No abstract

Consistent with Marshallian/Porterian theories, the Norwegian cluster policy has been linked to the development of specialized regional industry environments. Cluster projects are relatively sector-specific entities often supporting (already) strong regional industries and sectors. Following a review of the current literature on clusters and innovation, and informed by evolutionary thought, we argue that such constellations of specialized clusters may hamper the long-term innovation ability of regions. In a conceptual discussion of cluster evolution and its links to innovation and regional path renewal, we argue that special emphasisboth theoretical and politicalhas been placed on the geographical scale of clusters, but there has been less emphasis on scope. Accordingly, we present three theory-based strategies for cluster evolution and link these to regional development and innovation by assessing their impact on regional path renewal. We illustrate our argument empirically using examples from the Norwegian Centre of Expertise (NCE) cluster programme.

Theoretically and conceptually, evolutionary economic geography has paid little attention to technological characteristics when explaining the emergence of new industries. Building on the literature on technological innovation systems, the article develops a framework for investigating interconnections between territorial dynamics and technological characteristics in path creation processes. The theoretical argument is operationalized in an analytical framework that is applied in empirical investigation of two green technologies and their linkages to the region of southwestern Norway, namely, carbon capture and storage and maritime battery technology. As illustrated by the empirical investigation, territorial dynamics or technological characteristics alone do not explain path creation. Rather, interconnections between the two and how interconnections play out in time and space are considered focal.

For more than two decades, cluster theory has served as a basis for widespread implementation of regional development policies in several countries. However, there are still persistent struggles in academia towards agreement on clear operational definitions of a cluster. In this article, we argue that this definitional haziness, reflected by difficulties in demarcating the scale and scope of clusters, leads to a stretching of the cluster concept when put into practice. We show how actors, through cluster projects, are utilizing strategies of “hubbing” and/or “blending” to develop their own understandings of both what clusters are and what they might or should be. Through studies of three Norwegian cluster projects, we argue that national cluster policies, through translation of an academically vague concept, facilitate a stretching of the original definition of clusters, giving regional stakeholders leeway to integrate other theoretical rationales instead. We argue that this is not taken into account in current policies.

This dissertation is empirically motivated by understanding the observed and ongoing green transformation of the maritime industry in Western Norway, a development that has had implications for both environmental protection, regional economic growth and job creation. Theoretically, the dissertation argues that the observed regional transformation processes should be analysed through an integration of three theoretical frameworks; 'Evolutionary Economic Geography' (EEG), 'Transition Studies' (TS) and 'Institutional Entrepreneurship Work' (IEW). As such, the dissertation argues that transformation is a complex phenomenon that requires co-evolution between several actors, technologies, policies and institutions, but also that these processes need to be embedded in evolving territorial contexts. Finally, these processes must be driven by purposeful actors aiming to change institutions to be more favourable for a green transformation. The dissertation approaches an integration between EEG, TS and IEW through engaging with three debates or 'areas of engagement' within these literatures. These include debates around how actors and agency affect institutional change processes, the role of territorial and multi-scalar dynamics, and the role of simultaneous and dynamically interacting dimensions of materiality, organization and discourse. Through these debates, the dissertation specifically argues for a new analytical framework which emphasises multi-actor institutional change (drawing on IEW), territoriality and multi-scalarity (drawing on EEG), and multi-dimensionality (drawing on TS), as well as the interplay between these elements. The theoretical discussion is illustrated, empirically, by an extensive case study of the green transformation of the Western Norwegian maritime industry. The dissertation is based on four qualitatively oriented papers, each of which contributes to the overall problem framings that it has sought to tackle. These papers focus on the following issues; Paper #1) how engineers perform multi-scalar institution changing practices in addition to technologist practices during processes of transformation; Paper #2) how the material, organizational and discursive dimension around a specific multi-scalar demonstration project (the actor-networks around and the materiality of a 'performing project enacting agency') have led to change in public ferry procurement on regional and national level; Paper #3) how achieving 'directionality' in cluster policy must recognise that regional clusters are embedded in different 'trinity' (materialityorganisation-discourse), sector and territorial/multi-scalar dynamics; and Paper #4) how green x List of papers This dissertation is based on the following papers:

Linking the bottom-up and top-down evolution of regional innovation systems to policy: Organizations, support structures and learning processes The literature is ambiguous about whether regional innovation systems (RIS) evolve bottom-up or top-down. This is reflected in RIS policies, which tend to focus on either development of the actor level, i.e. organizations in a RIS, or the system level, i.e. the support structure for innovation. Here, we analyzed a Norwegian RIS policy programme, the Programme for Regional R&D and Innovation (VRI), which aimed to combine both approaches. We found that VRI mainly developed the support structure for innovation and that learning outcomes from VRI involvement in organizations differed between the involved actor groups. This is particularly so for RIS development in regions inexperienced with support structure development prior to VRI involvement. Conversely, in regions with well-functioning support structures prior to VRI, focus was beneficially on stimulating learning at the actor level. We argue that future research should investigate mechanisms and interlinkages between the two levels and their regional particularities.

No abstract

No abstract