Regional innovation system research trends: toward knowledge management and entrepreneurial ecosystems

[EN] The regional innovation system (RIS) is a popular way of explaining a region¿s development and competitiveness based on innovation activities and processes. In this paper, bibliometric techniques are used to analyze all RIS studies indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS CC) database as of December 2017. The goal of the analysis is to identify the main trends in RIS research. The evolution of the total number of publications and citations per year indicates that this research field has garnered considerable attention from the scientific community, public administrations, and international organizations. Analysis of the most common keywords and their co-occurrence sheds light on the conceptual framework of RIS research, where knowledge, innovation, clusters, policy, networks, systems, R&D, firms, and industry are key concepts. The 17 most influential RIS articles indexed in WoS CC are identified according to the total number of citations and the ratio of number of citations per year. Reviewing these 17 articles reveals 3 groups of underlying research trends: (1) research on innovation systems, which was mainly conducted in the 1990s, (2) research on knowledge management since the beginning of the 2000s, and (3) research on entrepreneurial ecosystems in recent years. Finally, analysis of citations to these 17 most influential RIS articles reveals strong interconnections according to the number of times they are cited together.Norat Roig-Tierno wish to thank Project GV/2019/063, funded by the Generalitat Valenciana, for supporting this research.López-Rubio, P.; Roig-Tierno, N.; Mas-Tur, A. (2020). Regional innovation system research trends: toward knowledge management and entrepreneurial ecosystems. International Journal of Quality Innovation. 6:1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40887-020-00038-xS1166Freeman C (1987) Technology policy and economic performance: lessons from Japan. Pinter PublishersLundvall BA (1992) National systems of innovation: towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Pinter, LondonNelson RR (1993) In: Nelson RR (ed) National innovation systems. a comparative analysisIsard W (1975) Introduction to regional science. Prentice Hall, New YorkCooke P, Uranga MG, Etxebarria G (1998) Regional systems of innovation: an evolutionary perspective. Environ Plan A 30:1563–1584. https://doi.org/10.1068/a301563Forrest JE (1991) Models of the process of technological innovation. Tech Anal Strat Manag 4(3):439–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537329108524070Cooke P, Uranga MG, Etxebarria G (1997) Regional innovation systems: institutional and organisational dimensions. Res Policy 26(4–5):475–491. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(97)00025-5Cooke P (1992) Regional innovation systems: competitive regulation in the new Europe. Geoforum 23(3):365–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-7185(92)90048-9Asheim BT, Smith HL, Oughton C (2011) Regional innovation systems: theory, empirics and policy. Reg Stud 45(7):875–891. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2011.596701Doloreux, D., & Parto, S. (2004). Regional innovation systems: a critical synthesis. United Nations University, Institute for New Technologies, Discussion Paper Series #2004-17.Asheim BT, Coenen L (2005) Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: comparing Nordic clusters. Res Policy 34(8):1173–1190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.03.013Borrás S, Jordana J (2016) When regional innovation policies meet policy rationales and evidence: a plea for policy analysis. Eur Plan Stud 24(12):2133–2153. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2016.1236074Buesa M, Heijs J, Pellitero MM, Baumert T (2006) Regional systems of innovation and the knowledge production function: the Spanish case. Technovation 26(4):463–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2004.11.007Isaksen A, Normann RH, Spilling OR (2017) Do general innovation policy tools fit all? Analysis of the regional impact of the Norwegian Skattefunn scheme. J Innov Entrep 6(1):6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-017-0068-xMytelka LK (2000) Local systems of innovation in a globalized world economy. Ind Innov 7(1):15–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/713670244Freeman C (1995) The national system of innovation in historical perspective. Camb J Econ 19:5–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035309Edler J, Fagerberg J (2017) Innovation policy: what, why, and how. Oxf Rev Econ Policy 33(1):2–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx001European Commission (2014). The European Union explained: research and innovation. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union, 2014. doi:https://doi.org/10.2775/74012.OECD (2015) The innovation imperative: contributing to productivity, growth and well-being. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239814-enLundvall BA, Johnson B, Andersen ES, Dalum B (2002) National systems of production, innovation and competence-building. Res Policy 31(2):213–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00137-8Sharif N (2006) Emergence and development of the national innovation systems concept. Res Policy 35(5):745–766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.04.001Etzkowitz H, Leydesdorff L (2000) The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and “Mode 2” to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Res Policy 29:109–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4Chesbrough H (2003) Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business School PressTodtling F, Trippl M (2005) One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Res Policy 34(8):1203–1219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.01.018Uyarra E (2010) What is evolutionary about ‘regional systems of innovation’? Implications for regional policy. J Evol Econ 20:115–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-009-0135-yMetcalfe JS (1995) Technology systems and technology policy in an evolutionary framework. Camb J Econ 19:25–46. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035307Nelson R, Winter S (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change. Belknap, CambridgeDosi G (1988) The nature of the innovative process. In: Dosi G et al (eds) Technical change and economic theory. Pinter, LondonKline S, Rosenberg N (1986) An overview of innovation. Reprinted. In: Edquist C, McKelvey M (eds) Systems of innovation: growth, competitiveness and employment. