The Regional in the Regional Innovation System: A Conceptualization Proposal in Peripheral Contexts

The regional collaborative innovation system is a nonlinear complex system, which has obvious uncertainty characteristics in the aspects of member selection and evolution. Ant colony algorithm, which can do the uncertainty collaborative optimization decision-making, is an effective tool to solve the uncertainty decision path selection problem. It can improve the cooperation efficiency of each subsystem and achieve the goal of effective cooperation. By analysing the collaborative evolution mechanisms of the regional innovation system, an evaluation index system for the regional collaborative innovation system is established considering the uncertainty of collaborative systems. The collaborative uncertainty decision model is constructed to determine the regional innovation system’s collaborative innovation effectiveness. The improved ant colony algorithm with the pheromone evaporation model is applied to traversal optimization to identify the optimal solution of the regional collaborative innovation system. The collaboration capabilities of the ant colony include pheromone diffusion so that local updates are more flexible and the result is more rational. Finally, the method is applied to the regional collaborative innovation system.

Regional innovation clusters and systems are a form of collective innovation efforts. There is a large amount of knowledge and technology creation that occurs withing these structures. A globally well-known example is Silicon Valley in the United States of America. This article plans to delve deeper into the concept of regional innovation clusters and systems by looking at what literature exists surrounding these topics. It does this by applying a systematic approach to a scoping review. Data is sourced from abstract and citation databases, namely Web of Science and Scopus. These databases are merged and analysed to identify core documents in the database by applying Bradford's law, identify influential authors by looking at various metrics. A thematic map is also developed to identify themes that exist in this specific set of literature. The evolution of these themes is also analysed over the years of 2000 to 2021, in the form of four times slices, to identify concepts that surround regional innovation systems, literature gaps or areas where contributions can be made. Concepts identified that occur with regional innovation systems are economic developments, clusters, and knowledge. A literature gap identified is the absence of the discussion of factors related to regional innovation.

Exploiting Knowledge: The Importance of Regional Allegiance and Territorial Loyalty in Implementing a Regional Small Business Innovation System

Layers of co-existing innovation systems

Emerging changes in the knowledge era has brought out the idea of open innovation, suggesting that ideas for innovations can emerge or go to market from outside the company as well as inside. A regional open innovation system, the innovation network comprised of different actors working towards a creation of innovations in a certain region, can offer a favourable platform for collaboration between companies. We examine a concept for a regional innovation system as a cooperational platform enabling the open innovation approach from the SMEs' point of view. Results from a survey of 175 SMEs in four EU regions are reported in order to highlight the situation of the collaborative field of the regional innovation system to map the potential of external sourcing and exchanging of innovations in these regions. Based on the results of the survey, suggestions of an efficient model for open innovation empowering collaboration inside the regional innovation system are presented.

In order to more firmly align the study of Korean regional innovation systems (RIS) with contemporary place-based inquiry into innovation processes, this research deploys a knowledge base and RIS perspective to explore firms’ motivations to innovate and spatial variability in firms’ use of innovation-supporting infrastructure and external technical support. Results, on the basis of a survey of Korean solar photovoltaic firms, parallel expectations of firms with a synthetic knowledge base and indicate that firms are active in multiple ‘regional networked innovation systems’. This suggests a move away from Korea's historically dirigiste system toward an approach which is more balanced among regions. Concerning RIS research, wider applications derived from the study include suggestions to further integrate firm-level analyses in order to unearth shortcomings associated with policy, to deploy knowledge base considerations to identify possible policy mismatch, and to include multispatial demand support considerations for innovative activity, particularly for nascent industries.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to collate relevant literature on the theoretical background of regional innovation systems and factors that impact the operational effectiveness of regional innovation systems. Design/methodology/approach – The collated information is then used to determine the opinions of experts from industries within science-based parks, and the scholars on the researches of regional innovation systems in Taiwan. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is used to evaluate the critical factors of regional innovation systems. Findings – This study finds that industry cluster effects constitute the most significant operating factor for regional innovation systems within the Taiwanese science-based parks. In addition, this study not only confirms that partners or parent firm location which were advocated by Tödtling et al. are also critical to Taiwanese regional innovation systems, but also verifies how well the relationships to partners or parent firm are equally important for expansion the regional innovation systems. Research limitations/implications – The concepts of regional innovation system have been established since 1990, and related articles have been published from European and Asian scholars, however, seldom does literature offer questionnaires or research items to measure the operational effectiveness of a regional innovation system. Therefore this study has developed a questionnaire, by reviewing literature and verifying it by the AHP method, with Taiwan’s HsinChu Science Park as the subject case. For the contribution on theories, this study inducted the construction of new innovation environments, new interactional behavior in regional organization innovation, and injection of new resources into regional innovation as the three main constructs to influence the operational effectiveness of regional innovation systems. In addition, this study has used experts’ questionnaire answers and the AHP method to clarify the priority of factors to operate the regional innovation system. Practical implications – Industry cluster effect, construction of knowledge infrastructure and how close partners or parent firm are (distance and relationship) are the top three factors in HsinChu Science Park. The duties of the government are not merely picking good firms for the regional innovation system, but also making policies and defining regimes, providing a good business environment for campus firms, universities, and research institutions, as well as offering plenty of R & D funding to encourage industry-academia cooperation. Governments must invest in infrastructures, such as: establishing databases, libraries, information networks, the national technical standards for certification, and other public services, to facilitate industry-academia cooperation. Social implications – These research results indicate the operating essentials of regional innovation systems are not limited to interactions among regional organizations. This study suggests that the success or failure of a new regional innovation system would instead, be dependent on the regional environment, as in software planning and support, as well as the relationship of innovation with policy implementation and administration. Originality/value – Results showed that the top-five factors influencing the operational effectiveness of regional innovation systems are the industry cluster effect, the construction of knowledge infrastructure, how close to partner’s or parent’s firm (distance and relationship), import of foreign capital and technology, and the implementation of regional innovation policy.

