Methodologies and methods of transnational learning

Introduction Most of the time, cognitive learning (see Chapter 1, this volume) is likely to be enabled and restricted by spatial (see Chapter 2, this volume) and organizational (see Chapter 3, this volume) frameworks, and lock-in mechanisms, which create trajectories. Attempts at transnational learning are often motivated by visions that break with some of these spatial and organizational limitations, sometimes with reference to emergent (Chapter 1) institutional phenomena or megatrends driven by globalization. The examples used in this volume are liberalization (NPM), multilevel governance in Europe (OMC, Smart Specialization), global communities defending the common interests of humanity (World Heritage), and Nordic values (see Chapters 1, 6, 8 and 13, this volume). The special case of Nordic learning is discussed more comprehensively in Chapter 8. This chapter shows how some of these forms of transnational learning may be analyzed within the parameters defined by SECI (see Chapter 3, this volume). The argument is that new knowledge creation facilitated through the analytical and organizational tools of SECI has a potential to change trajectories usually locked in by spatial and organizational restrictions. Accordingly, in the discussion on methods (see below), the chapter refers to approaches and tools that are based on SECI, which may be useful in organizing, monitoring and evaluating processes of transnational learning. In doing so, we draw upon some of the concepts introduced by Mariussen and Virkkala in Chapter 4 of this volume, such as translation and abduction. Finally, in the discussion on the practical application of the outcomes of transnational learning and innovation, the topic of emergence, introduced in Chapter 1, is reopened, from the point of departure of theories of institutional change. It is argued that continued work in this direction enables the development of analytical and methodological tools which may be used to explore empirically how transnational learning can change trajectories (see below).©2013 Routledge. This is an Accepted Manuscript of a book chapter published by Routledge in Mariussen, Å. (Ed.), Virkkala, S. (Ed.). (2013). Learning Transnational Learning. London: Routledge, on 29 April 2013, available online: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203427156.fi=vertaisarvioitu|en=peerReviewed

Networks of Innovation : Measuring Structure and Dynamics between and within Helices, Regions and Spatial Levels. Empirical Evidence from the Baltic Sea Region

In the quantitative, macro-oriented triple helix literature, synergy is measured indirectly, through patent data, firm data and other secondary statistical sources. These macro-level quantitative studies do not open up for understanding how different processes of cooperation create different outcomes, in terms of synergies. This article presents an alternative method of measuring quantitatively how different networks of innovation in a variety of ways create different types of complex synergies. This opens up for an empirical analysis of variations of synergy formation, seen as innovation networks with different structures, formed within and between helices, regions and geographical levels. Data was collected through a snapshot survey in 10 regional cases in the Baltic Sea Region. The analysis presents how different networks of innovation within and between helices are formed by different combinations of expectations, experiences and gaps.© Seija Virkkala and Åge Mariussen, 2021. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 license.The authors received funding from the project LARS (Learning Among Regions on Smart Specialisation) implementing the INTERREG Baltic Sea Region Programme 2014–2020.fi=vertaisarvioitu|en=peerReviewed

Creating Growth by Connecting PlaceBased Development Strategies

In the past years, the European Commission launched three thematic Smart Specialisation platforms to support interregional collaborations and to support European Union regions committed to co-invest jointly in strategic growth areas. The bottom up component in this process has resulted in a wide variety of industry-scientific partnerships at regional and transnational levels. These networks include regions, which are very different in terms of innovation ecosystems, but nevertheless connected through shared thematic focus enabling transnational processes of innovation. This paper explains how interregional partnerships build on the efforts and results achieved in national and regional research and innovation strategies for Smart Specialisation and how, as a result of this, new European innovation ecosystems are emerging. With reference to existing literature and experiences so far, the paper outlines a conceptual framework of how transnational cooperation may strengthen regional place-based development strategies and improve regional innovation capabilities. Key analytical concepts are proximity, knowledge complexity, entrepreneurial discovery processes, stakeholder analysis and cluster emergence.© European Union, 2020. The reuse policy of the European Commission is implemented by the Commission Decision 2011/833/EU of 12 December 2011 on the reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). Except otherwise noted, the reuse of this document is authorised under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This means that reuse is allowed provided appropriate credit is given and any changes are indicated. For any use or reproduction of photos or other material that is not owned by the EU, permission must be sought directly from the copyright holders.JRC Technical report JRC12224

