Базовые стратегии поведения промышленности как участника региональных инновационных экосистем

Purpose: The study aims to analyze the perception of quadruple helix actors in a regional innovation ecosystem regarding their contributions to the digital transformation of companies. Methodology/approach: In-depth interviews were conducted with key actors from Pacto Alegre and with companies operating in the ecosystem, as well as document analysis of their projects focusing on the theme of digital transformation. Originality/value: The study contributes by showing that regional ecosystems can function as facilitators in the process of the digital transformation of companies, corroborating the discussion that points to the need to integrate these two themes. Findings: Traditional companies are at an early stage of digital transformation, considering the Covid-19 pandemic an accelerating factor in this process, forcing entrepreneurs to adopt digital technologies. To this end, the ecosystem provides a favorable environment for the exchange of knowledge, inter-organizational relationships, and learning by companies, enabling them to reduce the distance for digital transformation. From its projects, Pacto Alegre has generated direct and indirect impacts on the digital transformation of companies. Theoretical/methodological contributions: The paper provides an analytical structure that links the themes of digital transformation and regional ecosystems and contains an empirical study of their application in the context of an emerging country and with a focus on low-tech companies. Social/management contributions: The practical implications of the present study provide elements for organizing and improving Pacto Alegre's actions as a facilitator of digital transformation, as well as a basis for different ecosystems.

Management theory and practice demonstrate widespread interest in regional innovation ecosystems. It is believed that their functioning has a beneficial effect on the development of regional and, consequently, state economies. They are also are able to support and develop specific areas: industry, innovation, science, etc. At the same time, there is a discussion among scientists about the relevance of using the concepts of “ecosystem” and “regional innovation ecosystem” in economic discourse. A number of researchers allow the use of “regional innovation system” and “regional innovation ecosystem” as synonyms. Hence the need to determine significant conceptual differences between these concepts and justify the introduction of a “regional innovation ecosystem” into the economic conceptual apparatus. The subject of the article is the conceptual differences between the two concepts; The aim is to justify the need to introduce a “regional innovation ecosystem” into the economic conceptual apparatus. The methodological basis of the work is systemic and ecosystem approaches. Through comparative analysis, the author identifies significant conceptual differences between the “regional innovation system” and the “regional innovation ecosystem” and proves the need to introduce the latter into the economic conceptual apparatus. It is important that the similarities and differences between the two concepts established in the work relate to the studied concepts, and not to their physical embodiments. The results of the study can be used by scientists working in this subject field; by practitioners implementing the ideas of the concepts of a regional innovation system or regional innovation ecosystem in the activities of their organizations; by developers of the regulatory environment for regional development. The prospects for the development of the study lie in the transition from a comparison of concepts to a comparison of examples of their practical implementation.

Knowledge diffusion in regional innovation ecosystems is an important factor that influences the regional innovation efficiency. In regional innovation ecosystems under digital empowerment, the knowledge diffusion enables the optimal allocation of innovation resources and promotes the sustainable development and ecological evolution of regional innovation ecosystems. In this paper, a SEIR (Susceptible–Exposed–Infected–Recovered) model is proposed for knowledge diffusion in regional innovation ecosystems under digitization. The basic reproduction number of the proposed model is calculated and its stability is validated. Finally, the expressions for the optimal control system and the optimal control parameters are presented. According to the research conclusions of this paper, the knowledge-diffusion ability of innovation agents in an innovation ecosystem affects the knowledge diffusion in a system; the contact rate between innovation agents affects the efficiency of knowledge diffusion in the system and the structure of the system; the digital transmission ability of innovation agents affects the breadth of knowledge diffusion in the system; and the self-learning ability of innovation agents affects the efficiency of knowledge diffusion in the system.The digital technologies help heterogeneous innovation agents in regional innovation ecosystems to break down the knowledge silos. At the same time, the digital technologies enhance the ability of innovation agents to absorb and learn knowledge in regional innovation ecosystems under digitization, thereby increasing the infection rate of knowledge diffusion in such systems.These conclusions extend the theoretical boundaries of innovation ecosystems and knowledge diffusion and offer management implications for enterprises and governments in decision-making.

