20131129 FFF El punto de vista holandés_Kees Gooijer

1. El punto de vista holandés
Mr. Kees de Goejer.
5-6-2012
0

2. Kees de Gooijer
TKI Agri&Food, TKI-BBE
Kees = “case”
TKI = Topconsortium for Knowledge and Innovation
BBE = Biobased Economy
5-6-2012
1

3. Content
1. Why?
2. The current Dutch system
3. Some European thoughts (why is it difficult)
4. Governance
5. Q & A
6. NOG: START NATIONWIDE, ROLL OUT LATER
(KIC)
5-6-2012
2

4. Woody Allen (1953): why food?
Three existential questions exist.
1. Why are we here?
2. Where do we go?
3. When do we eat?
Maybe to be added: What do we eat, Which wine to choose?
5-6-2012
3

5. Driver #1: Health
Many chronic diseases food-related
€ 2.3 billion
• Coronary
• Cancer
€ 0.4 billion
• COPD (w.o. astma/allergy)
€ 0.6 billion
• Limbs
€ 1.0 billion
• Obesity
€ 2.5 billion*
• Sleep apneu
VWS okt-2003
* McKinsey 2012:
0.5 direct, 2.5 indirect
5-6-2012
4

6. Obesity..
5-6-2012
5

7. Michelangelo’s
David
After 2 years
in the US…
5-6-2012
6

8. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1985
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
7

9. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1986
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
8

10. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1987
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
9

11. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1988
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
10

12. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1989
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
11

13. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1990
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
12

14. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1991
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
13

15. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1992
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
14

16. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1993
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
15

17. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1994
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
16

18. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1995
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
17

19. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1996
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
18

20. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1997
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
≥20%
19

21. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1998
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
≥20%
20

22. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1999
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
≥20%
21

23. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2000
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
≥20%
22

24. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2001
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
20%–24%
≥25%
23

25. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2002
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
20%–24%
≥25%
24

26. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2003
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
20%–24%
≥25%
25

27. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2004
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
20%–24%
≥25%
26

28. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2005
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
20%–24%
25%–29%
≥30%
27

29. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2006
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
20%–24%
25%–29%
≥30%
28

30. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2007
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
20%–24%
25%–29%
≥30%
29

31. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2008
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
20%–24%
25%–29%
≥30%
30

32. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2009
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
20%–24%
25%–29%
≥30%
31

33. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2010
(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
20%–24%
25%–29%
≥30%
32

34. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2011(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person, method changed)
No Data
5-6-2012
<10%
10%–14%
15%–19%
20%–24%
25%–29%
≥30%
33

35. EU Trends
1980-2005
Females
5-6-2012
34

36. % Obesity
<5%
5-9.9%
10-14.9%
15-19.9%
Females
1980-1984
5-6-2012
© International Obesity TaskForce 2005
20-24.9%
≥ 25%
35

37. % Obesity
<5%
5-9.9%
10-14.9%
15-19.9%
Females
1985-1989
5-6-2012
© International Obesity TaskForce 2005
20-24.9%
≥ 25%
36

38. % Obesity
<5%
5-9.9%
Females
1990-1994
10-14.9%
15-19.9%
20-24.9%
≥ 25%
5-6-2012
© International Obesity TaskForce 2005
37

39. % Obesity
<5%
5-9.9%
Females
1995-1999
10-14.9%
15-19.9%
20-24.9%
≥ 25%
Self Reported
data
5-6-2012
© International Obesity TaskForce 2005
38

40. % Obesity
<5%
5-9.9%
Females
2000-2005
10-14.9%
15-19.9%
20-24.9%
≥ 25%
Self Reported
data
5-6-2012
© International Obesity TaskForce 2005
39

41. EU Trends
1980-2005
Males
5-6-2012
40

42. % Obesity
<5%
5-9.9%
10-14.9%
15-19.9%
Males
1980-1984
5-6-2012
© International Obesity TaskForce 2005
20-24.9%
≥ 25%
41

