Generally, companies from Austria, Germany, the U.S. and the Scandinavian countries are considered to be quality producers. Table 1.20 provides an overview, by media and by country, of which are the major "quality" foreign environmental technologies.
| TABLE 1.20: PERCEPTIONS OF FOREIGN ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES FROM DIFFERENT COUNTRIES | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Czech Republic | Hungary | Poland | Slovakia | Slovenia | |
| Air | 1) Germany; 2) Austria; 3) US |
1) Germany; 2) Austria; 3) Japan |
1) Germany; 2) Scandinavia; 3) US, Japan |
1) US; 2) Germany; 3) Austria, Scandinavia |
1) Germany; 2) US; 3) Japan |
| Water and Wastewater | 1) Germany; 2) Austria; 3) UK |
1) Germany; 2) Austria; 3) Holland, France, US |
1) Japan; 2) Austria; 3) US, Germany |
1) Germany; 2) US; 3) France, Holland, Scandinavia |
1) Holland; 2) Germany; 3) Austria |
| Waste | 1) Austria; 2) Denmark; 3) Netherlands |
1) Austria; 2) Germany; 3) France, US |
1) US; 2) Germany; 3) Austria; 4) Scandinavia |
1) Germany, US; 2) France, Scandinavia; 3) Japan |
1) Germany, US; 2) France; 3) Holland |
| Energy | 1) Germany; 2) Austria; 3) US |
1) Germany; 2) Holland; 3) US |
1) Austria; 2) Holland; 3) Germany, US |
1) Scandinavia; 2) Germany; 3) US, Holland |
1) Scandinavia; 2) Germany; 3) Austria, Holland |
| Noise, Vibration and OHS | n.a. | 1) Denmark, Sweden; 2) Japan; 3) US |
n.a. | 1) Scandinavia; 2) Germany; 3) Austria, Japan, US, Holland |
1) Denmark; 2) US; 3) Germany, Scandinavia |
| Note: The survey question appeared as follows: "rank how environmental professionals in your country perceive environmental technology from different countries, using the following scale: 5 = excellent reputation, 4 = good reputation, 3 = average reputation, 2 = poor reputation, 1 = very poor reputation, blank- no opinion" | |||||
Austria and Germany enjoy good or excellent reputations for the quality of their products in almost all countries and technology categories. The reputation of German technologies was particularly high in the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Slovenia, the traditional CEE markets for German suppliers. A very similar situation existed with perceptions of Austrian technologies.
Waste management, and water and wastewater were the sectors where Austrian technologies scored well. German products were ranked near the top in practically all categories. American technologies were also perceived well in most categories.
Technologies from other countries enjoyed good reputations only in certain sectors (e.g. Japan in air protection, France in waste management, Holland in energy). Interestingly, technologies from some countries enjoyed good reputations despite their limited availability on the local markets. Notably, Holland, Japan and the United States are cases in point.
Significantly, in most cases the perception of domestic technologies was considerably below that of Western products. Nonetheless, some experienced local customers did not always share this opinion. With the wide range of products available, local buyers have grown more experienced and selective. Also, increasingly sophisticated and still cheaper local competitors will play a larger role in the environmental technology market.
It is worth noting many respondents were either unwilling or unable to address the perception issue, either because of a limited knowledge of the foreign technologies available, or because they regard the country of origin as insignificant, with the specific producer much more important. Many respondents favored particular countries, but had problems with naming specific firms from that country. This indicates that the judgment was based more on common wisdom than on personal experience. The following section examined in more detail those foreign firms active in the domestic market.
A significant number of Western environmental technology firms are active in the surveyed countries, through a permanent local presence, or by direct sales of their equipment. The foreign presence is particularly strong in the waste management sector, water supply, and wastewater treatment. A smaller number of companies are active in the energy sector and air protection.
One clear finding from the study was that no single company dominates in any single country - individual foreign firms usually hold a minimal share of the market. The presence of technologies from specific countries varies substantially according to the media, and according to the region. Even within a single environmental technology field, several companies serve the market, as demonstrated by the fact that most interviewed experts referred to several different companies as the major suppliers.
Table 1.21 lists the major suppliers by country of origin, rather than by name (see the individual country chapters for specific company listings). The table is based on the number of foreign companies from a specific country active on the local market.
| TABLE 1.21: MAJOR FOREIGN ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY SUPPLIERS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Czech Republic | Hungary | Poland | Slovakia | Slovenia | |
| Air | Germany | Germany | Germany, Austria, Switzerland | n.a. | Germany, US, Austria, Switzerland |
| Water and Wastewater | Germany, Slovakia, France | Germany, Austria | Germany, France, Austria, Sweden | Germany, Czech Republic, US | Germany, France, Austria |
| Waste | Germany, Austria, Denmark | Austria, Germany, US, France | Austria, Germany | Denmark, Austria, France | Italy, Germany, Austria |
| Energy | US, Sweden | Germany, US, Austria, Sweden | Scandinavia, Austria, Germany | Germany, US | n.a. |
| Noise, Vibration and OHS | n.a. | Denmark, Germany | n.a. | Scandinavia, Germany | Denmark |
| Note: Many respondents had difficulties naming specific companies, which indicates poor knowledge of the foreign technologies available. | |||||
The environmental technology market in all the countries is well penetrated by foreign suppliers, with firms from Austria and Germany most active and best known across all major technology sectors. German and Austrian firms hold the lead in supplying environmental technologies in terms of both quantity and quality.