List of Contributors. Preface. Acknowledgments. Part A: In Search of Conceptual Framework. 1. Local and Regional Systems of Innovation as Learning Socio-Economies J. de la Mothe, G. Paquet. Part B: Conceptual Perspectives. 2. Calibrating the Learning Region R. Florida. 3. Regional Systems of Innovation and the Blurred Firm A. Saxenian. 4. Modeling Regional Innovation and Competitiveness T. Padmore, H. Gibson. Part C: International and Inter-Regional Perspectives. 5. Knowledge-Based Industrial Clustering: International Comparisons R. Voyer. 6. Contrasting U.S. Metropolitan Systems of Innovation Z.J. Acs, et al. 7. Contrasting Regional Innovation Systems in Oxford and Cambridge H.L. Smith, et al. 8. Telecoms in New Jersey: Spatial Determinants of Sectoral Investments C. Wymbs. Part D: Perspectives on Canada's Local and Regional Systems of Innovation. 9. Innovation in Enterprises in British Columbia J.A.D. Holbrook, L.P. Hughes. 10. How Do Small Firms Innovate in British Columbia? H.G. Schuetze. 11. The Dynamics of Regional Innovation in Ontario M.S. Gertler, et al. 12. Canada's Technology Triangle J. Roy. 13. The Chaudiere-Apalaches System of Industrial Innovations R. Landry, N. Amara. 14. Saint John, NB, as an Emerging Local System of Innovation R. Nimijean. 15. Canadian Science Parks, Universities, and Regional Development J. Doutriaux. PartE: Quo Vadis? 16. Some Lessons and Challenges for Model Builders, Data Gatherers and Other Tribes J. de la Mothe, G. Paquet. Index.

The Innovation Systems Research Network is a collaborative Canadian initiative to undertake and disseminate research results concerning the diverse nature of regional and local innovation systems across the country. The network was established on the premise that, because of their diversity, regional innovation systems in Canada could not be treated as similar, and that single nation-wide innovation policies would not be successful. This project is, itself, an experiment in research management, in that, because of its regional focus in a geographically diverse federation, it is organized as a federation of regional innovation studies networks. A consequence is that the network has been productive and has provided opportunities for graduate students to meet their peers (and future colleagues) across the country. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

As the continuous development of technology, the processes of technological innovation involve in more elements and tend to be more complicated. Regional technology innovation ability, regarded as important research content in regional innovation system, can be the reflection of the extent to functioning in regional technology innovation system. Based on extant research in this field, this paper constructs a measurement framework indicating regional technology innovation ability. We draw a three-level evaluation indicators system of regional technology innovation ability to evaluate national regional competitiveness, urban competitiveness and regional modernization. We also select Yunnan Province as an example to expound the regional technology innovation ability, and elaborate the procession of indicators construction of regional technology innovation ability.