Connectivity and innovation potential in Pomorskie ICT and Energy : comparison across the Baltic sea region

fi=vertaisarvioimaton|en=nonPeerReviewed

A connectivity model as a potential tool for smart specialization strategies

The article contributes to the smart specialization literature by presenting a new approach, connectivity analysis, where Triple Helix (TH) relations (involving universities, companies and government) are at the centre of the entrepreneurial discovery process. Relations between helices may be seen, from the point of departure of proximity, as preconditions of connectivity, or interaction, measured through expectations and experiences. This offers potential solution to two limitations of proximity approach: its static nature and narrow focus on dyadic relationships. The connectivity analysis reveals the extent of mutual expectations, as well as tensions, or gaps. Based on this analysis, the article presents a policy model that is used to map structures of networks and gaps between TH actors. It may also identify strengths, weaknesses and problems. This analysis is used as input to structured dialogues between actors in leading positions in the TH and in smart specialization policy-making and implementation. This approach may lead to policy interventions supporting entrepreneurial discoveries. The model has been developed in partnership with researchers and the Regional Council of Ostrobothnia. The article also presents this case study and demonstrates the use of the connectivity model in practice.fi=vertaisarvioitu|en=peerReviewed

Municipalities and communities enabling social innovations in peripheral areas – case studies from Ostrobothnia, Finland

The article focuses on social innovation processes (SIs) in rural areas in Nordic countries. There are different roles of actors in SI processes such as initiator, promotor and connector, facilitator, follower, opponent, and others. What roles or contributions can municipalities provide to opportunity-driven SI processes in rural localities? More specifically, what kind of relationships can there be between the municipality and local communities in SI processes? The empirical findings presented in this article identifies three specific contributions from municipalities: (1) surveyor of opportunities (in the initiation phase), (2) promoting projects by providing resources such as knowledge and legitimacy (promoter and connector), and (3) securing the future of successful results (promotor and connector). We argue that the reasons why municipalities focus of these specific contributions is that they can be aligned with municipal coordinating mechanisms. Within this framework, they may provide resources, such as the ability to formulate local needs, sector expertise, long-term thinking, knowledge of local and extra-local opportunities (funding and partners), legitimacy, trust, and social capital. In successful SI processes, these inputs from municipalities may empower communities to deliver complimentary resources, such as voluntary work, ideas, the social capital, and legitimacy of local networks.© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/),which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.fi=vertaisarvioitu|en=peerReviewed

Smart multi-level coordination towards green transformation : GRETA WP2 Report Comparative Analysis

Report introduces operationalisation of Geels multi-level perspective via a method for measuring stakeholder´s status regarding power (ability to act), legitimacy (relevance for action) and urgency (need to act) towards green transformation (based on Mitchell at al.) Analysis shows results of 6 regions across Europe (2 from Finland, 2 from Lithuania, one from Latvia and one from Sweden) regarding their status towards green transformation. Analysis is also done on circular economy and green energy industries to add understanding of their situation in the Baltic Sea Region. Besides these case studies the report also looks at the pathways that could help in changing regime level towards green transformation and includes discussion on green transformation and on the role of the regions in managing this change.©2021 Interreg Baltic Sea Region, European Union: European regional development fund, GRETA, Vaasan yliopisto.fi=vertaisarvioimaton|en=nonPeerReviewed

Creating Growth by Connecting Place-Based Development Strategies

In the past years, the European Commission launched three thematic Smart Specialisation platforms to support interregional collaborations and to support European Union regions committed to co-invest jointly in strategic growth areas. The bottom up component in this process has resulted in a wide variety of industry-scientific partnerships at regional and transnational levels. These networks include regions, which are very different in terms of innovation ecosystems, but nevertheless connected through shared thematic focus enabling transnational processes of innovation. This paper explains how interregional partnerships build on the efforts and results achieved in national and regional research and innovation strategies for Smart Specialisation and how, as a result of this, new European innovation ecosystems are emerging. With reference to existing literature and experiences so far, the paper outlines a conceptual framework of how transnational cooperation may strengthen regional place-based development strategies and improve regional innovation capabilities. Key analytical concepts are proximity, knowledge complexity, entrepreneurial discovery processes, stakeholder analysis and cluster emergence.JRC.B.3-Territorial Developmen

Self-discovery enabling entrepreneurial discovery processes

This chapter interprets the entrepreneurial discovery process (EDP) as a process of self-discovery and transition spanning knowledge exploitation and exploration. Exploitation refers to using existing knowledge and refining existing processes; exploration refers to new knowledge discovery and creation. This transition requires changes in agency, which can be framed in terms of the division of labour between the triple-helix actors and a collective regional actor: ‘the self’ in self-discovery is a public–private partnership. The chapter presents the development of the conceptualisation of agency (‘self’) from the individual entrepreneur by Kirzner to the collective actor in the EDP presented by Foray. EDP and smart specialisation are compared with cluster theories and innovation system approaches.fi=vertaisarvioitu|en=peerReviewed