This Genially and your Activity 3.3 Word template work together as one activity. Open both now and keep them side by side.
You will move through 10 steps. Each step: read the Genially screen, make a decision, and fill in the corresponding section of your Word template immediately. You never need to go back and transfer anything.
Steps 1–3: Explore services by category. For each service you want, tick it in your template and assign a year.
Steps 4–8: Make five design decisions. For each one, read the options here and fill in the matching element in your template.
Step 9: Complete the infrastructure table in your template using the guidance on screen.
Step 10: Run the coherence check in your template.
Step 1 of 10 · Service Explorer
Regional Analysis services
Read each service. Click a card to see the full description. For every service you want to include, tick it in your template and assign Year 1, 2, or 3.
Open your template now → Element 1A: Regional Analysis services
These are your diagnostic tools. At least one must appear in Year 1. You cannot design services without first mapping what exists in your territory.
RA-1
Territorial Bio-Based Asset Mapping
A systematic survey of all biological resource flows, processing capacity, enterprises, and knowledge assets in your territory.
Read full description →
RA-2
Stakeholder Ecosystem Mapping
A structured analysis of who the actors are, what relationships exist between them, and where the critical coordination gaps lie.
Read full description →
RA-3
Value Chain Gap Analysis
A detailed tracing of biological material flows from primary production to end markets — to find exactly where value is being lost.
Read full description →
✏️ Fill in your template now: Element 1A — tick the Regional Analysis services you are selecting and assign Year 1, 2, or 3 to each.
Step 2 of 10 · Service Explorer
Social services
Read each service. Click a card for the full description. Tick your selections in your template and assign a year.
Template → Element 1B: Social services
These build the human infrastructure of your Startup Village. The peer learning network (S-1) belongs in Year 1 in almost every context — it is the lowest-cost, highest-relationship service in this catalogue.
S-1
Peer Learning Network
A structured programme of regular exchanges between bio-based entrepreneurs — facilitated, sector-specific, and self-organising after 6 months.
Read full description →
S-2
Mentoring Programme
A structured 6–12 month advisory relationship between an early-stage entrepreneur and an experienced practitioner from a comparable rural context.
Read full description →
S-3
Community Cooperative Development Support
Advisory and facilitation support to design and establish collective bio-based enterprises that retain economic value in the territory.
Read full description →
✏️ Fill in your template now: Element 1B — tick Social services and assign years.
Step 3 of 10 · Service Explorer
Technical services
Read each service. Click a card for the full description. Tick your selections in your template and assign a year.
Template → Element 1C: Technical services
Most capital-intensive. Only include a Technical service in Year 1 if you already have documented demand from at least 6–8 enterprises.
T-1
Shared Processing Facility
A facility shared by multiple enterprises that cannot individually finance processing equipment at commercially viable scale. €150K–€800K capital. Confirm demand first.
Read full description →
T-2
Quality Certification Support
Group certification for PDO/PGI, organic, FSC, and bio-based content marks — reducing per-enterprise costs by 50–70%.
Read full description →
T-3
Export and Market Access Programme
Market intelligence, buyer-seller matchmaking, and export documentation support to help enterprises access markets beyond local and regional.
Read full description →
✏️ Fill in your template now: Element 1C — tick Technical services and assign years. Then complete the sequencing rationale box at the bottom of Element 1.
Step 4 of 10 · Design Decision 1
Governance model
Read all four options. Choose the one that best fits your territory. Then complete Element 2 (Governance and Legal Structure) in your template.
Template → Element 2: Governance and Legal Structure
Public institution-led
The regional or local government authority directly manages the Startup Village. Strong institutional legitimacy and access to public resources. Vulnerable to electoral cycle changes and can feel bureaucratic to entrepreneurs.
Best if
Political commitment is strong and multi-year. Your institution has staff capacity for direct service delivery.
ROBIN EXAMPLE
Andalusia regional government-led agri-food innovation hub — used regulatory authority to create a bio-based enterprise permitting fast-track.
Cooperative
Owned and governed by a cooperative of stakeholders — enterprises, community members, and public partners as co-owners. Genuine community ownership and aligned incentives. Requires existing cooperative culture.
Best if
Territory has active cooperative traditions. Political will exists to transfer ownership rather than retain control.
ROBIN EXAMPLE
Abruzzo forest bioeconomy second-degree cooperative — seven forest cooperatives and the Comunità Montana as co-owners.
