In parallel with the interest in networks of innovation on the part of the academic literature, policymakers are increasingly recognizing the important systemic nature of innovation processes, involving many agents often engaged in networks of relationships (OECD, 1997; Mytelka and Smith, 2002; European Commission, 2003; Nauwelaers and Wintjes, 2008), and they are increasingly supporting the creation of networks among firms and other types of organizations. Examples are the EU Framework Programmes (Breschi and Malerba, 2009; Tindemans, 2009) as well as the many national and regional policies launched in the past decade or so (Branstetter and Sakakibara, 2002; Caloghirou et al, 2004; Russo and Rossi, 2009; Bellandi and Caloffi, 2010; Cunningham and Ramlogan, 2012). Policies for innovation networks usually aim to support joint R&D, technological development or technology transfer projects or even, sometimes, networking per se (with a view to create a “critical mass” of experts or users in a certain technology). At the same time, these policy interventions may also help the participants improve their ability to perform collaborative innovation, by allowing them to gain experience in working with external partners on a specific activity. Such behavioural outcomes, while not generally considered the main objective of these policies, have the potential to generate long-lasting beneficial changes in the participants’ competences and abilities (Gök and Edler, 2012). An important question for policy design is what kind of networks should be supported, if the objective of the policy is not just to fund “successful” innovation projects, but also to increase the participants’ ability to engage in collaborative innovation. Should policies simply provide funding to innovation networks on the basis of an assessment of the project they intend to realize, or should they promote the setup of networks with specific features, in order to increase the agents’ innovative potential through networking
