Strategy if properly conceived.

This then appears a retraction of responsibility for such a Strategy. If commercial industrial strategists said this, they would not be in their professional role for long].

“We have studied previous attempts at Industrial Strategy, which have had successes as well as failures. One lesson is that government cannot do this on their own, instructing and planning, but listening or consulting”. “So our partnership is with businesses, workers, universities and colleges, local government and the devolved administrations where we work together to achieve our goals”

[This is the ideology of stakeholder participation, if not the necessity of consensus building. Buut it also conveys the likewise reducted government responsibility for the absolute eventual success of the pronounced Industrial Strategy].

The Grand Challenges (as previously depicted) recognise that it is “not just enough to look at the economy we have. We must make preparations for the economy we need to become”. Obviously true, hence (like other notional AM and first phase EM nations) recognition of sweeping global trends, and so government's role in prompting participation in those trends.

Returning to the subtle observation at the beginning of this weblog about enthno-centrism and the power of that to serve Britain overseas, the central mantra of the White Paper is 'Global Britain'.

“The decision to leave the EU was not a decision to retreat from the world....if fact we need to embrace it”.

[ie to embrace both the EU and RoW; hence the present political Brexit tussle in Westminster; and so the very critical nature of the Brexit talks with Brussels. To be avidly either a 'Brexiteer' or 'Remainer' is extremely short-sighted.

Given personal circumstances, people can be, and are, led to various and specific attitudinal 'isms' so as to take sides in the 'democratic process'. 

But better to (as with Brazil's Foreign Policy, be open to all possibilities. Herein, at last, Britain (as a smaller global force) appears to be seeking to carve out a new era of Internationalism for itself, not based upon military or currency might of the distant (yet regurgitated) past, but upon truly reciprocal internationalist advancement, with both the RoW (BRICs, MINTS, CIVETS) and the EU.

A very unlikely but possible outcome that 'to save the rest of the EU' as a combined singular entity is that it does 'turn its back' on the UK and USA, to forge far stronger connections to Russia, Turkey, the CIS States and China. To bolster trade by creating a Eurasian super-continent. With expanded connections to Brazil and S.America (via Portugal and German/Italian efforts – as seen in Brazil during the 1950s to 1970s). This through deliberately directed German leadership that the other smaller and reliant nations would follow.

Highly unlikely that the EU 'turns its back' on the UK, but not impossible].

To continue...

“Preparing for Our Future Trade Policy” necessitates the formation of new trade relationships – presented as 'old friends and new allies'. The IMF posits that over 80% of new growth will be outside of the EU, and so new relations need to be put in place.

“Our Industrial Strategy will be flexible to take account of developments in negotiations between the UK and EU or changes in the global economy”....so the Industrial Strategy will adapt.

[This generates the idea that although there are specific fore-front sectors, the details of an actual strategy are relatively scant.

Effectively left in the hands of the Business Strategists of each industrial sector, and its most powerful companies. This suggests that the business leaders of each sector might - as pseudo global syndicate members – seek to 'slice-up the world' to suit their comparitive and planned commercial capabilities to form 'non toe-stepping' growth plans. So as to obtain descrete markets and avoid profit sapping over-competition – which itself relies upon buying market share and ultimately become Value Destructive for investors as scale and inevitable internal inefficiencies grow faster than Marginal Profits].

Furthermore, as regards Devolution, the Paper cites that micro-level data will be made available to each National Assembly, so that they play a role in identifying strengths and weaknesses in specific parts of the country. A shared evidence base upon which to build the Industrial Strategy.

[This again infers that to date, little actual planning regards the forefront sectors has taken place.

This assumption supported by the words “we must have the right reporting mechanism in place”

The creation of the details of the Strategy will ultimately rely upon a 'bottom-up' feed in of analsysis data, as opposed to the wholly 'top-down' approach of Industrial Planning in the past].

The Economy and Industrial Strategy Cabinet Committee chaired by the PM remains responsible for “driving delivery across government. An independent Industrial Strategy Council is to develop measures to assess and evaluate our Industrial Strategy and make recommendations”.

[That Council, formed as of 01.11.2018, comprised of representatives from :

- The Bank of England

- National Infrastructure Commission

- Public Policy think tank

- Local Enterprise Partnership

- Private Equity

- Alternative Asset Management

- the CBI,

- the TUC

- Universities (specialist in Sociological disciplines)

- the RSA. (Royal Society for the Arts)

…....and companies in:

- Finance

- Retail

- Engineering

- Advertising

- e-Commerce

Interestingly rather than being wholly responsble for the formation and implementation of Strategy, its role is that of recommending 'Success Measures' for Implementation.

And 'Commenting on Delivery of those Success Measures and their Contribution to the UK Economy.

As stated....How to Improve the Measurement of Success, the Better Use of Data Across Government, the Effectiveness of Programme Evaluation, Publishing Reports about Assessing Progress on Implementation Against Success Measures and Ways to Improve Measurement and Evaluation.

The Industrial Strategy Council then appears centred around Improvement and Success Rate Reporting Procedures, convening 3 times a year to do so.

[NB Thus, from a Private Equity perspective – the most sophisticated of Strategy Analysts given the focus on ROI - beyond contributing to general discussions regards hi-potential sectors, and getting a 'heads-up' 'on-paper' about what will be the better assisted new and incumbent commercial sectors, Rupert Harrison of BlackRock will likely be either seeking to steer the Commitee's activities to the more investment productive sectors, and or, 'tearing his hair out' at the apparent bureacracy involved.

Not quite the hands on detailed Strategy Policy Formulation that Blackrock would hope for, but at least part of the seemingly heavily beauracratic data reporting mechanism that is meant to eventually steer such detailed policy formulation.

This appears to not bode well for any aspirant visionary UK industrialists in the grand yesteryear Georgian and Victorian meld. But appears instead, the conduit mechanism ultimately steered by reciprocal Production and Research related FDI of increasingly wealthy EM Multi-National corporations, to both serve as the Services Export Base of the UK through its Research and Development activities, and utilising the UK as itself an export market for increasingly 'Globally Converged' products and services.

Nothing at all wrong in this expectation – inherent to the Global Econony - but if that be so, it should be far more clearly stated to highlight the critical importance of EM nations to the UK economy.

The near bombastic nature of some Brexiteers – seemingly seeking to regain yesteryear colonial glories – is wholly misplaced. The tables of inherent global power have obvioulsy turned, and so the prime message is that of Internation Reciprocity, the antithesis of jingoistic bombast].

In Summary -

The Green and White Papers sought the input of many (over 2000 organisations), and has inevitably recognised the most obvious socio-economic trends; and so seeks to leverage the country's 'Innovative Capital' in the form of Money, Technology and Minds to do so; to create a new and evolved 'Industry 4.0' template.

But inevitably, from an industrial practioners perspective (especially amongst SMEs), the presentation of the White paper falls short. High on repeated rhetoric, yet meagre on more supportive statistics and meaningful examples of past innovation. (As shown some of the examples given are disputable as having even originated in the UK).

The White Paper does however – very importantly - highlight the historic 'British Disease'.

Whereby the innovation process itself was scuppered from long-term success for the nation, given the manner in which innovative solutions would be sold-off soon after incubation and proof of theory. The process of innovation itself packaged by The City and Wall Street, so as to become a marketable commodity. Innovation originators quickly morphing from life-long scientists into highly tactically minded, personal profit-hunting, business people. With either a lump sum upon incubator company exit, or thereafter retained as a notional board member or 'consultant'.

The presentation then does highlight the financially motivated early-phase market reality of UK innovation, long before any such innovation itself is marketed to the B2B or B2C arenas under the auspices of a much larger (often foreign) corporate entity that can more quickly scale-up and trickle-down the innovation across its own product sector and geographical market.

Ultimately, the White Paper presentation was/is little more than recognition of obvious global themes, illustrating the application of expanded bureaucracy – possibly acting as the actual arbiter of innovation application and so ultimately an individual company's success. Thus different in name and process but ultimately akin to the Brazilian government model using its own web-site as the Industry 4.0 funnel.

If so, this then – as effective 'cherry-picker' - the very opposite of a nurturing but pragmatic national innovation template. One that seeks to encompass innovation routes on the merits of product and service betterment; based upon the priniciples of objective rationality, the impact of feasible technological advancement and true feasible market opportunity.

There is – as ever – a danger that ironically the bureaucrats responsible for running the Industrial Strategy create internal operating mechanisms akin to a bureaucratic junket in itself.

{NB this especially ironic given the anti-EU Brussels 'gravy train' sentiment)

Heavy on trendy initiative names, rationalised flow-chart processes (such as eponymous 'evaluation') and check-box procedures.

Thus running the risk of putting process over knowledge and pragmatic insights, since, unless truly insightful experts regards each commercial sector, likely to acquiesce to the various stakeholder's 'inputs' which drive the hard choices of Strategy and Innovation.

[NB eg Previously investment-auto-motives mentioned the apparent dichotemy between Renewables and New Nuclear as regards the reality of real world Climate and Environment impact. This just one of the types of pragmatic choices and multi-option mixes, that must be made.