Today, the concept of ‘Innovation Systems’ is widely used in discourse and policies to stimulate economic development through upgrading firms for enhanced competitiveness. Productivity increments are key to enhanced competitiveness, and innovation accounts for the overwhelming majority of productivity gains in most of the world’s leading economies. So creating and sustaining innovation is the key to improved competitiveness. Much of the early knowledge about these relationships derived from writers updating and correcting some of the crucial insights of Schumpeter (1975) on innovation and entrepreneurship. These new thinkers utilized the notion of the national economy as their canvas, seeking to understand if it retained force under conditions of globalization (Lundvall, 1992; Nelson, 1993) although subsequently the difficulty of limiting the scope of analysis in that way was recognized (Edquist, 1997). Hence the importance of sectoral and regional innovation systems was highlighted. With regard to sectoral systems, interesting if somewhat constrained use of the ‘system’ concept developed, as in the work of Teece (1988) and as ‘technological systems’ (Carlsson and Jacobsson, 1994). That firm-focused approach sought to show the detailed repercussions of an innovation upon the internal and external relations of the firm, its technology, skills-mix and marketing in the specific sector in question.KeywordsSocial CapitalVenture CapitalLearn SystemRegional InnovationRegional ClusterThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Science and Technology Park (STP) is perceived to be a vehicle in promoting innovation-based economic growth within the framework of regional and national innovation systems. STP is a tool to encourage regional innovation and competitiveness in increasing contribution of sci- ence and technology in economic development. STP can also be a leading sector in creating conducive environment for local community's technopreneurship. In relation to the vision outlined in the 2025 Indonesian Master Plan of Acceleration and Expansion of Indonesia's Economic (MP3EI), STP is stated to be an important element in creating innovation within the framework of Special Economic Zone among six Economic Corridors. Hence, the government of Indonesia continues to encourage the development of STPs in Indonesia by involving local gov- ernments, universities, business players and stakeholders surround the area. Ultimately, STP is a platform in developing National Innovation System (NIS) and Regional Innovation System (RIS).

모든 국가는 지역 균형성장과 함께 4차 산업혁명 시대에도 대비해야 하는 과제를 안고 있다. OECD가 강조해온 지역정책과 산업정책을 결합한 지역기반의 혁신성장전략이 주목받는 이유다. 국내에서도 클러스터 기반의 지역혁신시스템이 여러 곳에서 태동·발전하고 있으나 개선해야 할 점들이 적지 않다. 이러한 맥락에서 EU가 추진해온 ‘스마트 전문화 전략(RIS3)’과 유럽의 지역혁신시스템은 우리에게 정책적 시사점을 줄 수 있다. 본 연구에서는 EU의 스마트 전문화 전략(RIS3)을 살펴보고 혁신성과를 조절변수로 한 위계적 조절회귀분석을 실시하여 유럽 지역혁신시스템(RIS)의 경제성과에 영향을 주는 요인을 규명하였다. 분석 결과 지역혁신시스템은 혁신성과와의 조절효과를 통해 경제성과에 유의한 영향을 주며, 여기에는 지역혁신시스템을 구성하는 4개의 요소가 모두 필요함을 확인하였다. 또한 ‘지역혁신역량’과 ‘지역 거버넌스’는 혁신성과와의 상호작용을 통해 경제성과에 유의한 영향을 미치는 반면, ‘기업 역동성’과 ‘협력 및 상호작용’은 혁신성과의 조절효과가 입증되지 않았다. 이는 유럽의 많은 낙후 지역에서 ‘기업 역동성’과 ‘협력 및 상호작용’이 아직 혁신성과와 연계되지 못하고 있음을 뜻한다. 기업 역동성과 협력 및 상호작용이 혁신성과와 어우러져 지역경제 활성화에 기여하려면 개방적이고 역동적인 혁신생태계가 필요하다. 본 연구의 시사점은 첫째, 정책의 우선순위를 지역혁신역량의 강화에 두어야 하고, 둘째, 경제주체들이 참여하는 효율적인 거버넌스를 구축해야 하며, 셋째, 기업 역동성과 협력 및 상호작용이 혁신성과와 연계되도록 역동적인 혁신생태계 조성에 꾸준히 노력해야 한다. 넷째, 지역혁신시스템의 고도화 및 역동적인 혁신생태계의 구축은 하루아침에 이루어지지 않는다. EU와 회원국들이 오래 전부터 민간 주도의 개방화된 스마트 전문화 전략을 지속적으로 추진해온 이유도 바로 여기에 있다.All countries have the task of preparing for the 4th industrial revolution along with regional balanced growth. This is why the regional-based innovative growth strategy that combines regional and industrial policies that the OECD has emphasized is drawing attention. In Korea, cluster-based regional innovation systems are growing in various places, but there are many points that need to be improved. In this context, the ‘smart specialization strategy (RIS3)’ promoted by the EU and the regional innovation system in Europe can give us many policy implications. In this study, EU s smart specialization strategy (RIS3) was examined and the factors affecting the economic performance of 280 European regional innovation systems were identified by using hierarchical adjustment regression analysis with innovation performance as a moderating variable. As a result of the analysis, it was confirmed that the regional innovation system (RIS) had a significant effect on economic performance through the moderating effect (interaction effect) with the innovation performance. This study also confirmed that the economic performance of the regional innovation system is improved when the innovation performance is high, and that four elements(‘Regional innovation capacity’, ‘regional governance’, ‘business dynamism’, ‘cooperation and interaction’) constituting the regional innovation system are necessary to improve the economic performance. In addition, it was confirmed that regional innovation capacity and regional governance brought a significant difference to the economic performance of the regional innovation system through the interaction with the innovation performance. On the other hand, the direct effects of corporate dynamism and cooperation and interaction on economic performance were confirmed, but the moderating effect of innovation performance was not confirmed. This means that many underdeveloped regions in Europe have not yet been able to link corporate dynamism, cooperation and interactions with innovation activities. In order for corporate dynamism and cooperation and interaction to contribute to vitalization of the local economy, an open and dynamic innovation ecosystem must be created. The policy implications of this study are: First, the priority of policy should be placed on strengthening regional innovation capabilities. Second, in order for the regional innovation system to be successful, efficient regional governance in which all economic actors participate should be established. Third, continuous efforts should be made to create an open innovation ecosystem so that corporate dynamism, cooperation and interaction can be linked with innovation performance. Fourth, the advancement of regional innovation systems and the establishment of a dynamic innovation ecosystem cannot be achieved overnight. This is the reason why the EU and its member states have been continuously pursuing private-led open smart specialization strategies for a long time.

