Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Smart Specialization as a New Strategic Framework: Innovative and Competitive Capacity in European Context

  • Published:
Journal of the Knowledge Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The smart specialization framework is an addition to the European policy agenda aiming to foster innovation and smart, sustainable, and inclusive growth. The framework is expected to boost innovativeness and competitiveness of the European Union. However, it raises a number of doubts and concerns, especially due to the currently limited state of knowledge about the concept and its possible implications. To contribute to the need for further analysis of the issue, the paper examines the current smart specialization framework, its basic assumptions, conceptual basis, and current developments in the field. The policy analysis aims to identify the strengths of the framework, as well as its weaknesses that will require attention and corrective measures. Basing on existing literature and declared by regions smart specializations, the authors provide a list of conclusions regarding the current shape of the smart specialization framework in the context of European Union strategic objectives and their implications for policy makers. Provided recommendations suggest improvements of the approach to smart specializations required for the realization of the EU strategic objectives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1992). A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, 60, 323–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aghion, P., & Saint-Paul, G. (1998). Virtues of bad times: interaction between productivity growth and economic fluctuations. Macroeconomic Dynamics, 2, 322–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, U., Dasí, A., Mudambi, R., & Pedersen, T. (2016). Technology, innovation and knowledge: the importance of ideas and international connectivity. Journal of World Business, 51(1), 153–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Añón Higón, D., Manjón, M., Máñez, J. A., & Sanchis-Llopis, J. A. (2015). Does R&D protect SMEs from the hardness of the cycle? Evidence from Spanish SMEs (1990-2009). International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(2), 361–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asheim, B. T., & Isaksen, A. (2002). Regional innovation systems: the integration of local ‘sticky’ and global ‘ubiquitous’ knowledge. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(77), 77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • AtKearney (2015). Rebooting Europe’s high-tech industry, San Francisco, February 2015, AtKearney. https://www.atkearney.pl/communications-media-technology/ideas-insights/future-of-europes-high-tech-industry. Accessed 29 Jan 2016.

  • Autant-Bernard, C., Fadairo, M., & Massard, N. (2013). Knowledge diffusion and innovation policies within the European regions: challenges based on recent empirical evidence. Research Policy, 42(1), 196–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barcelona European Council (2002). Presidency Conclusions, European Commission http://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-research/pdf/download_en/barcelona_european_council.pdf Accessed 15 January 2016

  • Bartholomew, S. (1997). National systems of biotechnology innovation: complex interdependence in the global system. Journal of International Business Studies, 2(2), 241–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belkhodja, O., & Landry, R. (2007). The triple-Helix collaboration: why do researchers collaborate with industry and the government? What are the factors that influence the perceived barriers? Scientometrics, 70, 301–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellini, N., & Hilpert, U. (2013). Europe’s changing geography: the impact of inter-regional networks. New York: Regional Studies Association, Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borsekova, K., Vanova, A., & Vitalisova, K. (2017). Smart specialization for smart spatial development: innovative strategies for building competitive advantages in tourism in Slovakia. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 58, 39–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J., & Floros, I. V. (2012). Access to private equity and real firm activity: Evidence from PIPEs. Journal of Corporate Finance, 18(1), 151–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruijn, P., & Lagendijk, A. (2005). Regional innovation systems in the Lisbon strategy. European Planning Studies, 13(8), 1153–1172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camagni, R., & Capello, R. (2013). Regional innovation patterns and the EU regional policy reform: toward smart innovation policies. Growth and Change, 44(2), 355–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Rakhmatullin, R. (2014). The quadruple/quintuple innovation helixes and smart specialisation strategies for sustainable and inclusive growth in Europe and beyond. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5(2), 212–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E.G., Meissner, D., & Edelkina, A. (2015). Targeted innovation policy and practice intelligence (TIP2E): concepts and implications for theory, policy and practice. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(3), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • CEC (2001). Communication on the future of the European Union. Brussels: European Governance. 25.7.2001 COM(2001) 428. europa.eu/rapid/press-release_DOC-01-10_en.pdf.