Evaluating and forecasting the niche fitness of regional innovation ecosystems: A comparative evaluation of different optimized grey models

From the external perspective of digital technology diffusion in regional innovation ecosystems, this study divides innovation promotion into information dissemination and precision subsidy promotion strategies, and uses multi-agent modelling and simulation method to analyse the impact of innovation promotion strategies on digital technology diffusion in regional innovation ecosystems. The results are as follows. (1) The diffusion rate and depth of digital technology in regional innovation ecosystems with an information dissemination promotion strategy are better than those without this strategy. Early, high-strength centralised promotion strategy has the highest rate and depth of digital technology diffusion, and implementing distributed information promotion strategy in the late stage can maximise the rate and depth of digital technology diffusion. (2) When the number of target enterprises is insufficient, the precision subsidy promotion strategy cannot achieve the desired effect. With an increase in the number of target enterprises, the diffusion rate and depth of digital technology in regional innovation ecosystems gradually increased and showed a classic ‘S’-type diffusion curve. By focusing on the overall trend, the average rate and depth of digital technology diffusion in regional innovation ecosystems with a relationship embeddedness strategy are the best.

The digital transformation of regional innovation ecosystems is received by the extensive attention from academia and practical communities. This paper uses China’s regional innovative ecosystem as a research object, explores changes in information flow, resource flow, capital flow and technical flow direction and flow rate within the context of digital transformation. The study found that digital transformation will change the flow direction and structure of the information flow; The flow rate of resource flow, capital flow and technology flow is accelerated is increased, but the flow direction is unchanged. Finally, the potential risks of innovative ecosystem under digital transformation background have been analyzed, and the countermeasures and recommendations for relevant management departments and enterprises are put forward, providing a theoretical reference for further improving digital construction for China’s regional innovation ecosystems.

Introduction. This article investigates the phenomenon of innovation parks as a promising vector for transforming regional innovation ecosystems in Ukraine. It demonstrates the increasing influence of innovation parks on the development of Ukrainian municipalities within the framework of regional innovation ecosystems. A comparative analysis of the dynamics of scientific, technological, and innovation parks in Ukraine and highly developed countries is conducted. Based on a retrospective analysis, differences in the development of innovation parks in Ukraine and globally are identified within their respective life cycles. Subject of the Study. The subject of this research is the evaluation of the prospects for the development of innovation parks as centers for the formation of regional innovation ecosystems in Ukraine. Purpose of the Study. The aim is to assess the prospects for developing innovation parks as centers for the creation of regional innovation ecosystems, which will enable the modernization of urban planning in Ukraine. Method (Methodology). To substantiate the arguments presented, the study employs a range of general scientific and specialized methods, including: historical-logical method for investigating the theoretical foundations and evolution of scientific, technological, and innovation parks; analysis and synthesis for comparing key approaches to interpreting the concepts of «innovation park», «regional innovation ecosystems», and urban planning; comparison and grouping for systematizing indicators used to evaluate the development of innovation parks in Ukraine and internationally; graphical methods for visually representing analytical findings; abstract-logical method for theoretical generalization and formulation of conclusions. Results. The study identifies bottlenecks in the functioning of scientific, technological, and innovation parks in Ukraine. It refines the concept of an innovation park as an institutional platform for collaboration among scientific, educational, financial, and industrial actors, local governments, and public organizations to modernize innovation infrastructure and foster environmentally balanced development, exerting a positive impact on urban planning. Urban planning is defined as systematic processes for developing sustainable city development strategies from economic, environmental, and social perspectives. The article presents the dynamics of scientific, technological, and innovation park development in Ukraine and worldwide. It substantiates the necessity of stimulating innovation parks as centers of regional innovation ecosystems. Prospective directions for the development of innovation parks within regional innovation ecosystems are delineated, which will positively affect urban development and enhance the innovation factor in urban planning. Area of Application of the Results. The establishment and expansion of innovation parks will accelerate the formation of regional innovation ecosystems, positively influencing municipal development, strengthening cities’ capacity for innovation, and modernizing urban planning in Ukraine.

