Effectiveness of Regional Innovation Actions: Cases from Small, Low-Innovative Regions

  • Elpida Samara
  • Kostas Galanakis
  • Ioannis Bakouros
  • Dimitrios Skalkos
Article
  • 24 Downloads

Abstract

This paper attempts to identify the suitability of centrally and remotely designed innovation-related regional actions, examining the case of regions that started innovative activities from a low development level. Using the case of two Greek regions, the present paper analyses the legacy left to the regional systems by a series of regional innovation programs, whose main priorities were designed centrally without any regional consultation. After a brief presentation of the analysis framework, it discusses the actions of four programs that were implemented in the two cases from 1997 until 2008, namely, the Regional Innovation System (RIS), Regional Innovation Strategy + (RIS+), Innovative Actions, and Innovation Poles. The findings suggest that these programs often provide the means for generating the first steps towards the creation of an Innovation System at regional level; however, because of an economic and knowledge environment that is not matured to support innovation, they create a dependency on publicly funded programs. As a consequence, a vicious circle is created, leading the regional actors to direct most often their applications and actions to the centrally designed priorities, instead of identifying regional needs and priorities and without a systemic view of the industrial and developmental needs of the region. Evidently, this leads to fragmented actions and the inability to sustain those actions after the completion of the programs.

Keywords

Regional innovation systems Regional innovation strategies Innovation policy 

References

  1. Asheim, B. T., & Isaksen, A. (1997). Localisation, agglomeration and innovation: towards regional innovation Systems in Norway? European Planning Studies, 5(3), 299–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asheim B., Coenen L., (2005). The role of regional innovation systems in a globalizing economy: comparing knowledge bases and institutional frameworks in Nordic clusters. CIRCLE.Google Scholar
  3. Asheim, B., & Getler, M. (2005). The geography of innovation: regional innovation systems. In J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery, & R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 291–317). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Asheim, B., Boschma, R., & Cooke, P. (2011). Constructing regional advantage: platform policies based on related variety and differentiated knowledge bases. Regional Studies, 45, 893–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Autio, E. (1998). Evaluation of RTD in regional systems of innovation. European Planning Studies, 6, 131–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beauregard, R. A., & Pierre, L. (2000). Disputing the global: a sceptical view of locality-based international initiatives. Policy and Politics, 28(4), 465–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Börzel, T.A. and Risse, T. (2001) Private-public partnerships: effective and legitimate tools of international governance?. Paper prepared for the Workshop on “Global Governance”, RSCAS, Florence, 6-7 April 2001.Google Scholar
  8. Boschma, R., & Frenken, K. (2011). The emerging empirics of evolutionary economic geography. Journal of Economic Geography, 11, 295–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carayannis, E., & Rakhmatullin, R. (2013). The quadruple/quintuple innovation helixes and smart specialization strategies for sustainable and inclusive growth in Europe and beyond. Journal of Knowledge Economy, 4, 331–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. CEC (Commission of the European Communities) (1995). Green Paper on Innovation, CEC, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
  11. Chang, C., & Chen. (2004). Comparing approaches to systems of innovation: the knowledge perspective. Technology in Society, 26, 17–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Christensen, J. (2010). The role of finance in national systems of innovation. In B. Lundvall (Ed.), National systems of innovation: toward a theory of innovation and interactive learning, Anthem press (pp. 151–172). New York: London.Google Scholar
  13. Cooke, P. (1992). Regional innovation systems: Competitive regulation in the new Europe. Geoforum 23(3), 365–382.Google Scholar
  14. Cooke, P., Uranga, M., & Etexbarria, G. (1997). Regional innovation systems: institutional and organizational dimension. Research Policy, 26, 475–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cooke, P., Boekholt, P., & Tödtling, F. (2000). The governance of innovation in Europe, regional perspectives on global competitiveness. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  16. Cooke, P. (2001). Regional innovation systems, clusters and the knowledge economy. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 945–974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Doloreux, D. (2003). Regional innovation systems in the periphery: the case of the Beauce in Québec (Canada). International Journal of Innovation Management 7, 67–94.Google Scholar
  18. Dosi, G. (1988). Sources, procedures, and micro economic effects of innovation. Journal of Economic Literature, 26, 1120–1171.Google Scholar
  19. Edquist, C. (1997). Systems of innovation: technologies, institutions and organisations. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  20. Edquist, C., & Hommen, L. (1999). Systems of innovation: theory and side. Technology in society: an International Journal, 21, 63–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Edquist, C. (2004). Reflections on the systems of innovation approach. Science and Public Policy, 31(6), 485–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Edquist, C. (2011). Design of innovation policy through diagnostic analysis: identification of systemic problems (or failures). Industrial and Corporate Change, 20, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. European Commission DG Regional Policy, (2002) Regional innovation strategies under the European Regional Development Fund Innovative Actions 2000-2002.Google Scholar
  24. Foray, D. (2015). Smart specialization: opportunities and challenges regional innovation policy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Foray, D., & Rainoldi, A., (2013) Smart specialisation programmes and implementation. JRC Scientific and Policy Reports: S3 Policy Brief Series, 2.Google Scholar
  26. Foxon, T., Gross, R., Chase, A., Howes, J., Arnall, A., & Annderson. (2005). UK innovation systems for new and renewable energy technologies: drivers, barriers and systems failures. Energy Policy, 33(16), 2123–2137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Freeman, C. (1987). Technology policy and economic performance: lesson from Japan. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
