Regional Innovation Capacities in New Member States: a Typology

Abstract

The paper examines the characteristics and performance of regional innovation systems in 12 new member states of the European Union. More specifically, it develops a typology that differentiates their various potentials as innovative regions. Based on a principal component analysis, five different groups of regions are identified. The characteristic profile of each group is detailed and exploration of possible paths of innovation-based regional development is presented for each type of region. The paper concludes with an examination of policy implications emerging from the analysis.

Patterns of Innovation in EU-25 Regions: A Typology and Policy Recommendations

“…The service specialisation in these regions is the result of either a diversification process in the economic structure following a decline of industryö as in the cases of the UK regions and the Provence-Alpes-Coª te d'Azur ö or a high concentration of administrative and service activities due to being the national capital ö for example, Madrid, Rome, Bratislava, and Dublin. In general, the capital regions of this group provide services to other local regions and operate as intermediaries between the national and the global economies (Muller et al, 2008). Lisbon, Athens, and Budapest, located on the borderline of group 4, and next to move to group 6, fulfil a similar function, but with less intensity.…”

“…Moreover, we will use the concept of the regional innovation systems (RISs) as an analytical vehicle, due to its wide acceptance among scholars (Asheim and Coenen, 2005;Muller et al, 2008), policy makers, and international institutions dealing with economic development öfor example, the European Commission, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and the World Bank. Our research will use aggregate data analysed by quantitative methods, which will contribute to the creation of a more robust empirical research into RISs, which until now has been mainly based on case studies mostly limited to successful regions (Doloreux, 2004;Howells, 2005;Sharpe and Mart|¨nez-Ferna¨ndez, 2006).…”

Smart specialisation in regions with less-developed research and innovation systems: A changing role for universities?

“…Notwithstanding differences in innovation system and capabilities between these CEE countries and the selected regions within them (Radosevic, 2004;Muller et al, 2008), their shared heritage as former communist countries ensures some broadly common features in terms of the public research system and relationship to the rest of the economy.…”

“…This focus on what Autio (1998) calls the knowledge generation and diffusion subsystem of public research, educational, and technology intermediary institutions should, however, be balanced by an equal focus on the corresponding knowledge application and exploitation subsystem of private firms and their networks. The concept of national or regional innovation capacity is now widely recognised to have multiple components, including those that affect the demand for and absorption of knowledge, and the quality of governance (Muller et al., 2008; Navarro et al., 2009; Radosevic, 2004; Rodríguez-Pose and Di Cataldo, 2015). In less-developed regions, the specific structure of the economy is a key factor determining this capacity (Novotný et al., 2016).…”

Regional Open Innovation Roadmapping: A New Framework for Innovation-Based Regional Development

“…In a 2008 ranking of 439 regions in Germany, MOL held the 379th position, which is a slight increase of 21 ranks compared with a 2004 study [50]. Using the typology created by Muller et al [51] to describe regional innovation capacities in Europe's new member states, Märkisch-Oderland can be categorized as an E-region, a lagging agricultural region with a relatively underdeveloped economy and structural problems linked to the loss of systemic integration.…”