Territorial innovation systems and strategies of collective efficiency

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to show the relevance of territorial innovation systems approach for non-central regions’ development strategies. The research made allowed to identify actions of collective efficiency to strengthen endogenous capacity for regional innovation, and also to detect some institutional weaknesses that inhibit the innovation dynamics in a particular rural region (Tagus Valley). Design/methodology/approach – The research followed an interpretive case study, of explanatory type. Data collecting method comprised semi-structured face-to-face interviews with business agents and local government members, direct observation of innovation activities and documentary analysis. Statistical methods to analyse the firms’ innovation behaviour, as well as owners and managers’ perceptions, were also used in order to improve the trustworthiness of the research. Findings – The results show that innovation is positively associated to a diverse set of institutional factors that shape a territorially embedded innovation system, in which the firms’ innovation activity is chiefly based on localized learning processes. Moreover, a path of smart and creative diversification area is detected, but there are substantial differences between firms belonging to agro-food supply chain. While food industries and wineries show very interesting levels of investment in innovation activities and external knowledge synergies, farmers/producers depend greatly from producers’ organizations. Research limitations/implications – Given the absence of generalizability and some speculative argumentation, further research needs to be done, especially about the critical role of higher education institutions to promote innovation. Practical implications – The paper provides empirical insights about the role of actors belonging to the governance layer inherent to the territorial innovation system in discussion. Originality/value – The paper fulfils an identified need to systematize institutional factors able to affect non-central regions innovation.

Exploring the role of digitalization as a driver for the adoption of circular economy principles in agrifood SMEs – an interpretive case study

“…Researchers can study specific fields in a natural environment, learn about the state of the art and generate theories from practice, answering the how and why questions to understand the nature and complexity of the processes taking place (Benbasat et al, 1987;Myers, 2009). The utilization of an interpretive approach has proven valuable in providing empirical evidence within the realm of the agrifood sector (De Cock et al, 2015;Mackrell et al, 2009;Oliveira and Nat ario, 2016).…”

The Knowledge Economy and Quality of Work in the Future: An Exploratory Study

“…Education, lifelong learning, and a culture of innovation are essential for developing human capital in such an economy (Öberg & Alexander, 2021;Oliveira & Turčinková, 2019;Florida, 2002;Audretsch & Feldman, 1996). • Collaboration and Networking: Partnerships between individuals, organisations, and institutions are vital to leverage collective knowledge, share expertise, and promote cross-sectoral collaborations (Cai, Ferrer & Lastra, 2019;World Bank, 1999;Edquist, 1997;Oliveira & Natário, 2016;Machlup, 1962).…”

Portuguese regional innovation systems efficiency in the European Union context

“…Looking at Portuguese regional innovation systems, studies indicate the existence of some shortcomings related to the systems' innovation capacity. These weaknesses are mostly related to the reduced interaction between the regional system agents (Santos, 2000;Santos and Simões, 2014;Oliveira and Natário, 2016). Hierarchical organizational structures of institutions, lack of coordination between innovation policies, and low quality of infrastructures supporting innovation (Santos and Simões, 2014) are also at fault for the observed lack of interactions.…”

“…Hierarchical organizational structures of institutions, lack of coordination between innovation policies, and low quality of infrastructures supporting innovation (Santos and Simões, 2014) are also at fault for the observed lack of interactions. These authors (Natário et al, 2012;Oliveira and Natário, 2016;Santos, 2000;Santos and Simões, 2014) argue that the policies implemented so far have led to lack of competitiveness, increased disparities between regions, and did not allow for innovation capacity and knowledge production to improve. Therefore, based on the Portuguese case, the assessment of the role of agents' interactions in determining regions' innovation efficiency seems to be an important step to understand the performance of regional innovation system in the EU context.…”