  28. Freeman, C. (1995). The ‘national system of innovation’ in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(1), 5–24.Google Scholar
  29. Galanakis, K. (2006). Innovation process. Make sense using systems thinking. Technovation, 26, 1222–1232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Godinho, M. M., S. Mendonça and T. S. Pereira, (2004) Towards a taxonomy of innovation systems, paper presented at the Second Globelics Conference: innovation systems and development: emerging opportunities and challenges, Beijing, 16-20 October 2004.Google Scholar
  31. Grande, E., (2001) Institutions and interests: interest groups in the European system of multi-level governance. Working paper no. 1/2001, chair for political science, TU Munich.Google Scholar
  32. Hall, B. (2002). The financing of research and development. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18, 35–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hall, B. (2005). The financing of innovation. In S. Shane (Ed.), The handbook of technology and innovation management (pp. 409–430). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  34. Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2001). Multi-level governance and European integration. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. Open Journal of Political Science 4 No. 4, October 16.Google Scholar
  35. Karjalainen, P. (2008). R&D investments: the effects of different financial environments on firm profitability. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 18, 79–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kirat, T., and Lung, Y. (1999). Innovation and proximity territories as loci of collective learning processes. European urban and regional studies 6(1), 27–38.Google Scholar
  37. Kirzner, I. (1997). Entrepreneurial discovery and competitive process: an Austrian approach. Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 60–85.Google Scholar
  38. Liu, X., & White, S. (2001). Comparing innovation systems: a framework and application to China’s transitional context. Research Policy, 30, 1091–1114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lundvall, B.-Å. (1992). National systems of innovation: towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  40. Lundvall, B., & Borras, S. (2005). Science, technology and innovation policy. In J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery, & R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation (pp. 599–631). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Malmberg, A. and Maskell, P. (1997). Towards an Explanation of Regional Specialization and Industry Agglomeration. European Planing Studies 5, 25–41.Google Scholar
  42. Marks, G., Hooghe, L., & Blank, K. (1996). European integration from the 1980s: state-centric vs. multi-level governance. Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(3), 341–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Melkas H. and Harmaakorpi, V., (2008). Data, information and knowledge in regional innovation networks: quality considerations and brokerage functions. European Journal of Innovation Management, 11 (1).Google Scholar
  44. Mieszkowski, K., & Kardas, M. (2015). Facilitating an entrepreneurial discovery process for smart specialization. The case of Poland. Journal of Knowledge Economy, 6, 357–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Nelson, R. R. (1993). National systems of innovation: a comparative study. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  47. OECD. (1997). National innovation systems. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  48. OECD. (1999). Managing national innovation systems. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  49. Peters, G.B. and Pierre, L. (2002) Multi-level governance: a view from the garbage can. Manchester papers in Politics: EPRU Series, 1/2002.Google Scholar
  50. Pisano, G., (2006). Can science be a business? Lessons from biotech. Harvard Business Review, 1–12.Google Scholar
  51. Porter, M. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. New York: Free Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rahm, D., Kirkland, J., & Bozeman, B. (2000). University-industry R&D collaboration in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan. London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Reid, A., Komninos, N., Sanchez-P. J. and Tsanakas, P., (2012) Smart specialisation as a means to foster economic renewal, A report to the European Commission, Directorate General for Regional Policy, Unit I3 - Greece & Cyprus.Google Scholar
  54. Rothman, H., & Kraft, A. (2006). Downstream and into deep biology: evolving business models in ‘top tier’ genomics companies. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 12, 86–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Samara, E., Galanakis, K., Bakouros, I., & Platias, S. (2010). The spin off chain. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 5(3), 51–68.Google Scholar
  56. Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Sefertzi, E. (Ed.). (1998). Innovation: system areas, technology transfer and development in Greece. Athens: Gutenberg (in Greek).Google Scholar
  58. Skayannis, P. (2002). First innovation attempts in less developed European regions: contextual questions and policy issues. Entrepreneurship and innovation policies in the European periphery: a research agenda. Volos: University of Thessaly Press.Google Scholar
  59. Storper, M. (1997) The Regional World, Territorial Development in a Global Economy. Guilford Press, New York.Google Scholar
  60. Sundbo, J. (1998). The organisation of innovation in services. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  61. Ter Wal, A. L. J., & Boschma, R. (2011). Co-evolution of firms, industries and networks in space. Regional Studies, 45, 919–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Todtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2005). One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research Policy, 34, 1203–1219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wallace, H. (2000). The institutional setting: five variations on a theme. In H. Wallace & W. Wallace (Eds.), Policy-making in the European Union (4 th edn) (pp. 3–37). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elpida Samara
    • 1
  • Kostas Galanakis
    • 2
  • Ioannis Bakouros
    • 1
  • Dimitrios Skalkos
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of Western MacedoniaKozaniGreece
  2. 2.Nottingham Busienss SchoolNottingham Trent UniversityNottinghamUK
  3. 3.Management of Innovation in Food Enterprises, Department of Food Science & NutritionUniversity of the AegeanLemnosGreece

Personalised recommendations