R&D, spillovers, innovatoin systems and the genesis of regional growth in Europe

Research on the impact of innovation on regional economic performance in Europe has fundamentally followed three approaches: a) the analysis of the link between investment in R&D, patents, and economic growth; b) the study of the existence and efficiency of regional innovation systems; and c) the examination of geographical diffusion of regional knowledge spillovers. These complementary approaches have, however, rarely been combined. Important operational and methodological barriers have thwarted any potential crossfertilization. In this paper, we try to fill this gap in the literature by combining in one model R&D, spillovers, and innovation systems approaches. A multiple regression analysis is conducted for all regions of the EU-25, including measures of R&D investment, proxies for regional innovation systems, and knowledge and socio-economic spillovers. This approach allows us to discriminate between the influence of internal factors and external knowledge and institutional flows on regional economic growth. The empirical results highlight how the interaction between local and external research with local and external socio-economic and institutional conditions determines the potential of every region in order to maximise its innovation capacity. They also indicate the importance of proximity for the transmission of economically productive knowledge, as spillovers show strong distance decay effects. In the EU-25 context, only the innovative efforts pursued within a 180 minute travel radius have a positive and significant impact on regional growth performance.Economic growth, innovation, R&D, knowledge, spillovers,

The geographical processes behind innovation: a Europe-United States comparative analysis

The United States and European Union differ significantly in terms of their innovative capacity: the former have been able to gain and maintain world leadership in innovation and technology while the latter continues to lag. Notwithstanding the magnitude of this innovation gap and the political emphasis placed upon it on both sides of the Atlantic, very little systematic comparative analysis has been carried out on its causes. The empirical literature has emphasised the structural differences between the two continents in the quantity and quality of the major ‘inputs’ to innovation: R&D investments and human capital. The very different spatial organisation of innovative activities in the EU and the US – as suggested by a variety of contributions in the field of economic geography – could also influence innovative output. This paper analyses and compares a wide set of territorial processes that influence innovation in Europe and the United States. The higher mobility of capital, population, and knowledge in the US not only promotes the agglomeration of research activity in specific areas of the country but also enables a variety of territorial mechanisms to fully exploit local innovative activities and (informational) synergies. In the European Union, in contrast, imperfect market integration, and institutional and cultural barriers across the continent prevent innovative agents from maximising the benefits from external economies and localised interactions, but compensatory forms of geographical process may be emerging in concert with further European integration.Innovation, Research and development, Regions, Spillovers, Agglomeration, Systems of innovation, European Union, United States

How ‘Smart’ Are Smart Specialization Strategies?

The introduction of smart specialization (S3) as a fundamental pillar of the 2014 reform of the EU cohesion policy is a significant strategic shift in European development intervention. S3 strategies aimed at mobilizing the economic potential of each country and region of the EU by allowing a more place-based and bottom-up approach to development. However, despite the salience that S3 has acquired in a short period of time, there has been no European-wide evaluation of the extent to which S3 strategies truly reflect the economic characteristics and potential of the territories where they are being implemented. This article examines the characteristics of S3 strategies across Europe – by focusing on their development axes, economic or scientific domains and policy priorities – to assess whether this is the case. The results show that S3 strategies display a proliferation of objectives, a problem that particularly affects areas with weaker quality of government. Moreover, strategies are generally loosely connected with the intrinsic conditions of each region and mostly mimic what neighbouring areas are doing. The lack of more concise and focused S3 strategies is likely to undermine the effectiveness of what is, otherwise, a very interesting and worthwhile policy experiment

The drivers of SME innovation in the regions of the EU

European Union (EU) innovation policies have for long remained mostly research driven. The fundamental goal has been to achieve a rate of R&D investment of 3% of GDP. Small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) innovation, however, relies on a variety of internal sources —both R&D and non-R&D based— and external drivers, such as collaboration with other firms and research centres, and is profoundly influence by location and context. Given this multiplicity of innovation activities, this study argues that innovation policies fundamentally based on a place-blind increase of R&D investment may not deliver the best outcomes in regions where the capacity of SMEs is to benefit from R&D is limited. We posit that collaboration and regional specificities can play a greater role in determining SME innovation, beyond just R&D activities. Using data from the Regional Innovation Scoreboard (RIS), covering 220 regions across 22 European countries, we find that regions in Europe differ significantly in terms of SME innovation depending on their location. SMEs in more innovative regions benefit to a far greater extent from a combination of internal R&D, external collaboration of all sorts, and non-R&D inputs. SMEs in less innovative regions rely fundamentally on external sources and, particularly, on collaboration with other firms. Greater investment in public R&D does not always lead to improvements in regional SME innovation, regardless of context. Collaboration is a central innovation activity that can complement R&D, showing an even stronger effect on SME innovation than R&D. Hence, a more collaboration-based and place-sensitive policy is required to maximise SME innovation across the variety of European regional contexts