  • Charles, D., Grross, F., & Bachtler, J. (2012), ‘Smart specialisation’ and cohesion policy—a strategy for all regions?, European Policies Research Center. IQ-Net Thematic Paper No. 30(2) http://www.clusterpolisees3.eu/ClusterpoliSEEPortal/resources/cms/documents/2012.06.20_Smart_specialisation_and_Cohesion_Policy_-_A_Strategy_for_All_Regions.pdf

  • Cincera, M., & Veugelers, R. (2012). Young leading innovators and the EU's R&D intensity gap. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 22(2), 177–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, P. (1998). Introduction. Origins of the concept. In Braczyk, H.-J., et al. (Eds.), Regional Innovation Systems. London: UCL Press, pp. 2–25.

  • Cooke, P., Urangab, M. G., & Etxebarria, G. (1997). Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organisational dimensions. Research Policies, 26(4–5), 475–491.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, P. H., Boekholt, P., Tödtling, F. (1998). Regional innovation systems: designing for the future, Final Report, EU Commission.

  • Cooke, P. N., Heidenreich, M., & Braczyk, J. (2004). Regional innovation systems: The role of governances in a globalized world. London: Psychology Press, Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delgado, M., Porter, M., & Stern, S. (2010). Clusters and entrepreneurship. Journal of Economic Geography, 10(4), 495–518.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2010). Commission staff working document, Lisbon Strategy evaluation document, European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/lisbon_strategy_evaluation_en.pdf. Accessed 28 December 2015.

  • EC (2010a). Council conclusions on Innovation Union for Europe, 3049th Competitiveness Council meeting, Brussels, 26 Nov 2010, Council of the European Union: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/intm/118028.pdf.

  • EC (2012). Europe 2020: Europe’s growth strategy, European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/europe_2020_explained.pdf. Accessed 18 December 2015.

  • EC (2012a). Guide to Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisations (RIS 3), European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/presenta/smart_specialisation/smart_ris3_2012.pdf. Accessed 18 October 2015.

  • EC (2014). National/Regional Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3). Cohesion Policy 2014–2020. European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/informat/2014/smart_specialisation_en.pdf.

  • EC (2015). EU R&D Scoreboard, European Union: http://iri.jrc.ec.europa.eu/scoreboard15.html Accessed 09 February 2016.

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Klofsten, M. (2005). The innovating region: toward a theory of knowledge-based regional development. R&D Management, 35(3), 243–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Mello, J. M. C. (2004). The rise of a triple helix culture: innovation in Brazilian economic and social development. International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development, 2(3), 159–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • EU (2016). The EU in the world, 2016 edition, Publication Office of the European Union: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3217494/7589036/KS-EX-16-001-EN-N.pdf/bcacb30c-0be9-4c2e-a06d-4b1daead493e

  • Faber, J., & Hesen, A. B. (2004). Innovation capabilities of European nations: cross-national analysis of patents and sales of product innovations. Research Policy, 33(2), 193–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foray, D., David, P. A., & Hall, B. (2011). Smart specialization. From academic idea to political instrument, the surprising career of a concept and the difficulties involved in its implementation, MTEI Working Paper. Management of Technology & Enterepreneurship Institute. http://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/170252/files/MTEI-WP-2011-001-Foray_David_Hall.pdf. Accessed 18 Oct 2015.

  • Frank, A. G., Cortimiglia, M. N., Ribeiro, J. L. D., & Oliveira, L. S. (2016). The effect of innovation activities on innovation outputs in the Brazilian industry: market-orientation vs. technology-acquisition strategies. Research Policy, 45(3), 577–592.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fransman, M. (1999). Is national technology policy obsolete in a globalized world? In: Fransman, M. (Ed.), The Japanese Vision. Visions of Innovation: The Firm and Japan. New York: Oxford, pp. 167–201.

  • Freeman, C. (1982). Technological infrastructure and international competitiveness. Draft Paper Submitted to the OECD Ad hoc Group on Science, Technology and Competitiveness.

  • Freeman, C. (1987). Technology policy and economic performance: lessons from Japan. London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furman, J. L., & MacGarvie, M. (2009). Academic collaboration and organizational innovation: The development of research capabilities in the U.S. pharmaceutical research laboratories. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18, 929–961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furman, J., Porter, M., Stern, S. (2000). Understanding the drivers of national innovative capacity. Academy Of MANAGE Proceeding August 2000 Meeting Abstract Supplement A1-A6.

