Regional Innovation Systems and the Advent of Strategic Science

Abstract

While regional innovation systems are, to some extent, an artefact of regional administration and mimesis, there are also clear proximity and agglomeration dynamics. A third type of dynamic at play derives from uptake of knowledge production, regional role of universities etc. The advent of strategic science, with its double emphasis on relevance (including local relevance) and global competition, creates pressures on universities which want to play a regional role as well. The University of Twente, in The Netherlands, is an example. Its evolution shows that the regional function leans heavily on institutional differentiations like outreach units, while strategic science is taken up in new outward looking, problem-solving centres, not necessarily directed towards the region. The immediate moral is that universities can play a role in managing the tension between local (regional) and global, but the tensions will return internally. The general moral is that the changes in knowledge production (whether labeled as strategic science or Mode 2 or whatever) have to be taken into account in regional innovation systems. This might also help to avoid a short-sighted focus on wealth creation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Asheim, B.T. and A. Isaksen, 2002, ‘Regional Innovation Systems: The Integration of Local “Sticky” and global “Ubiquitous” Knowledge’, Journal of Technology Transfer 27 (1), 77-86.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Caracostas, P. and L. Soete, 1997, ‘The Building of Cross-Border Institutions in Europe: Towards a European System of Innovation?’, in C. Edquist (ed.), Systems of Innovation, Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, London: Pinter, pp. 395-419.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Burton, R.C., 1998, Creating Entrepreneurial Universities. Organizational Pathways of Transformation, Oxford: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cooke, P., 2002, ‘Regional Innovation Systems: General Findings and Some NewEvidence from Biotechnology Clusters’, Journal of Technology Transfer 27 (1), 135-147.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cooke, P., F. Moulaert, E. Swyngedouw, O. Weinstein, and P. Wells, 1992, Towards Global Localisation, London: UCL Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. De la Mothe, J. and G. Paquet (eds.), 1998, Local and Regional Systems of Innovation, Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Deuten, J.J. A. Rip, and W. Smit, 1998, Nieuwe werelden...met micro-optica. Scenario's en scripts en wat deze impliceren voor micro-optica onderzoek aan de Universiteit Twente (Enschede: Universiteit Twente, Faculteit Wijsbegeerte en Maatschappijwetenschappen, February 1998), 58 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Duysters, G. and J. Hagedoorn, 1996, ‘Internationalization of Corporate Technology Through Strategic Partnering: An Empirical Investigation’, Research Policy 25, 1-12.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Edquist, C. (ed.), 1997, Systems of Innovation. Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  10. European Consortium of Innovative Universities (ECIU), 1997, Charter, signed at Dortmund, November 18.

  11. Etzkowitz, H. and L. Leydesdorff, 2000, ‘The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations’, Research Policy 29, 109-123.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Etzkowitz, H., A. Webster, C. Gebhardt, and B.R.C. Terra, 2000, ‘The Future of the University and the University of the Future: Evolution of Ivory Tower to Entrepreneurial Paradigm’, Research Policy 29, 313-330.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Freeman, C. 1987, Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan, London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Gibbons, M., C. Limoges, H. Nowothy, S. Schwartzman, P. Scott, and M. Trow, 1994, The New Production of Knowledge, London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hagedoorn, J. and J. Schakenraad, 1990, ‘Interfirm Partnerships and Co-Operative Strategies in Core Technologies’, in C. Freeman and L. Soete (eds.), New Explorations in the Economics of Technical Change, London: Pinter. pp. 3-37.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Håkansson, H. and I. Snehota (eds.), 1995, Developing Relationships in Business Networks, London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Irvine, J. and B.R. Martin, 1984. Foresight in Science. Picking the Winners, London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Jacobs, D. 1998, ‘Innovation Policies Within the Framework of Internationalization’, Research Policy 27, 711-724.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kaghan, W.N. 2000, ‘Harnessing a Public Conglomerate: Professional Technology Transfer Managers and the Entrepreneurial University’, in J. Croissant and S. Restivo (eds.), Degrees of Compromise: Industrial Interests and Academic Values, Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Landabaso, M., C. Oughton, and K. Morgan, 2002, ‘Regional Innovation Systems and Regional Innovation Strategies: Theory, Policy and Practice’, Journal of Technology Transfer 27 (1), 97-110.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Larédo, P. 1994, L'impact des programmes communautaires de recherche en France, Paris: Centre Sociologie de ‘Innovation, École Nationale Supérieure des Mines.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Meyer-Krahmer, F. 1999, ‘Was bedeutet Globalisierung für Aufgaben und Handlungsspielraüme nationaler Innovationspolitiken?’, in K. Grimme, S. Kuhlmann, F. Meyer-Krahmer (Hrsg.), Innovationspolitik in globalisierte Arenen, Opladen: Leske & Budrich.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Mustar, P. 1997, ‘How French Academics Create Hi-Tech Companies: The Conditions for Success or Failure’, Science and Public Policy 24, 37-43.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Nelson, R.R. (ed.), 1993, National Systems of Innovation: A Comparative Study, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  25. OECD, 1971, Science, Growth and Society. A New Perspective, OECD, Paris, Report of the Secretary-General's Ad Hoc Group on New Concepts of Science Policy, chaired by Harvey Brooks.