43. % Obesity
<5%
5-9.9%
10-14.9%
15-19.9%
Males
1985-1989
5-6-2012
© International Obesity TaskForce 2005
20-24.9%
≥ 25%
42

44. % Obesity
<5%
5-9.9%
Males
1990-1994
10-14.9%
15-19.9%
20-24.9%
≥ 25%
Self Reported
data
5-6-2012
© International Obesity TaskForce 2005
43

45. % Obesity
<5%
5-9.9%
Males
1995-1999
10-14.9%
15-19.9%
20-24.9%
≥ 25%
Self Reported
data
5-6-2012
44

46. % Obesity
<5%
5-9.9%
Males
2000-2005
10-14.9%
15-19.9%
20-24.9%
≥ 25%
Self Reported
data
5-6-2012
© International Obesity TaskForce 2005
45

47. Top sector
Agri & Food
The Dutch growth
diamond
5-6-2012
46

48. Position of Top sector Agro & Food:
€ 29 billion direct added value
G€
Total contribution including distribution, retail and hotel & catering € 48 billion
19.7
48.8
50
Distribution/Retail
54%
40
Hotel & catering
13.4
Industry and goods
Services
46%
30
29.1
48%
20
52%
9.4
10
6.3
Primary
production
5-6-2012
Processing
Suppliers2
Direct
added
value
Distribution
Total
added
value
0
47

49. Three opportunities
5-6-2012
48

50. Do more for less: develop sustainable, innovative
food production systems - Sustainability across the
whole Agro & Food chain
Primary production in
NL
Processing Industry
Distribution
Retail / Hotel &
catering
Water usage
Energy usage
CO2 reduction
Waste flows
Packaging
Ecosystem /
Recycling
Animal Welfare
Sustainable imports
5-6-2012
49

51. Greater added value: focus innovation on health,
sustainability, taste and convenience
De consument wil...
Primary
production
Processing
Distribution
Retail/Hotel &
catering
Examples of value creation across the chain
Improved/more
healthy crops
Hygienic distribution
of fresh products
Healthy preparation
methods
No animal suffering
Optimisation of raw
material use
Minimisation of CO2
emissions
Sustainable packaging,
sustainable cooling
Breeding for taste
Optimal processing to
retain aroma and
flavour
Packaging to retain
maximum quality
Improved preparation
methods
Production of long-life
products
5-6-2012
Functional ingredients,
less salt and saturated
fats
Ready sliced products
Regular delivery
Improved portion size
for ease of use
1
Healthy food
2
Sustainable food
3
Tasty food
4
Convenient food
50

52. Governance
Management team
Project team
EL&I
(secretary)
+
LTO
FNLI
CBL
Top team 2.0 Cees ‘t Hart
Casper Meijer
Hans Hoogeveen Jan van Rijsingen
Noud Jansen
Robert Smith
Martin Kropff
Workstream Leaders
Emmo
Meijer
Knowledge
&
Innovation
5-6-2012
Michel
Post
Medy van
der Laan
Internatio
nal
Educati
on
&
Labour
market
Paul
Jansen
Public
support
Jan van
Rijsingen
SMEs &
Regions
Vacancy
Sustainability
Bureau
51

53. Governance TKI Agri&Food
5-6-2012
52

54. TKI’s position
Business
TKI
Science
5-6-2012
Government
53

55. industrial relevance,
scientific excellence
TI Food and Nutrition
Corporate Presentation

56. The innovation process
5-6-2012
55

57. TI Food and Nutrition: Our partners
5-6-2012
56

58. The building of the plan: Start with
consumer needs
Nutrition
& Health
Food &
Structure
Food &
Safety
Consumer
Behaviour/
Communicat
ion
5-6-2012
Body shape
Resistance
Sense of
well-being
Quality of
life for the
Elderly
Great
taste
Great
texture
Great
convenience
Kids
Health
Avoidance
of chronic
diseases
Feel totally
secure
about
food
Best behaviour
for own
well-being
Social
interaction
57

