Creating institutional preconditions for knowledge flows in cross-border regions

Abstract

Abstract:In recent years we have witnessed an intensive scholarly discussion about the limitations of traditional inward looking regional innovation strategies. New policy approaches put more emphasis on promoting the external connectedness of regions. However, the institutional preconditions for collaboration across borders have received little attention so far. The aim of this paper is to investigate both conceptually and empirically how policy network organizations can target the institutional underpinnings and challenges of cross-border integration processes and knowledge flows. The empirical part of the paper consists of an analysis of activities performed by four cross-border policy network organizations in the Öresund region (made up of Zealand in Denmark and Scania in Sweden) and how they relate to the creation of institutional preconditions and the removal of institutional barriers. Our findings suggest that cross-border policy network organizations have limited power to change or facilitate the adaptation of formal institutions directly. They mainly rely on mobilizing actors at other territorial levels for improving the formal institutional conditions for knowledge flows. Informal institutions, on the other hand, can be targeted by an array of different tools available to policy network organizations. We conclude that institutional preconditions in cross-border regions are influenced by collective activities of multiple actors on different territorial levels, and that regional actors mainly adapt to the existing institutional framework rather than change it. For innovation policy this implies that possibilities for institutional change and adaptation need to be considered in regional innovation policy strategies.

A territorial scale-based model for Euroregions and its implications for Cross-Border Cooperation in maritime contexts

“…In turn, this may help quell suspicions over autonomist or separatist tendencies (Perkmann, 2000(Perkmann, , 2003(Perkmann, , 2005. Moreover, it would transmit the image of Euroregions as soft spaces and examples of institutional entrepreneurship for policy formulation and implementation scenarios (Miörner et al, 2018;Telle, 2017;Perkmann and Spicer, 2007).…”

“…The tasks and purposes of a Euroregion. In their classification of the organisational activities of EU cross-border institutions, Miörner et al (2018) identified four different ranges of activities for policy-network organisations such as the Euroregions. These include i) the provision of information regarding the regulation of cross-border activities, the promotion of joint activities (i.e.…”

Evolution of Guangzhou Biomedical Industry Innovation Network Structure and Its Proximity Mechanism

“…This means that the distance of social relations affects the content of innovation activities. Close social relations will strengthen trust between the innovators, reduce uncertainty and opportunism in cooperation, and reduce transaction costs in cooperation [43]. For the same reason, "nternalization" of cooperation is a best choice for cooperation between entities in the same organizational relationship [44].…”

Institutionalization of cross-border regional innovation systems: the role of university institutional entrepreneurs

“…The RIS model conceptualizes improvements to sparse innovation systems (what is referred to below as 'densification') by focusing on linkage-building processes (Tödtling & Trippl, 2005), and we specifically highlight the property of cross-border RIS (Lundquist & Trippl, 2013;Trippl, 2010) as potentially sparse innovation systems as where the border continually undermines interaction between innovators in various ways (Perkmann, 2007). Borders may hinder knowledge flows, labour mobility and access to critical resources (Cerina, Chessa, Pammolli, & Riccaboni, 2014;Miörner & Trippl, 2016;Miörner, Zukauskaite, Trippl, & Moodysson 2017) by raising the opportunity costs of cross-border interaction, channelling knowledge resource-search processes to remain within national boundaries, and reducing complementarities (Leick, 2012;Lundquist & Trippl, 2013).…”