  26. Pavitt, K. 1984, ‘Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change: Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory’, Research Policy 13, 343-373.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Pouder, R. and C.H. St. John, 1996, ‘Hot Spots and Blind Spots: Geographical Clusters of Firms and Innovation’, Academy of Management Review 21, 1192-1225.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Rip, A. 1997, ‘A Cognitive Approach to Relevance of Science’, Social Science Information 36(4), 615-640.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Rip, A. 2000, ‘Fashions, Lock-Ins and the Heterogeneity of Knowledge Production’, in M. Jacob and T. Hellstrom (eds.), The Future of Knowledge Production in the Academy, Buckingham: Open University Press, pp. 28-39.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Rip, A. and B.J.R. van der Meulen, 1996, ‘The Post-Modern Research System’, Science & Public Policy 23 (5), 343-352 (also published in Rémi Barré, Michael Gibbons, John Maddox, B. Martin, and P. Papon (eds.), 1997, Science in Tomorrow's Europe, Paris: Economica International, pp. 51-67).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Saxenian, A. 1998, ‘Regional Systems of Innovation and the Blurred Firm’, in J. De La Mothe and G. Paquet (eds.), Local and Regional Systems of Innovation, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 29-43.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Segal N., 1998, Regional Development and the European Consortium of Innovative Universities. A Report to the Consortium, Enschede: December 1998.

  33. Teece, D.J., 1986, ‘Profiting from Technological Innovation: Implications for Integration, Colaboration, Licensing and Public Policy’, Research Policy 15, 285-305.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Van Lente, H. and A. Rip, 1998, ‘The Rise of Membrane Technology: From Rhetorics to Social Reality’, Social Studies of Science 221-254.

  35. Van der Sijde, P.C. and J.A. van Alsté, 1998, ‘Support for Entrepreneurship at the University of Twente’, Industry & Higher Education 12, 367-372.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Van der Sijde, P.C. and G.A. Van Driem, 1999, ‘Incubation Infrastructure for Knowledge-Intensive Companies Around the University of Twente’, Industry and Higher Education 13, 243-247.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Van der Sijde, P. and J. Van Tilburg, 2000, 'support of University Spin-Off Companies’, Entrepreneurship and Innovation Feb. 13-21.

  38. Voyer, R., 1998, ‘Knowledge-Based Industrial Clustering: International Comparisons’, in J. De La Mothe and G. Paquet (eds.), Local and Regional Systems of Innovation, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 81-109.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rip, A. Regional Innovation Systems and the Advent of Strategic Science. The Journal of Technology Transfer 27, 123–131 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013108906611

Download citation

Keywords

  • Economic Growth
  • Agglomeration
  • Regional Role
  • Regional Function
  • Innovation System