That is regards the available technology choices of the 'here and now', so forecasting and 'backing' various suites of Innovation becomes even more theorectical, and so demands greater understanding and foresight. Not to blindly select a technology or route, because it is the flavour of the day, or positioned in the public's consciousness].

And so the possibly of being unable to truly pragmatically assess the viability for eventual success - when providing grants and loans – is a very real concern.

Hence the voices of Industry and Investment should be given greater weighting over the oft idealism of Academia, Quango or Public Stakeholders.

Industry and Investors have 'skin in the game'.

Typically, objective critical analaysis often arrives later down the Investment Road, when private financing and private equity get on board.

But even then such interests may only be short to medium term – themselves understandably in the business of maturing and securing an exit - so repeating the well recognised 'short-sighted' problems of the past. That British Disease, of early exits and lost opportunities to capitalise, will not magically dissappear, and the temptation may grow even larger as the exit prices grow thanks to the endemic growth of EM economied themslves. EM corporations will have biger an bigger revenues and budgets by which to buy-in innovations.

And with ever greater foreign corporate interests on an increasingly EM inclined world, the PE firms et al will be sure to set out their own strategies to market each of their small but 'rising star' portfolio companies.

There is no perfect solution when creating a framework to boost national innovation, since so much is about the capability to innovate itself – where science meets creativity.

That sits within the minds of innovators themselves, not in stakeholder meetings, process charts, the tick-box bureacratic mentality, or the unrealistic over-optimism of such middle-ranking state employees who believe the rhetoric, yet have never been part of a creative industrial or commercial process itself.

The White Paper is only a broad ambition....much needs to be done to achieve that ambition.

Post Script...

It must be remembered that Jaguar's XJ-based 'Limo-Green' project was itself assisted by government funding; as had two decades earlier Rover Group's development mule, a ,Petrol-Electric Hybrid Metro.

But it was the initial 'electric exploration' of Toyota with Prius, dependent upon Toyota's nationalistic will to reduce reliance on imported petroleum and the Kyoto Summit, that truly started Hybrid and EV innovation. And whilst the Japanese government provided some finance, it was the strength of the corporate balance sheet that paid the way for Prius.

Thereafter it was PSA's and Renault's small volume series vans and cars that set the ball rolling in Europe; PSA itself an Alliance partner with Toyota on the small C1 / Aygo city car; itself ripe for eventual electrification.

Then Silicon Valley's Private Equity and Wall Street's deep-pocketed 'front-runner' funding of Tesla Motors.

With only really then – once the threat of billions of dollars in backing and Tesla's success on the stock-market, that prompted the remaining major auto-players to react to changing trends with their own e-centric sub-branded model variants.

Jaguar Land Rover's own real-world Hybrid and All-Electric technical strategy – though connected to 'Limo Green' and the C-X75 concept, was to become fully realised in production cars such as initial E-Pace, and now publicised I-Pace, came from the coupled drivers of TATA Motor's backing, increasingly successful roll-out of conventional products providing the income, and critically, the competitive challenge set by others and the need to shift from pollutive diesels and into far cleaner engines and powertrains.

But it was Germany's BMW that scaled-up production of a carbon-fibre body production process toward the lower end of mid-volume, that really shook-up the industry from a technical perspective. More efficient electric motors and improving 'rare earth' battery packs has been mated to steel and aluminium structures; but it was Germany's excellence in chemicals and materials science and production manufacturing that made perhaps the biggest leap in the 21st century. Added to that was the use of recycled materials (various wood and paper pulp) to provide additional eco-credentials. Much reduced mass and higher ecological content - together with the real-world necessity for small capacity ICE based 'range extenders - put BMW in the driving seat of 21st century cars, and it is the template that all will inevitably eventually follow. 

Hence, Britain's Strategy Council and the off-shoot New Institutions set under the auspices of The Treasury, need to be sure to be truly informed and wholly 'au fait', with what's happening both in the Innovations Laboratory, each sector's Commercial Structure and Competitive Backdrop, the world of High Finance and the plethora of B2B and B2C buyer mindsets.

[NB and an indepth study into the real stories of historically successful and historically failed innovations, would be immensely helpful guidance].

This requirement to actually create the sound basis for Industrial Strategy - is a 'country mile' away from the recent and present focus upon Social High Idealism of Process Success Measures.

The good efforts of the Previous 'Industrial Catapult' Initiatives recognised – from a virtual Scenario Planning start-point – where government assistance would be most valuable. Industry leaders painted the picture.

More of the same please - connected to an even bigger meaningful micro and macro pictures- so as to depict a properly considered Visioneered Future.

Getting there requires: less central and regional governmental PR spin, less civil-service like process 'bureaucratisation' and a meaningful decison-making framework derived from very broad real-world objectiveness and rationality.