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamEdquist C, Johnson B (1997) Institutions and organisations in systems of innovation. In: Edquist C (ed) , pp 41–63Edquist C (ed) (1997) Systems of innovation: technologies, institutions and organisations. Pinter, LondonBoschma R (2004) Competitiveness of regions from an evolutionary perspective. Reg Stud 38(9):1001–1014. https://doi.org/10.1080/0034340042000292601Iammarino S (2005) An evolutionary integrated view of regional systems of innovation: concepts, measures and historical perspectives. Eur Plan Stud 13(4):497–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310500107084Asheim B, Coenen L, Moodysson J, Vang J (2007) Constructing knowledge-based regional advantage: implications for regional innovation policy. Int J Entrep Innov Manag 7(2-5):140–155. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEIM.2007.012879Asheim B, Moodysson J (2017). Innovation policy for economic resilience: the case of Sweden (No. 2017/5). Lund University, CIRCLE-Center for Innovation, Research and Competences in the Learning Economy.Pritchard A (1969) Statistical bibliographic or bibliometrics? J Doc 25(4):348–349Lawani S (1981) Bibliometrics: its theoretical foundations, methods and applications. Libri 31(4):294–315. https://doi.org/10.1515/libr.1981.31.1.294Thelwall M (2008) Bibliometrics to webometrics. J Inf Sci 34(4):605–621. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551507087238Hirsch JE (2005) An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102Small H (1999) Visualizing science by citation mapping. J Am Soc Inf Sci 50(9):799–813 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1999)50:93.0.CO;2-GNoyons ECM, Moed HF, Van Raan AFJ (1999) Integrating research performance analysis and science mapping. Scientometrics 46(3):591–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02459614Callon M, Courtial P, Turner WA, Bauin S (1983) From translations to problematic networks: an introduction to co-word analysis. Soc Sci Inf 22(2):191–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901883022002003Kessler MM (1963) Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. Am Doc 14:10–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.5090140103Small H (1973) Co-citation in the scientific literature: a new measure of relationship between two documents. J Am Soc Inf Sci 24:265–269. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406White HD, Griffith BC (1981) Author co-citation: a literature measure of intellectual structure. J Am Soc Inf Sci 21:163–172. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630320302Van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2010) Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 84(2):523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3Cobo MJ, López-Herrera AG, Herrera-Viedma E, Herrera F (2011) Science mapping software tools: review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 62(7):1382–1402. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21525Merigó JM, Yang JB (2016) A bibliometric analysis of operations research and management science. Omega 73:37–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2016.12.004Acs ZJ, Anselin L, Varga A (2002) Patents and innovation counts as measures of regional production of new knowledge. Res Policy 31(7):1069–1085. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00184-6Muller E, Zenker A (2001) Business services as actors of knowledge transformation: the role of KIBS in regional and national innovation systems. Res Policy 30(9):1501–1516. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00164-0Rodriguez-Pose A, Crescenzi R (2008) Research and development, spillovers, innovation systems, and the genesis of regional growth in Europe. Reg Stud 42(1):51–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400701654186Ter Wal ALJ, Boschma RA (2009) Applying social network analysis in economic geography: framing some key analytic issues. Ann Reg Sci 43(3):739–756. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-008-0258-3Cooke P (2005) Regionally asymmetric knowledge capabilities and open innovation. Exploring ‘Globalisation 2’ – a new model of industry organization. Res Policy 34(8):1128–1149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.12.005Fritsch M, Franke G (2004) Innovation, regional knowledge spillovers and R&D cooperation. Res Policy 33(2):245–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(03)00123-9Hansen HK, Niedomysl T (2009) Migration of the creative class: evidence from Sweden. J Econ Geogr 9(2):191–206. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbn046Yam RCM, Lo W, Tang EPY, Lau AKW (2011) Analysis of sources of innovation, technological innovation capabilities, and performance: an empirical study of Hong Kong manufacturing industries. Res Policy 40(3):391–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.10.013Spigel B (2017) The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrep Theory Pract 41(1):49–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12167Oh DS, Phillips F, Park S, Lee E (2016) Innovation ecosystems: a critical examination. Technovation 54:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.02.004Audretsch DB, Belitski M (2017) Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: establishing the framework conditions. J Technol Transfer 42(5):1030–1051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9473-8Gaviria-Marin M, Merigó JM, Baier-Fuentes H (2019) Knowledge management: a global examination based on bibliometric analysis. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 140:194–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.006Huber F (2011) Do clusters really matter for innovation practices in Information Technology? Questioning the significance of technological knowledge spillovers. J Econ Geogr 12(1):107–126. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbq058Miles I, Kastrinos N, Bilderbeek R, Hertog PD, Flanagan K, Huntink W, Bouman M (1995) Knowledge-intensive business services: users, carriers and sources of information. European Innovation Monitoring System (EIMS) Reports, European Commission, BrusselsNonaka I (1994) A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organ Sci 5(1):14–37. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.1.14Acs ZJ, Autio E, Szerb L (2014) National systems of entrepreneurship: measurement issues and policy implications. Res Policy 43(3):476–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.08.016Autio E, Kenney M, Mustar P, Siegel D, Wright M (2014) Entrepreneurial innovation: the importance of context. Res Policy 43(7):1097–1108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.01.01

