Advertisement

From a Nascent to a Mature Regional Innovation System: What Drives the Transition?

  • Marina Ranga
  • Serdal Temel
Chapter
Part of the Science, Technology and Innovation Studies book series (STAIS)

Abstract

While regional innovation systems (RIS) saw a relative development in many European countries in recent years due to decentralisation policies, they are at an early stage in Turkey, a unitary state with a strong centralised system rooted in the administrative structures of the Ottoman Empire. The Turkish region of Izmir was the first in the country to elaborate its own Regional Innovation Strategy in 2012 and achieved considerable improvements in its R&D and innovation capacity, based on the strategy’s recommendations. What are the key factors driving the transition from a nascent to a mature RIS, and how can the transition be further enhanced? This paper aims to answer these questions by examining the Izmir RIS from the fine-grained perspective of the Triple Helix Systems concept, which sees regional innovation as the result of the interplay between a Knowledge Space, an Innovation Space and a Consensus Space. The spaces co-evolve in a multitude of ways and directions as a non-linear process and provide a detailed view of regional actors, knowledge flows and interactions between them, and the resources available, in view of identifying existing blockages or gaps and formulating policy recommendations. The picture provided by the Triple Helix Spaces is complemented, for a more comprehensive approach, with insights drawn from three other RIS typologies based on integration into internal and external environments, regional barriers to innovation, and regional development stage. We conclude that the key factor driving these improvements was the presence of high-impact national and regional R&D, innovation and entrepreneurship policies that have been implemented in a relatively well-defined Triple Helix System. Izmir’s Triple Helix System features a more advanced Knowledge Space with a comprehensive, high-density institutional structure and a solid knowledge base, a younger but fast developing Innovation Space, with an increasing number of technology transfer offices, technoparks and innovation-support institutions, and a thinner, yet active Consensus Space promoting regional networking and collaborative leadership. For a successful transition to a mature RIS, policy and practice in the next stages need to focus on reducing fragmentation and strengthening the systemic linkages between the three Spaces.

Keywords

Regional entrepreneurial system Triple helix Regional innovation strategy Emerging economy Turkey 