59. The building of the plan: Link with
business opportunities
Main needs
Quality
of life for
the Elderly
Indication market size
World market
Above 1 billion and
growing
Underlying needs
Maintain mental performance
Avoid fractures
Avoid sensory loss
Maintain muscle function
Avoid sleep disturbances
Functional
targets
Prevent
cognitive decline
Improve mood
.........
TIFN
Progr. Dir.
Scientific
targets
Optimised fatty
acid
composition
Increase serotonergic activity
Personalised diet
composition
Regulate
inflammation
Anti-oxidative
networking
Research
programme
............
5-6-2012
58

60. Scope of the Innovation Contract
• Industry-demand driven
• Public-private financing ratio; target: 50/50 in 2015
• Public budget 2012: 56 M€ (excl. Existing like TIFN):
• DLO 34 M€ (Industrial research)
• TNO 12 M€ (Industrial research)
• NWO 10 M€ (Fundamental research, 2014/15: 30 M€ + ...)
• In 2012 building on existing projects/programs of DLO, TNO
and NWO
• TKI benefit (8.6 m€) based on cash investment in public
knowledge infrastructure
• SME valorisation pilot (3.4 m€) for feasibility and SME
innnovation project (SME contribution 60%)
5-6-2012
59

61. Biggest change
Less free money to spend.
Much more money in the form of “bodies”.
Amazingly more money from the National Science
Foundation – if we (the sector) get our act
together.
5-6-2012
60

62. (Prototyping,
scaling, 25%
public)
Implementation
busines impact
review
(towards application,
50% public)
demonstration
assesment
(knowledge
creation, without
application in
sight, 85% public)
Industrial
Research
assesment
fundamental
research
assesment
The Funnel – EU definition for R&D state
support (law!)
Knowledge Push
Market Pull
Long-term Vision: Large companies
Short-term Dynamics: SME’s
Note: Fundamental # universities, Industrial # GTI’s !
5-6-2012
61

63. 5-6-2012
62

64. PPP: The Cultural Challenge
 The Industrialist
• Driven by external needs
• Clear goals with shareholder
commitments
• Commercial confidentiality
 “Academics never deliver”
 The Academics
• Self directed
• Next step defined by
yesterday’s results
• Free exchange of ideas
 “Industry tries to cheat us”
 So it can be expected that it will
be difficult to build a mutually
trusting relationship…
Source: Tim Cook, the ISIS project, Oxford
5-6-2012
63

65. “Managing” your relationship with a
university
You
The
University
 Like leading an elephant with a thin rubber band:
Walk along with the elephant
In whatever direction it wants to go
Until it gets used to you,
Start to pull gently on your rubber band.
 If you pull too hard, or too suddenly:
You will break your rubber band, and
Have no further influence over the elephant.
5-6-2012
64

66. Investments up to sales
5-6-2012
65

67. And SME’s ?
UM / Nutrim
U Twente
TU Delft
RUG
Green
Genetics
HAS Den
Bosch
TI Pharma
Aquamarijn
Resato
Friesland
Foods
WUR
TIFN
TNO
Idea test
5-6-2012
Feasible?
Innovate
66

68. What good are those brokers?
•
•
•
•
•
•
Create a climate of open innovation and interaction.
Brokerage of concrete innovation projects wsa SME:
Define the business case:
bring parties together,
build the consortium,
(make) create project(proposal).
• Free.
5-6-2012
67

69. Brokers: call them!
Marc Oude Luttikhuis
Kees den Uijl Chain approaches
Frans vd Berg Wouter de Heij Sensory &
General
Processing Structure
Peter Sakkers
Functional
Ingredients
5-6-2012
Albert Zwijgers
Food & Health
Nico Heukels
Consumer behaviour
68

70. Europe...
5-6-2012
69

71. Internationaal
A HEALTHY DIET FOR A
HEALTHY LIFE
5-6-2012
70

72. Kees de Gooijer
TKI Agri&Food, TKI-BBE
5-6-2012
71