Effectiveness of Regional Innovation Actions: Cases from Small, Low-Innovative Regions

Abstract

This paper attempts to identify the suitability of centrally designed innovation-related regional actions, examining the case of regions that started innovative activities from a low development level. Using the case of two Greek regions, the paper analyses the legacy left to the regional systems by a series of regional innovation programmes implemented during the 1990s and 2000s, whose main priorities were designed centrally without any regional consultation. The findings suggest that these programmes often provide the means for generating the first steps towards the creation of a Regional Innovation System; however often they create a dependency on publicly funded programmes.

A system dynamics approach for the development of a Regional Innovation System

“…The innovation process is typically characterized by many ideas (programs ή projects) in the initial phases, and combined with various development mechanisms, evaluates, and selects the most promising ideas following the next steps. Typically, the innovation process approaches describe a sequence of approximately four phases (e.g., Idea Generation, Idea Formulation, Problem Solving and Exploitation) (Samara et al, 2012(Samara et al, , 2020.…”

“…Changes in product production systems significantly affect the manufacturing system, as well as technical and administrative processes. Furthermore, before introducing a new product into production, process changes are required (Carayannis et al, 2015;Ettlie, 1995;Kim et al, 1992;Samara et al, 2020). Regional development grants, therefore, seem to help a significant proportion of establishments to introduce new processes under process innovation (Oakey et al, 1982).…”

Defining the prerequisites for effective innovative activity of Ukrainian organizations in the context of acquiring competence on the European market

“…Not all the findings can be implemented in the activities of Ukrainian organizations due to the peculiarities of the conditions of activity, the use of different approaches to management, the difference in the mentality of employees, their values, norms, motives of behavior. A transparent wage system was recognized as a more effective way to intensify research innovations by scientists in [11]. They developed recommendations for the implementation of centralized measures to stimulate innovation activity of organizations in regions with a low level of development.…”

“…Summarizing the results of the study of existing achievements, it can be noted that the vast majority of them focus on the analysis of innovation policy of countries with the identification of existing shortcomings, justification of the role of innovation activity of organizations in ensuring the status of an investment-attractive country [6,8]. Others, on the contrary, insist on the primary importance of the state in intensifying this process, focusing on the introduction of various methods of state support for innovation activities of organizations [5,7,9,11]. Some, exploring the advantages of joining Ukrainian organizations to the European market, form requirements for innovative behavior of employees, developing state and regional financial incentive systems [9,10].…”

Science and Technology Parks: Opening the Pandora’s Box of Regional Development

“…In this context, the concept of Regional Innovation System (RIS) is of particular importance as a perspective on the articulation, in different nodes; the interaction, at different levels (national, super-regional, and international); and the contribution of various elements, actors and networks to the regional success of innovation (Asheim & Coenen, 2005 ; Samara et al, 2020 ). Innovation is revealed in complex and interdependent processes on organizational capacities, of “unnegotiated interdependencies” (Christopherson & Clark, 2007 ; Muller & Zenker, 2001 ); in the capabilities and forces installed (Lau & Lo, 2015 ; Zhao et al, 2015 ); integration into open systems, i.e.…”