  • Furman, J. L., Porter, M. E., & Stern, S. (2002). The determinants of national innovative capacity. Research Policy, 31, 899–933.

  • Goedhuys, M., & Veugelers, R. (2012). Innovation strategies, process and product innovations and growth: firm-level evidence from Brazil. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 23(4), 516–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grupp, H., & Schubert, T. (2010). Review and new evidence on composite innovation indicators for evaluating national performance. Research Policy, 39, 67–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guisado-González, M., Vila-Alonso, M., & Guisado-Tato, M. (2016). Radical innovation, incremental innovation and training: analysis of complementarity. Technology in Society, 44, 48–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasan, I., & Tucci, C. L. (2010). The innovation-economic growth nexus: global evidence. Research Policy, 39, 1264–1276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausman, R., & Rodrik, D. (2003). Economic development as self-discovery, NBER Working Paper Series, Working Paper 8952.

  • Hecksher, E., & Ohlin, B. (1933). Interregional and international trade, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  • Hill, Ch. W.L. (2017). International business: competing in the global marketplace, 11th edition, New York: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.

  • Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hoskinsson, R. E. (2015). Strategic management: competitiveness and globalization: concepts, 11th edition. Stamford: Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huggins, R., & Kitagawa, F. (2012). Regional policy and university knowledge transfer: perspectives from devolved regions in the UK. Regional Studies, 46(6), 817–832.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, A. (2012). Enhancing impact: the value of public sector R & D: summary report, Council for Industry and Higher Education: http://www.cbr.cam.ac.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/centre-for-business-research/downloads/special-reports/specialreport-enhancingimpact.pdf. Accessed 17 November 2015.

  • Ireland, R. D., & Webb, J. W. (2007). A cross-disciplinary exploration of entrepreneurship research. Journal of Management, 33(6), 891–927.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C. I. (1995). R&D-based models of economic growth. Journal of Political Economy, 103(4), 759–784.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karo, E., & Kattel, R. (2015). Economic development and evolving state capacities in central and Eastern Europe: can “smart specialisation” make a difference? Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 18(2), 172–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Komninos, N., Musyck, B., & Reid, A. I. (2014). Smart specialisation strategies in South Europe during crisis. European Journal of Innovation Management, 17(4), 448–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krammer, S. M. S. (2009). Drivers of national innovation in transition: Evidence from a panel of eastern European countries. Research Policy, 38, 845–860.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krammer, S. M. S. (2017). Science, technology, and innovation for economic competitiveness: The role of smart specialization in less-developed countries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 123, 95–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krugman, P. (1980). Scale economies, product differentiation, and Pattern of Trade. The American Economic Review, 70(5), 950–959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, B., & Samson, D. (2001). Developing innovation capability in organisations: a dynamic capabilities approach. International Journal of Innovation Management, 5(3), 377–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2012). The triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Encyclopedia of creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall, B., (1992). Introduction. In: Lundvall, B. (Ed.), National systems of innovation toward a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter Publishers, pp. 1–19.

  • Lundvall, B. (2007). National Innovation Systems — Analytical concept and development tool. Industry and Innovation, 14(1), 95–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall, B.-Å., & Borrás S. (1997). The globalising learning economy: implications for innovation policy. Report from DG XII, Commission of the European Union.