Enhancing high-quality development in regional innovation ecosystems

Anticipatory innovation governance describes the process of managing and directing innovation efforts in wider context in regional, national, or international innovation ecosystems. In 2022 OECD presented an anticipatory innovation governance model for Finland. Since 2014, European Union has recommended European regions to enhance their development activities based on Smart Specialization. Smart Specialization is a place-based approach characterized by the identification of strategic areas based both on regional strengths and potential of the economy. It aims to enhance prosperity of European regions by accelerating research, development and innovation activities as well as supporting Entrepreneurial Discovery Process (EDP) with wide stakeholder involvement.Both approaches aim for balanced development. The current societal situation cannot be addressed through reactive and conventional governance practices. Societies and regions are facing both challenges and changes that set demand and create opportunity for new ways of working and collaboration. Anticipatory innovation governance model addresses both authorizing environment and agency. It addresses the creation of enabling environment for innovation and introduces supportive mechanism to support anticipatory innovation practices with tools, methods, and information resources. The paper introduces EU’s Mission on Adaptation to Climate Change which focuses on supporting EU regions, cities, and local authorities in their efforts to build resilience against the impacts of climate change. The Mission’s activities aim to test and deploy on the ground innovative solutions needed to build resilience. The Mission’s objective is to accompany at least 150 European regions and communities towards climate resilience by 2030.The paper shares activities of Häme Goes into Ecosystems HGiE –project which aims to enhance sustainable innovation ecosystem development among regional stakeholders and support research, development, innovation and Entrepreneurial Discovery Process activities linking to national and international ecosystems. Häme Portfolio tool is used to support open innovation practices. The goal of this paper is to share early results of the study on how anticipatory innovation governance model, regional innovation ecosystems and portfolio management practices can enhance both innovation and sustainable development as well as adaptation to climate change.

This case-study comparative analysis focuses on five different Place-based Innovation Ecosystems in four countries of the European Union (namely Espoo in Finland, Barcelona in Spain, Gothenburg in Sweden and Ljubljana in Slovenia) and one in the United States of America (Boston) and seeks to generate scientific evidence for the future development of the European Union policies related to innovation in the context of regional and urban innovation ecosystems.\nAll five selected and presented Place-based Innovation Ecosystems have been individually synthesised, analysed and compared based on common dimensions of analysis. These results allowed - as a first theoretical approximation to a specific typology - to define five different models of Place-based Innovation Ecosystems, with the potential to serve as an indicative reference for the development of other EU (and non-EU) cases.\nIn conclusion, this study evidences a high complexity of innovation ecosystems with different levels of implementation of the Quadruple Helix Model and different kind of interrelations with Smart Specialisation Strategies and their inherent Entrepreneurial Discovery Processes. Orchestrators and main key-players play an essential role in the governance of the innovation ecosystems, performing a leadership role concerning local, regional, national and international innovation-related policy agendas. This leadership, talent attraction and retaining, the presence of research and innovation infrastructure, complementary system stakeholders and internationalisation were detected as core elements for successful local and regional innovation ecosystems.

The article is devoted to the formation and development of regional innovation ecosystems (RIES), which are a set of subjects of the scientific and educational complex, business structures (including innovative organizations), representatives of public authorities, development institutions and other stakeholders who participate in the processes of creation, transformation and dissemination of innovations, new knowledge and technologies, form the innovation field and take measures to create and constantly update the innovation infrastructure of the region. Special attention is paid to the basic conceptual provisions of the implementation of the hybrid model of the triple helix, designed taking into account the institutional structure of the Russian Federation and in the context of the methodological principles of the functioning of innovative ecosystems formulated by G. Itskovich. the article also formulates proposals for the formation of the strategic architecture of the RIES, presents the methodological principles of designing the RIES management system justified by the authors and the rules for the transition of regional innovation systems to the RIES, highlighting the stages of transition and disclosing their content.

We investigate how a set of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) can engage in business model development within a regional innovation ecosystem. Based on a case of Danish manufacturing SMEs that developed their local ecosystem in an innovative automation project, we find key drivers and challenges that these companies encountered while creating and capturing value both for them and the ecosystem at large. While the value creation process is enabled by common goals and financial support, companies need to balance their core activities with their commitment to the joint initiative. Moreover, ecosystem development is centrally dependent on the value-capture process, which also takes place at the inter-organisational level. Such open innovation process implies a purposive management of knowledge flows at the level of the innovation ecosystem that fits a multi-layered structure of the business model. Our findings also highlight the underlying connection between the business model and ecosystem concepts.