References

  1. Asheim BT, Coenen L (2005) Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: comparing Nordic clusters. Res Policy 34(8):1173–1190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asheim B, Gertler M (2004) Understanding regional innovation systems. In: Fagerberg J, Mowery D, Nelson R (eds) Handbook of innovation. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Asheim B, Gertler M (2005) The geography of innovation. Regional innovation systems. In: Fagerberg J et al (eds) The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 291–317Google Scholar
  4. Asheim B, Isaksen A (1997) Location, agglomeration and innovation: towards regional innovation systems in Norway? Eur Plan Stud 5(3):299–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Asheim BT, Isaksen A (2002) Regional innovation systems: the integration of local ‘sticky’ and global ‘ubiquitous’ knowledge. J Technol Transf 27(1):77–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Asheim BT, Lawton Smith H, Oughton C (2011) Regional innovation systems: theory, empirics and policy. Reg Stud 45(7):875–891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Autio E (1998) Evaluation of RTD in regional systems of innovation. Eur Plan Stud 6:131–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Aydalot P (1986) Milieux innovateurs en Europe. GREMI, ParisGoogle Scholar
  9. Azoulay P, Liu CC, Stuart TE (2009) Social influence given (partially) deliberate matching: career imprints in the creation of academic entrepreneurs. Harvard Business School, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  10. Bagnasco A (1977) Tre Italia: La Problematica Territoriale Dello Sviluppo Economico Italiano. Il Mulino, BolognaGoogle Scholar
  11. Becattini G (ed) (1987) Mercato e Forze Locali: Il Distretto Industriale. Il Mulino, BolognaGoogle Scholar
  12. Bouchrara M (1987) L’industrialisation rampante: ampleur, me´canismes et porte´e. Economie et Humanisme 297:37–49Google Scholar
  13. Brusco S (1986) Small firms and industrial districts: the experience of Italy. In: Keeble D, Weaver E (eds) New firms and regional development in Europe. Croom Helm, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Bunnell TG, Coe NM (2001) Spaces and scales of innovation. Prog Hum Geogr 25(4):569–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cooke P (1998) Introduction: origins of the concept. In: Braczyk H, Cooke P, Heidenreich M (eds) Regional innovation systems. UCL Press, London, pp 2–25Google Scholar
  16. Cooke P (2001) Regional innovation systems, clusters, and the knowledge economy. Ind Corp Chang 10:945–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cooke P (2005) Regionally asymmetric knowledge capabilities and open innovation: exploring ‘Globalisation 2’–a new model of industry organization. Res Policy 34(8):1128–1149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cooke P, Leydesdorff L (2006) Regional development in the knowledge-based economy: the construction of advantage. J Technol Transf 31(1):5–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cooke P, Memedovic O (2003) Strategies for regional innovation systems: learning transfer and applications. United Nations Industrial Development Organization, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  20. Cooke P, Uranga MG, Etxebarria G (1997) Regional innovation systems: institutional and organisational dimensions. Res Policy 26(4–5):475–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cooke P, Heidenreich M, Braczyk H (2004) Regional innovation systems, 2nd edn. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Dasher R, Harada N, Hoshi T, Kushida KE, Okazaki T (2015) Institutional foundations for innovation-based economic growth. Report prepared for the National Institute for Research Advancement (NIRA)Google Scholar
  23. David P (1985) Clio and the economics of QWERTY. Am Econ Rev 75:332–337Google Scholar
  24. Doloreux D, Parto S (2004) Regional innovation systems: a critical synthesis. United Nations University discussion paper series. Paper no. 2004-17. August 2004. http://www.intech.unu.edu/publications/discussion-papers/2004-17.pdf
  25. Edquist C (ed) (1997) Systems of innovation. Technologies, institutions and organizations. Frances Pinter, London/WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  26. Elci S (2012) Erawatch Turkey Country Fiche 2012Google Scholar
  27. Enright MJ (1999) Regional clusters and firm strategy. In: Chandler A, Solvell O, Hagstrom P (eds) The dynamic firm. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 315–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Enright MJ (2001) Regional clusters: what we know and what we should know. In: Paper presented for the Kiel Institute International Workshop, 12–13 November 2011Google Scholar
  29. Eraydin A (2001) Roles of Central Government policies and the new forms of local governance in the emergence of industrial districts. In: Taylor M, Felsentein D (eds) Promoting local growth. Ashgate, AldershotGoogle Scholar
  30. Etzkowitz H, Klofsten M (2005) The innovating region: towards a theory of knowledge based regional development. R&D Manag 35:243–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fogelberg H, Thorpenberg S (2012) Regional innovation policy and public-private partnership: the case of triple helix arenas in Western Sweden. Sci Public Policy 39:347–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fritsch M, Slavtchev V (2010) How does industry specialization affect the efficiency of regional innovation systems? Ann Reg Sci 45(1):87–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Fritsch M, Slavtchev V (2011) Determinants of the efficiency of regional innovation systems. Reg Stud 45(7):905–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. GÖymen K (2008) Milestones of regional policy and practice in Turkey. Conference proceeding paper. LocDevelopmental, Kampala. http://myweb.sabanciuniv.edu/goymen/su_yayinlar/
  35. Graf H, Henning T (2009) Public research in regional networks of innovators: a comparative study of four East German Regions. Reg Stud 43(10):1349–1368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Greunz L (2003) Geographically and technologically mediated knowledge spillovers between European regions. Ann Reg Sci 37:657–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Howells J (1999) Regional systems of innovation? In: Archibugi D, Howells J, Michie J (eds) Innovation policy in a global economy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 67–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Izmir Development Agency (2012). Izmir regional innovation strategyGoogle Scholar
  39. Izmir Development Agency – Ege University Science and Technology Centre (EBİLTEM) (2010) Izmir regional R&D and innovation capacity analysisGoogle Scholar
  40. Izmir Development Agency – Ege University Science and Technology Centre (EBİLTEM) (2011) Situational analysis on R&D and innovation ecosystem in IzmirGoogle Scholar
  41. Izmir Development Agency – Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT) (2011) Izmir regional innovation strategy field surveyGoogle Scholar
  42. Kauffeld-Monz M, Fritsch M (2013) Who are the knowledge brokers in regional systems of innovation? A multi-actor network analysis. Reg Stud 47(5):669–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lagendijk A (1998) Will new regionalism survive? Tracing dominant concepts in economic geography, Discussion paper. Centre for Urban and Regional Development Studies, University of Newcastle upon TyneGoogle Scholar
  44. Martin R, Sunley P (2006) Path dependence and regional economic evolution. J Econ Geogr 6(4):395–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Maskell P, Malmberg A (1999) Localized learning and industrial competitiveness. Camb J Econ 23:167–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ministry of Science, Industry and Technology (2012). Best 50 entrepreneurial universities. http://www.sanayi.gov.tr/NewsDetails.aspx?newsID=4867
  47. Moulaert F, Sekia F (2003) Territorial innovation models: a critical survey. Reg Stud 37(3):289–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Parto S (2003) Transitions: an institutionalist perspective, MERIT-Infonomics research memorandum series (2003-019)Google Scholar
  49. Ranga M, Etzkowitz H (2013) Triple helix systems: an analytical framework for innovation policy and practice in the knowledge society. Ind High Educ 27(4):237–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rodriguez M (2014) Innovation, knowledge spillovers and high-tech services in European regions. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Eng Econ 25(1):31–39Google Scholar
  51. Saxenian A (1994) Regional advantage: culture and competition in Silicon Valley and route 128. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  52. Shapira P, Youtie J (2008) Learning to innovate: building regional technology development learning networks in midsized cities. Eur Plan Stud 16(9):1207–1228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Storper M (1995) The resurgence of regional economies, ten years later. The region as a nexus of untraded interdependencies. Eur Urban Reg Stud 2:191–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Storper M, Scott AJ (1988) The geographical foundations and social regulation of flexible production complexes. In: Wolch J, Dear M (eds) The power of geography. Allen & Unwin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  55. Tödtling F, Trippl M (2005) One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Res Policy 34(8):1203–1219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Vilanova MR, Leydesdorff L (2001) Why Catalonia cannot be considered as a regional innovation system. Scientometrics 50(2):215–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.European Commission, Joint Research CentreSevilleSpain
  2. 2.Ege University Science and Technology Centre and Department of Innovation and EntrepreneurshipIzmirTurkey

Personalised recommendations