Abstract
Despite this conceptual proximity, territorial cohesion and innovation have their own agendas, almost always disconnected from a territorial strategy that considers the specificities of each space as central elements to development. Some data that support this statement will be presented using the research carried out in the Centro Region of Portugal, namely interviews with 21 mayors. In general, we contribute to a better understanding of territorial policy options and to the identification of priority areas for a necessary dialogue between territorial cohesion and innovation. Based on this research, we argue that the regional/local development dynamics and projects, especially those related to territorial cohesion, competitiveness and innovation contribute significantly to the citizens’ well-being. These development dynamics which are structurally unbalanced and the consequences of these imbalances are harmful to the quality of life of the territories. Thus, public policies—as spatial planning, territorial governance instrument and intervention mechanism—acquire great relevance in the management and mitigation of these imbalances. The focus is then placed on the effectiveness of public policy since the development of the territory and the quality of life of societies depends on it. Considering the existence of a wide range of factors that prevent or reduce this effectiveness, it is essential to ensure a dialogue and convergence between the two fields of action that structure local and regional development dynamics, that is, territorial cohesion and innovation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amin, A., & Tomaney, J. (1995). The regional dilemma in a neo-liberal Europe. European Urban and Regional Studies, 2(2), 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/096977649500200205
Amoroso, S., Coad, A., & Grassano, N. (2018). European R&D networks: A snapshot from the 7th EU framework programme. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 8599, 1–16.
Balland, P., Boschma, R., & Koen, F. (2015). Proximity and innovation: From statics to dynamics. Regional Studies, 49(6), 907–920.
Borges, M., Marques, J. L., Castro, A. (2020). Decision making as a socio-cognitive process. In Research anthology on decision support systems and decision management in healthcare, business, and engineering. Information Resources Management Association (USA). ISBN13: 9781799890232
Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0034340052000320887
Brandsma, A., Di-, F., Diukanova, O., Kancs, D., Lopez-Rodriguez, J., Persyn, D., & Potters, L. (2014). Assessing policy options for the EU cohesion policy 2014–2020. Investigaciones Regionales, 29, 17–46.
Chamusca, P. (2021). Urban planning and policy in Portugal: An overview on the role of EU funds and guidelines. Urban research & practice. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2021.1980607
Eurostat. (2020). Eurostat database: 2020 Statistics. European Commission. Statistics available at https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database. Accessed on 21 January 2022.
Giddens, A. (2006). O Mundo na Era da Globalização. Editoral Presença. Lisboa, 8ª edição.
Hartmann, T., & Hengstermann, A. (2014). Territorial cohesion through spatial policies: An analysis with cultural theory and clumsy solutions Central European. Journal of Public Policy8(1), – June 2014. 30–49
Harvey, D. (1990). The condition of postmodernity: An enquiry into the origins of cultural change (p. 378). Blackwell.
INE. (2021). Population and Housing Census. INE. Statistics available at: https://www.ine.pt/xportal/xmain?xpgid=ine_main&xpid=INE. Accessed on 21 January 2022.
Jensen, M. B., Johnson, B., Lorenz, E., & Lundvall, B.-A. (2007). Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation. Research Policy, 36, 680–693.
Lundvall, B. -A. (Ed.). (2010). National system of innovation: Toward a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Anthem Press.
Lundvall, B. -A., & Johnson, B. (1994). The learning economy. Journal of Industry Studies, 1(2), 23–42.
Luukkonen, J. (2010). Territorial cohesion policy in the light of peripherality. Town Planning Review, 81(4), 445–466.
Madanipour, A. (2017). Cities in time: Temporary urbanism and the future of the city, Bloomsbury
Medeiros, E. (2016). Territorial cohesion: An EU concept, European Journal of Spatial Development, 60. http://www.nordregio.se/Global/EJSD/Refereedarticles/refereed60.pdf Online publication date: April 2016
Mikulic, D., & Nagyszombaty, A. (2015). Does international trade cause regional growth differentials in Croatia? Zbornik Radova Ekonomskog Fakulteta U Rijeci-Proceedings of Rijeka Faculty of Economics, 33(1), 81–102.
Pires, S., Polido, A., Teles, F., Silva, P., & Rodrigues, C. (2020). Territorial innovation models in less developed regions in Europe: The quest for a new research agenda? European Planning Studies, 28(8), 1639–1666. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1697211
Pylak, K. (2015). Changing innovation process models: A chance to break out of path dependency for less developed regions. Regional Studies, Regional Science, 2(1), 46–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681376.2014.979433
Sá Marques, T., Santos, H., Ribeiro, P. (2018). Redes de inovação no ecossistema da Região Centro de Portugal. In: Teresa Sá Marques, Helder Santos & M. Pilar Alonso Logroño (Coord.), VIII Jornadas de Geografía Económica: La Geografía de las Redes Económicas Y la Geografía Económica en Rede, Livro de Atas, Porto, Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto, Asociación de Geógrafos Españoles: 123–132.
Silva, P., Pires, S., & Teles, F. (2021). Explanatory models of regional innovation performance in Europe: Policy implications for regions. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2021.1909462
Wolf J., Borges M., Marques J. L., Castro E. (2019). Smarter decisions for smarter cities: Lessons learned from strategic plans. In L, Cagica Carvalho, C. Rego , M. Lucas , M. Sánchez-Hernández, A. Backx Noronha Viana (Eds.), New paths of entrepreneurship development. Studies on entrepreneurship, structural change and industrial dynamics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96032-6_2
Wolf, J., Batista, P., Marques, J. L. (2020). Processes of urban transformation: A typology based on urbanity, centrality and on territories’ population growth. Cidades, Comunidades e Territórios, 41 (Dec/2020), pp. 133 – 155
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Chamusca, P., Marques, J.L. (2023). Territorial Cohesion and Innovation: A Needed Dialogue. In: Teles, F., Rodrigues, C., Ramos, F., Botelho, A. (eds) Territorial Innovation in Less Developed Regions. Palgrave Studies in Sub-National Governance. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-20577-4_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-20577-4_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-20576-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-20577-4
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)