Over the past two decades, social scientists and governments have been paying more and more attention to regions as designated sites of innovation and competitiveness in the globalizing economy. Thus, innovation and innovation systems are becoming increasingly interesting to policy‐makers as ways of achieving their economic and social goals. Europe 2020, the European Union’s key strategy for the current decade, aims to foster a smart, sustainable, and inclusive economy. “Innovation has been placed at the heart of the strategy”, as it provides the “best means of successfully tackling major societal challenges” (European Commission 2010, p. 2). The new age of capitalism requires a new kind of region. In effect, regions are increasingly defined by the same criteria and elements which comprise a knowledge-intensive firm: continuous improvement, new ideas, knowledge creation and organizational learning (Florida 2003, p. 236). The increased policy and research interest in regional clusters and innovation systems reflects the growing significance of the regional level, and the importance of specific and regional resources, for stimulating the innovation capability and competitiveness of firms. The social and interactive practice of innovation also points to the importance of the relationship between the firm and its environment. The learning economy perspective affirms that learning and innovation are localized, not placeless processes (Storper 1997). Thus, it emphasizes that innovation is a territorially-embedded process, based not only on resources that are place specific but also on social and institutional contexts (Asheim, lsaksen 2002). This paper describes the role of innovations in Sweden and Swedish regions in development and growth, mainly by analysing the concept of regional innovation systems. Moreover, the actors and associations from the innovation system perspective are pointed out in the article. An analysis of the policy documents and a literature overview was the basis of the empirical material. Data comes from the OECD and EUROSTAT databases.

Like many of the post-soviet countries, Russia has entered the new century targeting at creation of competitive economy, based on knowledge and innovation with strong emphasis at the role of the regions. At the same time, the western world has entered an era of a new approach to innovation, shifting from a closed to an open innovation (OI) paradigm. This paper focuses on the development of an integrated regional open innovation system (ROIS) and introduces a framework for the analysis of OI implementation within regional innovation system in Russia. St Petersburg region of Russia is studied as an example for the developed framework. This paper contributes the ROIS and related constituting concepts by offering a framework for studying and comparing ROISs in Russia.