With the signing of the Association Agreement bet­ween Ukraine and the EU, the amendment of the Constitution of Ukraine regarding the implementation of Ukraine’s strategic course towards gaining full membership in the EU, approvement the National Security Strategy of Ukraine, in which European integration is recognized as the main direction of development of the Ukrainian state, Ukraine made the civilisational choice. The implementation of this civilizational choice obliges Ukraine to follow the path of the implementation of European integration reforms, to adopt the rules, norms and practices of the EU for successful integration into the European space and the system of formal institutions of the EU. This, among other things, concerns the need to implement the European approach to territorial division and regional policy, the introduce the smart specialisation approach into the system of strategic planning for regional development. The development of regional innovation ecosystems and the building of effective relationships between all their actors play a decisive role in the successful implementation of smart specialisation strategies. The system of interrelationships between the actors of the regional innovation ecosystem of the Prydniprovskyi economic area is analysed for their presence and intensity in comparison with other regions and Ukraine as a whole. It has been determined that both national and regional innovation ecosystems of Ukraine (including the Prydniprovskyi economic area) lack effective relationships between their key actors. The scientific and institutional provisions and recommendations for the formation of regional innovation ecosystems at the level of economic regions of Ukraine that meet the requirements of the European classification NUTS 1, in the context of the implementation of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU and the smart specialisation approach, have been substantiated. They are the following: to empower of Regional Scientific Centers of NAS of Ukraine and MES of Ukraine with additional powers to coordinate relations between actors of regional innovation ecosystems within the areas of their action, as well as to amend and supplement of the Law of Ukraine «On Scientific and Scientific and Technology Activities» to expand the functions and powers of Regional Scientific Centers, turning them into effective interregional focal points for innovative development. An approach to the formation of the Podillya regional innovation ecosystem within the Podillya economic area has been proposed. On the basis of the Prydniprovskyi Scientific Center of NAS of Ukraine and MES of Ukraine, it has been proposed to implement several experiments, firstly, on the formation of the Prydniprovskyi regional innovation ecosystem; secondly, on the creation of interregional public union «Platform for innovative development «Pridneprovie»», which can become a «factory of thought» on ways and means of restarting relations between actors of the regional innovation ecosystem and neo-industrial revival of the Prydniprovskyi economic area.

In the studies of scientists from various countries devoted to the search for new ways of organizing relations between economic agents that would have a beneficial effect on the development of regional innovations, as well as on the socio-economic development of the region in general, a regional innovation ecosystem is increasingly proposed as a way of organizing such relations. For the Russian reality, such a search is also relevant, since the already implemented forms of organizing relations between economic agents for the production of innovations have not fully justified the hopes placed on them. Hence, an understanding is formed of the need to develop a new form of organizing relations between economic agents that could potentially solve a wider range of problems than the already implemented forms. Guided by this, the author gives recommendations for the development of a mechanism for the formation and development of a regional innovation ecosystem. In this study, the author uses three concepts: “ecosystem,” “innovation ecosystem,” and “regional innovation ecosystem.” We proceed from the fact that the ecosystem is a generic concept for the other two; a regional innovation ecosystem is a special case of an innovation ecosystem; it is an innovation ecosystem that creates a unique innovation value for a region.

The interaction among innovation actors and environmental uncertainties has intensified the complexity of the evolution and drivers of regional innovation ecosystems, with profound implications for regional economies. This research aims to investigate the evolution and impact mechanisms of regional innovation ecosystems through the complex adaptive systems perspective. Employing an integrated methodology, we combine quantitative performance evaluation with dynamic fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to examine 30 Chinese provinces. Specifically, we investigate how innovation actors (governments, enterprises, universities) and key evolving institutional environment (openness, human capital and innovation platform) interact, adapt, and collaborate to shape innovation performance. We also analyze temporal changes and regional disparities. Our findings reveal significant differences in regional innovation performance across China’s eastern, central, and western regions, though all regions exhibit yearly improvement. Strong government investment in innovation is a necessary condition for high-level regional innovation, while weak enterprise R&D inputs are a necessary condition for low-level regional innovation. The analysis identifies five distinct configurations driving high innovation performance and four configurations associated with low-level regional innovation. The between-group consistency reveals that regional innovation increasingly depends on complex interactions among multiple actors and environments. The within-group consistency indicates that in developed eastern regions, innovation is driven by multiple innovation actors and environments, with high external knowledge dependence due to openness. In contrast, innovation in underdeveloped western regions mainly relies on internal factors like government and enterprise innovation investments. Case studies include both developed and lagging regional innovation ecosystems. Our research offers a novel theoretical perspective for understanding regional innovation ecosystem evolution. The findings provide policymakers with a scalable framework to tailor region-specific innovation strategies across diverse contexts, with insights applicable to innovation research in other regions.