| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- McKelvey, Maureen, 1965, et al.
(författare)
-
Governance of Regional Innovation Systems: An Evolutionary Conceptual Model of How Firms Engage
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Academy of Management proceedings, Vancouver, Canada. - 0065-0668. ; 2015:2364, s. 1-25
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper draws upon insights from social science, in order to propose a conceptualization of the governance of a regional innovation system. We are specifically interested in ones initiated through public policy and aiming to stimulate the competitiveness of firms through developing new technological knowledge through collaborative research involving different organizations. We are assuming firms choose whether, when and how to collaborate. This paper proposes a conceptual model, which focuses upon the governance processes at the regional level of this translation of knowledge into innovation and entrepreneurship. The underlying argumentation for the model is built from existing research. We interpret that regional innovation governance depends upon capacity building among three heterogeneous organizations – namely university-government-industry. This represents a case of a polycentric, adaptive, complex and self-organizing system, whereby collective action is supported by norms and institutions in order to develop a region resource pool. Hence, our expectation is that our conceptual model will help explain why different outcomes are possible. The concluding section discusses a future research agenda, by going further to explore how to define and analyze the attributes (mechanisms) enabling governance of a regional innovation system as well as to analyze how public policy and firms engage.
|
|
| 3. |
- Szücs, Stefan, 1964, et al.
(författare)
-
Innovation Governance Nexuses: Mapping Local Governments' University–Industry Relations and Specialization in High Technology in Sweden
- 2014
-
Ingår i: European Planning Studies. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0965-4313 .- 1469-5944. ; 22:9, s. 1769-1782
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this paper, we take as a point of departure an assumption that innovation governance matters as a local and regional policy instrument, and consequently we investigate whether local policy can be linked to local industry. To do this, we use Swedish survey data on policy and high-tech agglomeration at the level of municipalities and present evidence on innovation governance nexuses, i.e. locations with greater industrial specialization paired with stronger formalization of innovation governance. Theoretically, this paper follows the literature on regional advantage, but a novel approach is used in which innovation governance literature is linked to that advantage. The findings indicate that these types of policy instruments are useful by creating networks that channel and direct resource and knowledge flows, particularly at locations with higher education institutions.
|
|
| 4. |
- Hermansson, Ida, et al.
(författare)
-
How regions and networks affect knowledge intensive entrepreneurship
- 2015
-
Ingår i: DRUID Academy 2015, January 21-23, Rebild, Aalborg, Denmark. ; 2015:D:F3, s. 1-20
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Entrepreneurship is closely entwined with regional development. This paper examines the role of networks in regional development, in the textile industry in Borås, Sweden.
|
|
| 5. |
- McKelvey, Tomas, 1966, et al.
(författare)
-
Creating innovative opportunities through research collaboration: An evolutionary framework and empirical illustration in engineering
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Technovation. - : Elsevier BV. - 0166-4972. ; 39-40, s. 26-36
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper analyses the creation of innovative opportunities through research collaborations. It contributes by (i) providing an evolutionary conceptual framework for the formation and exploitation of innovative opportunities through research collaboration; and by (ii) providing an empirical illustration of this framework by applying it to a case study of firms׳ research collaboration taking place in university–industry research centers in engineering. The evolutionary framework developed specifically focuses on the generation of novelty and variety and on selection pressures as key for the creation of opportunities. It also emphasizes the differences between small and large firms when it comes to role of research collaboration for opportunity creation. Empirically, we illustrate that firms in general focus more on the generation of variety in the form of (fundamental) knowledge, than on research collaboration leading directly to the formation and exploitation of opportunities. For large firms, the focus is rather to transfer this created variety back to the firm, to use for inputs into the in-house creation of opportunities. In contrast, small firms focus instead on using research collaboration to generate and develop knowledge about customer needs in order to create market opportunities, especially through networking with large firms participating in the collaboration.
|
|
| 6. |
- Szücs, Stefan, 1964, et al.