  • MacMillan, I. C., Kulow, D. M., & Kholian, R. (1989). Venture capitalists’ involvement in their investments: extent and performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 4, 27–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz, H. M. (1959). Portfolio selection: efficient diversification of investments. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann, P., & Ortega-Argilés, R. (2013). Modern regional innovation policy. Cambridge Journal of Regions. Economy and Society, 6(2), 187–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann, P., & Ortega-Argilés, R. (2014). Smart specialisation in European regions: Issues of strategy, institutions and implementation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 17(4), 409–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, J. S. (1995). Technology systems and technology policy in an evolutionary framework. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(1), 25–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midtkandal, I., & Sörvik, J. (2012). What is smart specialisation? Nordregio News Issue, 5, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mieszkowski, K., & Kardas, M. (2015). Facilitating an entrepreneurial discovery process for smart specialisation. The case of Poland. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 6(2), 357–384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miozzo, M., & Walsh, V. (2006). International competitiveness and technological change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moretti, E. (2012). The new geography of jobs. New York: Houghton Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R. (1990). Capitalism as an engine of progress. Research Policy, 19(3), 193–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R. (1993). National innovation systems: a comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niosi, J., & Bellon, B. (1994). The global interdependence of national innovation systems—evidence, limits, and implications. Technology in Society, 16(2), 173–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Sullivan, M. (rapporteur) (2007). The EU’s R&D Deficit and Innovation Policy, report based on contributions of the members of the EU Commissioner J. Potoˇcnik’s Expert Group on “Knowledge for Growth”, see: http://ec.europa.eu/invest-inresearch/pdf/downloaden/rdddeficit report0207.pdf.

  • OECD (2013). Innovation-driven growth in regions: the role of smart specialisation, OECD: http://www.oecd.org/innovation/inno/smart-specialisation.pdf.

  • Pontikakis, D., Chorafakis, G., & Kyriakou, D. (2009). R&D specialisation in the EU: from stylised observations to evidence-based policy, in Pontikakis, Kyriakou and van Bavel (eds) 2009, The question of R&D specialisation: Perspective and policy implications, JRC Scientific and Technical Reports http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC51665.pdf Accessed 17 November 2015.

  • Porter, M. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. Harvard Business Review, 68(2), 73–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, 76(6),77–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. (2000). Location, competition, and economic development: Local clusters in a global economy. Development Quarterly, 14(1), 15–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. (2003). The economic performance of regions. Regional Studies, 37(6–7), 545–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raffo, J., Lhuillery, S., & Miotti, L. (2008). Northern and southern Innovativity a comparison across European and Latin American countries. The European Journal of Development Research, 20(2), 219–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranga, M., & Etzkowitz, H. (2013). Triple helix systems: an analytical framework for innovation policy and practice in the knowledge society. Industry and Higher Education, 27(4), 237–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricardo, D. (1817). The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, London: John Murray.

  • Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), 71–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, S. (2009). Non-technological and non-economic innovations: contributions to a theory of robust innovation. Bern: Peter Lang AG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development. An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Harvard Economic Studies 46.

  • Simmie, J. (2004). Innovation and clustering in the globalised international economy. Urban Studies, 41(5–6), 1095–1112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (1776). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. London: W. Strahan and T. Cadell, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.

  • Soete, L. (2006). A knowledge economy paradigm and its consequences, United Nations University—Maastricht Economic and social Research and Training Center on Innovation and Technology.

  • Vecchio, P., & Passiante, G. (2017). Is tourism a driver for smart specialization? Evidence from Apulia, an Italian region with a tourism vocation. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 6(3), 163–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, A., Papaioannou, T., Mugwagwa, J., & Kale, D. (2015). National innovation systems and the intermediary role of industry associations in building institutional capacities for innovation in developing countries: a critical review of the literature. Research Policy, 44(8), 407–1418.

    Google Scholar 

  • WIPO (2015). The Global Innovation Index 2015, World Intellectual Property Organization: https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/userfiles/file/reportpdf/GII-2015-v5.pdf Accessed 5 January 2016.

  • Zacharakis, A. L., Shepherd, D. A., & Coombs, J. E. (2003). The development of venture-capital-backed internet companies. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), 217–231.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. NECE – Research Unit in Business Sciences and PhD Candidate in Management, University of Beira Interior, Estrada do Sineiro, Polo IV, 6200-209, Covilhã, Portugal

    Ewa Kopczynska

  2. Management and Economics Department and NECE – Research Unit in Business Sciences, University of Beira Interior, Estrada do Sineiro, Polo IV, 6200-209, Covilhã, Portugal

    Joao J. Ferreira

Authors
  1. Ewa Kopczynska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joao J. Ferreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ewa Kopczynska.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kopczynska, E., Ferreira, J.J. Smart Specialization as a New Strategic Framework: Innovative and Competitive Capacity in European Context. J Knowl Econ 11, 530–557 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-018-0543-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-018-0543-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation