What we should know about regional systems of innovation

Doloreux, David

doi:10.1016/s0160-791x(02)00007-6

Cited by 435 publications

(325 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

225

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These RIS based studies have related the innovation performance of firms to the character of their networks and to institutional factors (Thomi and Werner 2001, Doloreux 2002, Fornahl and Brenner 2003, Cooke et al 2004. Departing from the main deficiencies of RIS, Tödtling and Trippl (2005) have drawn a distinction between "organizationally thin RIS", "RIS characterized by lock in" and "fragmented RIS".…”

Section: Peripheral Regions Are Regarded As Less Innovative In Comparmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovation and Knowledge Links in Metropolitan Regions: The Case of Vienna

Tödtling

Trippl

2012

Metropolitan Regions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Peripheral Regions Are Regarded As Less Innovative In Comparmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovation and Knowledge Links in Metropolitan Regions: The Case of Vienna

Tödtling

Trippl

2012

Metropolitan Regions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…National innovation systems are defined as the flows and mechanisms of technology and information between people, enterprises, and institutions that are the key to the innovation process at the national level (OECD 1997). Various researchers quickly applied the NIS concept in studying RIS (Braczyk et al 1996;Cooke et al 1997;Morgan and Nauwelaers 1999;Koschatzky et al 2000;Cooke 2001;Doloreux 2002). The RIS more specifically examines innovating firms in the context of external institutions, government policies, competitors, suppliers, customers, value systems, and social and cultural practices that affect their innovation activities within a geographical area larger than a city, but smaller than a nation (Kumaresan and Miyazaki 1999;OECD 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From innovation to commercialization through networks and agglomerations: analysis of sources of innovation, innovation capabilities and performance of Dutch SMEs

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study claims that policy makers may not be sufficiently aware of the importance of maintaining an appropriate balance between exploration and exploitation networks for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). On the basis of the open innovation model, policy makers are also increasingly stimulating SMEs to develop their exploration skills. In the Netherlands, a government subsidy called the 'innovation voucher programme' was introduced to stimulate SMEs to develop innovation in cooperation with knowledge institutes. Yet, although many studies show that SMEs tend to have a higher R&D productivity than larger firms, and innovative SMEs are more likely to make external networks with other SMEs or institutions such as universities, there is still little examination of the successfulness of SME's innovation activities. The growing policy attention for the role of SMEs in innovation prompts the questions how innovation in SMEs can be facilitated, and which factors contribute to the success (or failure) of their innovation efforts. This study explores the innovation strategy of innovative Dutch SMEs by means of their sources of innovation, innovation capabilities, innovation performance, and commercialization sources. By means of structural equation modelling of a sample of 243 Dutch SMEs, this study shows that exploring (technology) opportunity together with institutions such as universities and private research establishments is important for successful innovation in SMEs. But, in addition, our model shows that contacts with competitors are also important for successful innovation performance. Our finding that openness of open innovation also applies to the commercialization phase is too often neglected by researchers and policy makers. JEL Classification

show abstract

“…Cooke et al ( , p. 1581 While the former definition specifically includes the concepts of clusters and innovation, the latter definition views RIS more loosely. In general, RIS consist of four basic elements: firms, institutions, knowledge infrastructure, and innovation-driven policies (Doloreux, 2002). These elements can be grouped into two subsystems: the knowledge application and exploitation subsystem (firms) and the knowledge 100 generation and diffusion subsystem (institutions, knowledge and infrastructure) (Autio, 1998).…”

Section: Regions and Regional Innovation Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%