The Innovation System Research Network (ISRN): A Canadian Experiment in Knowledge Management

This paper looks at the creation and function of the Innovation Systems Research Network (ISRN), which is a collaborative Canadian initiative to undertake and disseminate research results concerning the diverse nature of regional and local innovation systems across the country

Celebrating 30 years of Innovation System research : what you need to know about Innovation Systems

On the occasion of the 30th anniversary of Innovation System research, this paper presents an extensive literature review on this large field of innovation research. Building on an analytical basis of the commonalities system and innovation, the authors analyze the four main Innovation System approaches: National Innovation Systems (NIS), Regional Innovation Systems (RIS), Sectoral Innovation Systems (SIS) and Technological Innovation Systems (TIS). The analysis is structured systematically along ten comprehensive criteria. Starting with the founder(s) of each theory and the research program within each Innovation System approach was developed (1), the basic thoughts of each Innovation System approach are explained (2). For five case studies most cited (3), spatial boundaries are examined (4) and units of analyses are derived (5). By comparing the underlying theoretical concept and empirical results, the authors show patterns in the evolution of Innovation System research overall. By studying the basic components (6) and a functional analysis (7), each Innovation System approach is broken down into structural pieces and functional processes. If available, the authors present one or several taxonomies (8) for each Innovation System approach and summarize similar approaches (9), in order to classify and integrate the approaches into the ongoing innovation research. The identification of further research (10) shows which steps will need to be taken in the next years in order to evolve Innovation System research further and deeper. After the conclusion, the extensive table of comparison is presented which can serve as a guideline for academics and practitioners from basic and applied science, industry or policy that need to understand which Innovation System approach may be best for their specific analytical purposes

University-industry technology transfer options: licensing or research joint venture?

In recent years there has been an increasing trend in various forms of collaboration and technology transfer between industry and universities, such as licensing, spin-offs and research joint ventures. In this paper, I provide an explanation for the choice of licensing versus research joint venture as technology transfer options by a firm.technology transfer, university-industry research joint venture, licensing

Innovation of New Product Development Process: A Case Study of Healthy Drink-Based Product Line in Indonesia’s Company

The research was financed by National Innovation System Research Incentive, Ministry Research and Technology, Republic of Indonesia (SINAS Ristek ) Abstract Contemporary and performing organizations are under tremendous pressure to bring new products and to market them quickly. However, the task of new product development requires significant investment and time in addition to making various decisions during the NPD process. The aims of the study is to identify pattern and model of new product development (NPD)  process conducted by an Indonesia’s local company (“S” company), particularly  for healthy  drink, “K” products line to meet best practice in NPD. The research was also conducted  to determine the factor(s)  that promote and hinder innovation culture within the company, which can affect the company’s competitiveness.     Descriptive analysis of  factors   and determinants which support and hinder the NPD process are provided using strategic assessment and alignment model. The mapping status of newess level of products or portfolios, level of innovativeness and NPD  stages are analysed using a Stage-Gate framework. The result found that the process of innovation  and NPD in  “S” company strongly associated with personal figure of the CEO/top manager or top-down appraoch.  The fact that informal NPD process in “S” company  is seemingly spontaneous, natural yet very flexible and highly dependent on CEO’s intuition. Keywords: new product development process, Indonesia, healthy drink, innovation DOI: 10.7176/EJBM/11-24-17 Publication date: August 31st 201

Claiming the City: Co-operation and Making the Deal in Urban Comprehensive Land Claims Negotiations in Canada

Since their introduction in 1973, comprehensive land claims (CLC) agreements have become important mechanisms for Aboriginal peoples to achieve their political, social, cultural, and economic goals. Although the literature on CLC negotiations is a rich and varied one, it has tended to ignore the role that municipal governments have on influencing negotiation outcomes. This lacuna is surprising since a number of treaty negotiations in the Yukon Territory and BC involve lands located in major municipalities. This paper develops a theoretical framework for understanding the influence that municipal governments can have on treaty negotiation outcomes. Using a case study of the Kwanlin Dün First Nation treaty negotiations in the Yukon Territory, we find that institutional and milieu factors are important. However, leadership was the most important and decisive factor

Universities, knowledge networks and regional policy

As knowledge becomes an increasingly important part of regional innovation and development processes, the role of universities has come to the fore of regional innovation and economic development policy The objective of this paper is to critically review and assess the structure and function of knowledge networks and modes of engagement between universities and the business community in regional settings and contexts. It is argued that while regional knowledge networks and modes of engagement between universities and the business community are becoming increasingly prevalent, it is often difficult to ascribe investments in knowledge-based infrastructure to improved regional competitiveness. It is concluded that in a globalised knowledge environment the engagement between universities and regional business communities must be based on a mutual understanding of the role of both network and market-based knowledge interactions