Public-private partnership
Public authority and a private sector partner co-manage under a formal agreement. Accesses private expertise and market connections. Requires careful contract design to protect the territorial mission.
Best if
A specific private actor — an ITS, processing company, or cooperative federation — has expressed genuine interest in co-management.
ROBIN EXAMPLE
Drama (Greece) — Perifereia and ITS of agronomy as co-managing partners. Neither could have sustained the hub alone.
Association
An independent non-profit association with a multi-stakeholder board. More flexible than public institutions; survives electoral cycles. Depends on diversified funding and strong board leadership.
Best if
You want governance independence from the electoral cycle and have strong civil society actors willing to lead.
ROBIN EXAMPLE
Zilina (Slovakia) rural innovation association — board with members from forest enterprises, municipality, ITS, and LAG.
✏️ Fill in your template now: Element 2 — governance model, legal form, board composition, decision-making procedures, accountability mechanisms, co-funders, political sustainability mechanism.
Step 5 of 10 · Design Decision 2 + 3
Territorial scale and target population
Two decisions on one screen — they belong together because the scale determines whether your target population reaches critical mass. Fill in Element 3 as you decide.
Template → Element 3: Target Entrepreneur Population
Territorial scale
Single municipality
Deepest local knowledge and trust. May not generate critical mass for shared services. Peer learning network needs minimum 6 enterprises.
Risk: too small for most shared services. Works only for cooperative models with a specific shared asset.
LAG area or equivalent
15,000–60,000 inhabitants. Large enough for critical mass, small enough for governance proximity. LEADER provides an existing governance anchor. All 9 services reach minimum viable scale at this level.
Provincial or regional
Larger enterprise pool and resource base. High governance complexity. Best for export programmes needing volume, regional quality branding, or technical services needing high scale.
Primary target population
Primary producers and farmer cooperatives
They have the biological resource but need help with processing, quality, and market access.
Suggested Year 1 portfolio
RA-1 + RA-3 + S-1 + T-2
Watch: significant heterogeneity. Individual farmers and cooperatives have very different needs.
Bio-based processors and product developers
They have a product concept but lack processing capacity, certification, or market access to commercialise it.
Suggested Year 1 portfolio
RA-2 + S-1 + S-2 + T-2
Watch: often overestimate market readiness. Do export readiness assessment before trade events.
Cross-sectoral innovators and startups
Novel bio-based products or business models across sector boundaries. Highest innovation potential; highest support intensity required.
Suggested Year 1 portfolio
RA-1 + RA-2 + S-1 + S-2
Watch: requires 3–5 year support horizon. Financial model must reflect this timescale.
✏️ Fill in your template now: Element 3 — sector focus, development stage, enterprise type, estimated numbers, geographic area, three unmet needs.
Step 6 of 10 · Design Decision 4
Financial model
Choose your scenario. Then complete the revenue and expenditure tables in Element 4 of your template — the scenario tells you which revenue growth trajectory to plan toward.
Template → Element 4: Financial Model
A
Grant-anchored
Year 1
90%
Year 3
70%
Year 5
55%
Grants cover most costs throughout. Service fees and other revenues grow slowly.
Best if: less-developed region with high ERDF rates. Enterprises cannot pay fees in Year 1.
B
Service revenue-building
Year 1
75%
Year 3
55%
Year 5
40%
Service fees and facility rental grow faster. More intensive financial management.
Best if: target enterprises have early commercial revenue. Governance model allows fee collection from Year 1.
C
Cooperative-owned
Year 1
65%
Year 3
45%
Year 5
30%
Most resilient long-term. Enterprise co-ownership creates structural incentive for fee payment. Slowest to establish.
Best if: cooperative governance model. Territory has cooperative culture. 12–18 months available for establishment.
Bar charts show grants as % of total operating costs. ROBIN pilot regions that achieved sustainability treated grant exit as a design problem from Day 1, not something to figure out later. Target: non-grant revenue above 35% by Year 3.
✏️ Fill in your template now: Element 4 — revenue streams (6 rows), expenditure categories (7 rows), sustainability pathway, Year 3 sustainability target.
Step 7 of 10 · Design Decision 5
Infrastructure approach
For each infrastructure type, choose Build / Partner / Virtual. Fill in Element 5 of your template row by row as you read across the table below.
Template → Element 5: Infrastructure
Key principle: Always check what already exists before committing to new infrastructure. In most territories, at least one ITS, cooperative facility, or municipal building can be accessed through partnership at a fraction of the cost of new construction.