Other major foreign competitors varied depending on country and sector. French and Danish companies had a strong local presence, while in Slovenia, Italian firms were also active. French companies, along with American and Scandinavian, were well represented in the water and wastewater sector. Scandinavian (primarily Swedish) and American firms played an active role in the energy and air sectors.
In the waste management sector, Austrian, German, French and Danish firms are strong, particularly in waste incineration. Waste recycling is primarily dominated by German firms. However, Italian companies had a notable presence on the Slovenian market.
Wastewater systems are introduced by a large number of foreign firms including German, Austrian, French, Scandinavian, and a few American, British, and Dutch. Interestingly, in the Czech Republic and Slovakia, each other's companies were actively present and well known on the market.
The energy and air pollution sectors are primarily occupied by German firms, with Austrian firms following close behind. American, Japanese, and Scandinavian (notably Swedish) firms were also active, although not nearly as much as companies from the first two countries.
The foreign presence in the noise, vibration and OHS sector is minimal. The leaders included Scandinavian companies (notably from Denmark) and German firms.
Most of the big companies' head office are located in capital cities or in other major centers. Joint-ventures and joint-stock companies are a common way for foreign suppliers to enter the local market. Some large foreign firms have established their subsidiaries as legal local entities, and are very active in the waste disposal sector, including recycling. Interestingly, some foreign firms in this sector established joint-stock companies with municipalities. The Danish firm Marius Pedersen, or Austrian A.S.A. in the Czech Republic serve as good examples.
Aside from the quality and the range of the technological offer, two major factors seem to drive the current foreign presence. One is geographic proximity - Germany and Austria are best examples; the other is a long tradition of cooperation - e.g. French water supply systems in Poland. However, as no firm is considered dominant in any product line, there seem to be opportunities for any firm to provide quality products at competitive Western prices.
In conclusion, there are many foreign companies either with a local presence in the surveyed countries, or who are entering the market through their products. The strengths of foreign companies (reliable and high quality technology), are diminished by the high price, and are sometimes further offset by the lack of patience, lack of knowledge of local conditions, or by communication problems with environmental bodies, municipalities, and local businesses.
However, experience shows that those foreign firms which learn more about business practices in the region, and which think in the long-term, can find a solid basis for their future activities. ABB, Flygt, Danfoss, Grundfoss, or Marius Pedersen are cases in point.
Based on the comments and observations presented in the preceding sections, the following should be considered by exporting environmental technology firms looking to improve their share of the local market.
The most cost-effective method to enter the local market is through a joint-venture or other strategic partnership with an experienced local company specialising in a similar product line.
Forming a joint-venture with a local partner would also provide assistance in following the basic procedures of the procurement process and in overcoming the language barrier. In some countries, it would also benefit the foreign company through the equal treatment of its price bid with that of purely domestic competitors when tendering for project opportunities.
Another possibility might be for exporters of environmental technologies to take part in projects supported by their native country or international institutions, which are generally able to cover the project costs at standard Western prices. A number of technology demonstration programs have been implemented recently under such arrangements.
Therefore, it is important to prepare an attractive and competitive financing package to increase the overall competitiveness of an offer. Possible options include low-interest credit lines, partial refinancing of foreign deliveries, etc. To this end, home country government assistance and export promotion programs are of importance.
Therefore, an alternative to the already prepared and announced public tenders may be the exporter's own initiative in end-user identification, and effort in determining the end-user's specific needs and requirements. This can be combined with an offer of technical assistance, assistance with a loan application, etc. With respect to the latter, cooperation between the exporter and an experienced local partner (e.g. through a joint-venture) is essential for domestic co-financing programs.
Focusing on growth sectors where environmental technologies are most needed should be a priority for potential exporters, and some areas where technologies are in high demand are identified in individual country chapters. In cases where more product-specific market research is required, the Regional Environmental Center can provide further assistance.
In conclusion, it is important to stress that, in many cases, environmental technologies which are competitive with other Western products in terms of price and quality can be successfully introduced on the local market, although these markets are very competitive. The key factor for a successful sale of an environmental technology is an in-country representative office, and a dependable technical service. Further improvements in sales prospects can result from an attractive financing package, such as low-interest foreign credit lines, partial refinancing of foreign deliveries, etc.