Revisiting the 'Missing Middle' in English Sub-National Governance

In the light of the new Coalition Government’s proposed ‘rescaling’ of sub-national governance away from the regional level, it is an opportune time to re-consider the strength and weaknesses of the city or sub-regional approach to economic development and to search, once more, for the ‘missing middle’ in English Governance. In this context, the article initially assesses the case for city or sub regions as tiers of economic governance, before examining the lessons to be learnt from the experiences of the existing city regions in the North East of England. It argues that while contemporary plans to develop Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) can be usefully considered within the context of the emerging city regional developments under the previous Labour Governments, a number of important challenges remain, particularly in relation to ensuring accountable structures of governance, a range of appropriate functions, adequate funding, and comprehensive coverage across a variety of sub-regional contexts. While the proposals of the new Government create the necessary ‘space’ to develop sub-regional bodies and offer genuine opportunities for both city and county LEPs, the scale of the sub-regional challenge should not be underestimated, particularly given the context of economic recession and major reductions in the public sector

Polarised Quark Distributions in the Nucleon from Semi-Inclusive Spin Asymmetries

We present a measurement of semi-inclusive spin asymmetries for positively and negatively charged hadrons from deep inelastic scattering of polarised muons on polarised protons and deuterons in the range $0.003$1 GeV$^2$. Compared to our previous publication on this subject, with the new data the statistical errors have been reduced by nearly a factor of two. From these asymmetries and our inclusive spin asymmetries we determine the polarised quark distributions of valence quarks and non-strange sea quarks at $Q^2$=10 GeV$^2$. The polarised $u$ valence quark distribution, $\Delta u_v(x)$, is positive and the polarisation increases with $x$. The polarised $d$ valence quark distribution, $\Delta d_v(x)$, is negative and the non-strange sea distribution, $\Delta \bar q(x)$, is consistent with zero over the measured range of $x$. We find for the first moments $\int_0^1 \Delta u_v(x) dx = 0.77 \pm 0.10 \pm 0.08$, $\int_0^1 \Delta d_v(x) dx = -0.52 \pm 0.14 \pm 0.09$ and $\int_0^1 \Delta \bar q(x) dx= 0.01 \pm 0.04 \pm 0.03$, where we assumed $\Delta \bar u(x) = \Delta \bar d(x)$. We also determine for the first time the second moments of the valence distributions $\int_0^1 x \Delta q_v(x) dx$.Comment: 17 page

Large enhancement of deuteron polarization with frequency modulated microwaves

We report a large enhancement of 1.7 in deuteron polarization up to values of 0.6 due to frequency modulation of the polarizing microwaves in a two liters polarized target using the method of dynamic nuclear polarization. This target was used during a deep inelastic polarized muon-deuteron scattering experiment at CERN. Measurements of the electron paramagnetic resonance absorption spectra show that frequency modulation gives rise to additional microwave absorption in the spectral wings. Although these results are not understood theoretically, they may provide a useful testing ground for the deeper understanding of dynamic nuclear polarization.Comment: 10 pages, including the figures coming in uuencoded compressed tar files in poltar.uu, which also brings cernart.sty and crna12.sty files neede

Advanced Technologies for Oral Controlled Release: Cyclodextrins for oral controlled release

Cyclodextrins (CDs) are used in oral pharmaceutical formulations, by means of inclusion complexes formation, with the following advantages for the drugs: (1) solubility, dissolution rate, stability and bioavailability enhancement; (2) to modify the drug release site and/or time profile; and (3) to reduce or prevent gastrointestinal side effects and unpleasant smell or taste, to prevent drug-drug or drug-additive interactions, or even to convert oil and liquid drugs into microcrystalline or amorphous powders. A more recent trend focuses on the use of CDs as nanocarriers, a strategy that aims to design versatile delivery systems that can encapsulate drugs with better physicochemical properties for oral delivery. Thus, the aim of this work was to review the applications of the CDs and their hydrophilic derivatives on the solubility enhancement of poorly water soluble drugs in order to increase their dissolution rate and get immediate release, as well as their ability to control (to prolong or to delay) the release of drugs from solid dosage forms, either as complexes with the hydrophilic (e.g. as osmotic pumps) and/ or hydrophobic CDs. New controlled delivery systems based on nanotechonology carriers (nanoparticles and conjugates) have also been reviewed

Spin Structure of the Proton from Polarized Inclusive Deep-Inelastic Muon-Proton Scattering

We have measured the spin-dependent structure function $g_1^p$ in inclusive deep-inelastic scattering of polarized muons off polarized protons, in the kinematic range $0.003 < x < 0.7$ and $1 GeV^2 < Q^2 < 60 GeV^2$. A next-to-leading order QCD analysis is used to evolve the measured $g_1^p(x,Q^2)$ to a fixed $Q^2_0$. The first moment of $g_1^p$ at $Q^2_0 = 10 GeV^2$ is $\Gamma^p = 0.136\pm 0.013(stat.) \pm 0.009(syst.)\pm 0.005(evol.)$. This result is below the prediction of the Ellis-Jaffe sum rule by more than two standard deviations. The singlet axial charge $a_0$ is found to be $0.28 \pm 0.16$. In the Adler-Bardeen factorization scheme, $\Delta g \simeq 2$ is required to bring $\Delta \Sigma$ in agreement with the Quark-Parton Model. A combined analysis of all available proton and deuteron data confirms the Bjorken sum rule.Comment: 33 pages, 22 figures, uses ReVTex and smc.sty. submitted to Physical Review