Infrastructure type
Build / procure your own
Partner access (existing)
Virtual or minimal
Physical workspace (co-working, meeting, events)
For large LAG-scale Startup Villages with 20+ active enterprises
ITS classrooms, municipal buildings, cooperative halls — negotiate a formal access agreement
Fully viable in Year 1. Rotating venue + shared messaging group is enough to start.
Shared processing equipment
Only if demand confirmed from 8+ enterprises and ERDF co-financing secured
Shared access with existing cooperative facility or agri-food hub — preferred if it exists
Not possible for this service
Digital platform (community hub, knowledge base)
Build if IT management capacity exists
Use ROBIN Toolbox community platform or LAG digital tools
Always viable. Minimum: shared messaging group + shared document folder.
Testing or quality lab
Very high cost — only if ITS partnership is truly unavailable
ITS lab access through formal partnership agreement — preferred in almost all cases
Not possible for quality certification services
Logistics and cold chain
Not recommended — capital-intensive with low Year 1 utilisation
Negotiate collective logistics contracts with existing regional operators
For markets within 100 km, individual enterprise logistics is viable while volumes are low
✏️ Fill in your template now: Element 5 — complete every row: approach (Build/Partner/Virtual), current status, estimated capital cost, year of deployment, funding source or partnership arrangement. Then add any existing infrastructure available through partnership.
Step 8 of 10 · Elements 6, 7 and 8
Partnerships, monitoring and assumptions
Three elements to complete in your template. Read the guidance for each, then fill in the corresponding section.
Template → Elements 6, 7 and 8
Element 6
Key Partnerships
List only the partnerships without which the programme genuinely cannot function — not the full stakeholder landscape.
For each essential partner: name and type → their contribution → your contribution to them (what do they gain?) → formality level → risk if they do not participate and your mitigation.
The "your contribution to them" column is the most important and most frequently left blank. Partnerships that extract value without offering reciprocal value are not partnerships.
Element 7
Monitoring Approach
Your template has 5 KPI rows — the first three are pre-filled with standard indicators (enterprises enrolled, 3-year survival rate, private investment mobilised). Add your own in rows 4 and 5.
Then complete the four review process fields: which forum reviews results, how often, who receives reports, and how results change programme delivery.
The most important field: how results feed back into programme design. A monitoring system without a decision-making process attached to it is an administrative exercise, not a management tool.
Element 8
Design Assumptions
Every design rests on assumptions about demand, partner commitment, political continuity, funding, and enterprise behaviour. Surfacing them is not a sign of weakness — it is how governance boards manage risk.
For each of your 5 assumptions: what you are assuming → evidence that supports it → what happens if it is wrong → your contingency plan.
A canvas with no explicit assumptions is a design built on hidden risks that will surface during implementation.
✏️ Fill in your template now: Element 6 (partnerships table), Element 7 (KPI table + review process), Element 8 (assumptions table — 5 rows).
Step 9 of 10 · Final check
Coherence check
Before finalising your canvas, answer these four questions in the Coherence Check section at the bottom of your template. If any answer is No, go back and revise.
Template → Coherence Check section
Run all four checks in your template
1
Does your governance model support your financial model? A public institution-led model with Scenario C cooperative financing is inconsistent. A cooperative model with Scenario A pure-grant financing may be inconsistent with the cooperative's need to demonstrate member value through fee income.
2
Does your territorial scale generate enough enterprises for your Year 1 services? Peer learning network: minimum 6 enterprises. Shared processing facility: minimum 8. If your scale does not reach these thresholds, either adjust the scale or defer those services to Year 2.
3
Does your service portfolio address the three unmet needs you identified in Element 3? Map each unmet need to the service or services in Element 1 that addresses it. If any unmet need has no corresponding service, either add a service or revise the needs.
4
Does your financial model cover the total annual cost of your service portfolio? Sum the cost per enterprise × number of enterprises for all Year 1 services from Element 1. Compare to total Year 1 revenue in Element 4. If revenue is less than cost, identify the gap source before proceeding.
Your canvas is complete when all four checks pass. This completed Service Design Canvas is the primary output of Module 3. Save it and share it with your governance board before finalising. It feeds directly into the entrepreneurship support infrastructure section of your Regional Action Plan in Module 10.
✏️ Final step in your template: Complete the Coherence Check section — four questions with a Yes / No / Partial answer and explanation for each.