The challenge of smart specialisation in less favoured regions

[Introduction] Inherent in its conception, the smart specialisation approach carries an intrinsic tension between its alleged place-based nature at the meso-level of regions and the fact that it was derived from theoretical premises that derive from the analysis of competition between nations (Foray et al. 2009; 2011). Implicitly, therefore, it presupposes a certain degree of completeness and variety in economic and innovation systems as is commonly assumed in international comparative analysis between nations – debatable as this suggestion may in itself be. Obviously, the actual innovation systems of European regions are often much more fragmented (Capello and Kroll 2016; Isaksen 2014; Kroll 2015; Technopolis et al. 2012; Todtling and Trippl 2005). At the same time, it borrows concept of exploration and discovery from the analysis of the world of business (Hausman and Rodrik 2003) which cannot easily be transferred to the world of governance, leave alone government. While, possibly, it can most easily be read as promoting the public triggering of such processes where their absence constitutes an obstacle to economic development and their better guidance in others (Landabaso 2012; 2014), this ambition is neither an easy task in practice nor theoretically very well understood to start with. Overall, there has been limited differentiation between processes that are merely discursive and those that amount to actual co-creation and joint discovery. [...]

[1]  Henning Kroll,et al.  From theory to practice in smart specialization strategy: emerging limits and possible future trajectories , 2016, Regional Innovation Strategies 3 (RIS3).

[2]  F. Barca,et al.  An Agenda for a Reformed Cohesion Policy A place-based approach to meeting European Union challenges and expectations , 2008 .

[3]  Knut Koschatzky Innovationsorientierte Regionalentwicklungsstrategien: Konzepte zur regionalen Technik- und Innovationsförderung , 2002 .

[4]  M. Trevor Technology Policy and Economic Performance. Lessons from Japan , 1989 .

[5]  Claire Nauwelaers,et al.  Guide to Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisations (RIS 3) , 2012 .

[6]  New forms of regional interaction between universities and industry evidence from Germany , 2014 .

[7]  Philipp Mohl,et al.  Do EU structural funds promote regional growth? New evidence from various panel data approaches☆ , 2010 .

[8]  E. Shils The Constitution Of Society , 1982 .

[9]  Dominique Foray,et al.  Smart Specialisation: Opportunities and Challenges for Regional Innovation Policy , 2014 .

[10]  Paul A. David,et al.  Smart specialisation From academic idea to political instrument, the surprising career of a concept and the difficulties involved in its implementation , 2011 .

[11]  Henning Kroll,et al.  Understanding the "regional policy mix": A classification and analysis of European regions' support policies , 2016 .

[12]  H. Bathelt Knowledge-based Clusters: Regional Multiplier Models and the Role of ‘Buzz’ and ‘Pipelines’ , 2008 .

[13]  Knut Koschatzky,et al.  The regionalisation of innovation policy in Germany: theoretical foundations and recent experience , 2000 .

[14]  F. Tödtling,et al.  One size fits all?: Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach , 2005 .

[15]  H. Bathelt,et al.  Clusters and knowledge: local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation , 2004 .

[16]  Björn Asheim,et al.  Constructing Regional Advantage: Principles - Perspective - Policies , 2006 .

[17]  N. Null The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths , 2015 .