Agnes von Matuschka, President of the European Division of the International Association of Science Parks and Areas of Innovation (IASP)
Agnes von Matuschka, Managing Director of Potsdam Science Park, was elected on 5 June as the new President of the European Division of the International Association of Science Parks and Areas of Innovation (IASP). What are your main priorities or key themes on which you intend to focus during this period within IASP?
It is truly an honour to serve as President of the IASP European Division. My focus for this term centres on three closely connected priorities: collaboration, policy dialogue, and sustainable growth. I see strong potential in deepening cross-border collaboration between science parks and areas of innovation across the EU, the UK, and EU applicant countries. By linking our ecosystems more strategically, we can accelerate technology transfer from science into industry, support scale-ups in their internationalisation, and generate replicable best practices at the interface of research, business, and regional development. This strengthens Europe’s visibility and innovation performance while simultaneously reinforcing the strategic positioning, resilience, and long-term value creation of science and technology parks across the continent.
IASP is a global network with a very active European community. Together, we can increase our relevance by empowering practitioners, encouraging initiative, and co-creating a forward-looking agenda. I would like to further develop the structured dialogue between parks, cities, regions, and European policymakers, particularly as our ecosystems face shared challenges in financing, innovation transfer and scaling up enterprises. I am very interested in hearing back from the different IASP members across Europe where we see aspects that need amplification. Cooperating and learning from each other is part of our shared interests.
My commitment is not just to generate new ideas, but to ensure they are put into practice—building resilient networks, aligning with the European Innovation Agenda, and positioning science and technology parks as key infrastructures for competitiveness, green transformation, and technological sovereignty. Attracting new members who recognize these advantages is essential for growing our impact. Those interested in joining can count on the CEO of IASP and our board members to provide clear guidance on the benefits and unique opportunities that membership brings. Within the IASP European Division, we have a distinct chance to advance as a united, visible force across Europe and within our regions.
At the level of European innovation policy, science and technology parks currently have limited visibility, while other innovation ecosystem actors such as clusters and living labs have gained greater prominence. From your perspective, how can science and technology parks increase their prominence and therefore their relevance in programmes such as the “European Innovation Ecosystems”?
Science and technology parks are entering a time of significant change and opportunity. With the European Competitiveness Fund and the successor to Horizon Europe set for discussion in 2028, there is still uncertainty about what the future holds for parks within Europe’s innovation landscape. Although these programs are designed to streamline funding, reinforce strategic value chains, and speed up the application of research, the specific criteria, priorities, and timelines have yet to be finalized. Therefore, it is essential for science parks to clearly communicate their role as key drivers of innovation, making sure they are recognized as vital contributors to Europe’s progress.
Science and technology parks can strengthen their visibility by presenting themselves as essential, interconnected innovation hubs rather than simply as physical spaces for organizations. Their true value lies in coordinating dynamic ecosystems—bringing together research institutions, startups, corporations, investors, local governments, and regional authorities within a unified framework. This coordination is most effective when all ecosystem participants acknowledge and embrace their collective responsibility.
Building stronger partnerships with clusters, living labs, EIT communities, and regional development agencies can further extend the reach and influence of science parks. When evaluating their impact— particularly regarding innovation transfer—it is important to consider the diverse structures and unique conditions present across different European regions.
Parks should communicate their impact in technology transfer, deeptech scaling, green transition, and regional transformation, while cities and regions actively support and value the coordination behind these results. Competitiveness is created by aligned local and regional systems, not single actors. Our goal within IASP should be to enhance competitiveness collectively. Together, we can strengthen Europe’s innovation capacity through connected, agile ecosystems and the swift integration of organizations eager to be part of this collaborative network
And, speaking as Managing Director of Potsdam Science Park site management, I’d like to add a brief note: we will be addressing these questions in Potsdam on April 15–16 at the 2nd Potsdam International Forum, “Science Parks and Competitiveness: Bridging Regional Growth and European Innovation and
Research Policy.” I am very much looking forward to continuing the conversation with colleagues from Spain’s science and technology parks in Potsdam.
Collaboration among European IASP members is also an important aspect to foster in order to boost the impact and visibility of parks in European policy development. What is your opinion of the initiative led by APTE within IASP to create a working group focused on promoting collaboration among IASP members in European projects? What other initiatives could be launched?
The IASP European projects subnetwork led by APTE is a timely and strategic step. A dedicated working group on European projects can pool expertise, help identify strategic funding opportunities early and align thematic priorities. Moving towards structured matchmaking and joint project pipelines and sharing intelligence on upcoming calls could be an interesting thought. In this way, we can build stronger consortia and increase our success rates.
A peer-to-peer mentoring scheme between experienced and emerging parks would further strengthen cohesion, particularly for members in EU applicant countries. There is also strong potential in launching cross-border flagship initiatives led by science and technology parks, focused on deep tech, green transition, and scale-up internationalization – I think first initiatives of this kind have already emerged.
At present, IASP is chaired by a woman, and now so is the presidency of its European Division. From the perspective of helping to reduce the gender gap in the technological field, do you believe new and more effective actions could be developed at European level?
Absolutely. Representation at leadership level matters, and it’s very encouraging to see IASP being chaired by a woman. As I see it, equality is reached when gender is no longer a question—when opportunities, recognition, and career paths are fully inclusive by default. We should conjointly move toward a Pan-European
ecosystem where equality is inherent, and Europe’s innovation capacity fully benefits from all its talent. Since this is not (yet) the case, it is relevant to put a spot on imbalances.
It is not a given everywhere in the world that women work in leadership positions our found a company. And even in Europe the tech talent gap is huge; women cover less than a third of all tech roles in European companies. We still have less women in STEM and ICT, few female engineers, founders and investors—even though there are some really dedicated ones. Change is often happening at the top, so women in leadership positions can effectively contribute to fostering female innovation talent in Europe. However, I would like to emphasize that this should by no means be understood as a “purely
female” dialogue—it’s a societal task across Europe.
I believe parks, as well as representative networks and institutions, can lead here by example, by promoting balanced recruitment in startups, spin-offs, and research teams. By fostering cultures where talent and ideas take priority.
At the European level, international mentorship and sponsorship programs and connecting women in tech and role models across regions, providing guidance and networks can contribute to change – also a topic we want to discuss at in April. There is a good chance that Europe can increase, or even double women’s share in tech roles. which would have an immense impact on EU GDP.