(författare)
-
Local Political Capital for Innovation in the Global Knowledge Economy
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Book of Abstracts, XVII World Congress of Sociology, 11-17 July 2010, Gothenburg. ; XVII, s. 472-473
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Over the last decade, policy initiatives to promote innovativeness and growth, inspired by normative models of capacity building through industrial clusters, triple helix and innovation systems, have proliferated. Theories of economic development offer several explanations of the emergence of clusters in particular environments. Most theorists would argue that specific, natural, economic, or institutional factors determine capacity building in terms of cluster development. Other theorists emphasize the role of local social networks and phases of regional knowledge-based spaces in explaining the emergence of such capacity building. Neither of these theoretical streams offers systematic explanations of differences in the emergence and success of capacity building, beyond finding that crucial resources are unevenly distributed. The theoretical linkage between triple helix and capacity building through innovation governance is unclear. We still do not have a relevant theory explaining the influence of innovation governance involving local/regional government–industry–university relationships on capacity building leading to successful innovations. Therefore, we are making a proposal to further develop theory by focusing on capacity building through different sequences of innovation governance in relation to components of local political capital - values/norms of identity, networks and local-global relations - in the era of the global knowledge economy.
|
|
| 7. |
- Szücs, Stefan, 1964, et al.
(författare)
-
Regional innovation governance : a model for complex systems of innovation and economic emergence
- 2012
-
Ingår i: 14th International Schumpeter Society Conference.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Over the last decade, political science has moved far from the traditional economist’s view of the government and public policy as responses to ‘market failures’. One focus of understanding public policy has been on governance, which is a concept including complex public-private interactions through networks of relationships. There is often an assumption of complex socio-economic systems underlying this concept of governance. This type of thinking has been very prevalent in discussions of innovation and economic emergence. Many public policy initiatives to promote innovativeness and growth have been inspired by normative models of capacity building through industrial clusters, triple helix and regional innovation systems. While providing important insights about network and knowledge relationships, existing models poorly explain the influence of governance on innovation and economic emergence. In order to understand the issue of risk and uncertainty in innovative entrepreneurship, we propose a conceptual model that includes the impact of governing in complex systems through innovation policy. Due to the interdependency of several actors, the centers of decision-making in innovation are nested into complex systems of governing. This means that the obviously visible indicators of innovation and growth, which are often used, do not match the theoretical linkage between entrepreneurial economic emergence and capacity building. Instead of looking at firm start-ups and patents or the immediate effects of public policy through a cost-benefit analysis, our model of innovation governance requires that we delve deeper into social and knowledge relationships at the regional level. Innovation systems represent a typical example of many organizations and/or decision-centers that are formally autonomous, but are in fact linked together by an overarching set of rules, networks and relationships in systems, defined as polycentric, based on rules/norms in use to regulate access to information and common pool resources in such systems. We therefore start from this underlying theoretical insight that innovation governance depends upon capacity building among the heterogeneous organizations (university-government-industry), each based on different attributes of norms and incentives, networks and global relationships, but nevertheless tied together by overarching rules and aims of innovation and entrepreneurship. As will be further developed in the paper, we suggest that this process of capacity building during emergence and entrepreneurial uncertainty, relay on a sequence of events explaining the success and directionality of innovation through specific institutions and an associated , subsequent, organizational structure for University-Industry-Government co-operation at the local and regional level.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Szücs, Stefan, 1964, et al.
(författare)
-
Triple Helix as a basis for capacity building through innovation governance
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Paper presented at the 7th Biennial International Conference on University, Industry & Government Linkages, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, 17-19 June, 2009.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Over the last decade, policy initiatives to promote innovativeness and growth, inspired by normative models of triple helix and capacity building, have proliferated. Theories of economic development offer several explanations of the emergence of clusters in particular environments. Most theorists would argue that specific, natural, economic, or institutional factors determine capacity building in terms of cluster development. Other theorists emphasize the role of local social networks and phases of regional knowledge-based triple helix spaces in explaining the emergence of such capacity building. Neither of these theoretical streams offers systematic explanations of differences in the emergence and success of capacity building, beyond finding that crucial resources are unevenly distributed. The theoretical linkage between triple helix and capacity building through innovation governance is unclear. We still do not have a relevant theory explaining the influence of innovation governance involving local government–industry–university relationships on capacity building leading to successful innovations. Therefore, we are making a proposal to further develop the triple helix theory by focusing on capacity building through different sequences of innovation governance in relation to values/norms of identity, networks and local-global relations.
|
|
