Building Regional Innovation Systems: Is Endogenous Industrial Development Possible in the Global Economy?

By Arne Isaksen. 2001

270 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0b232d44dc4df56831c42fee60a4271f26dcab6b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Knowledge networks in the Dutch aviation industry: The proximity paradox (2012, background): “In this sense “geographical proximity only creates a potential for interaction, without necessarily leading to dense local relations” (Isaksen, 2001, p. 110).”
Collaboration Intensity and Regional Innovation Efficiency in Germany—A Conditional Efficiency Approach (2012, background): “Excessive regional collaboration has clearly negative effects for firms' innovation performance because the “ ties that bind ” have become “ ties that blind ” (Grabher, 1993 : 24) and the regional networks are “ too closed and […] too rigid ” (Isaksen, 2001 : 110).”
Is regional innovation system development possible in peripheral regions? Some evidence from the case of La Pocatière, Canada (2008, background): “It is often argued that it is difficult to develop innovation systems in peripheral and rural regions because of the absence of sectors that have technological complementarities, and the lack of relevant regional actors in a critical mass and sufficient density (Malecki and Oinas 1999 , Isaksen 20”
SME Innovative Capacity, Competitive Advantage and Performance in a 'Traditional' Industrial Region of Portugal (2009, unknown): “In order to understand the features of regional competitiveness, a variety of conceptual models have been developed in recent years (e.g. Isaksen, 2001; Cooke, 2007).”
The role of collaborative networks in supporting the innovation performances of lagging-behind European regions (2018, background): “Following these considerations, knowledge spillovers are often related to the structuring of regional innovation systems (Fritsch, 2000; Isaksen, 2001; Tödtling and Grillitsch, 2014; Tödtling and Trippl, 2005) and on the extent of the regional knowledge base (Asheim et al., 2011).”
Path Renewal in Old Industrial Regions: Possibilities and Limitations for Regional Innovation Policy (2015, background): “…translated to the regional level through the seminal work of TÖDTLING and TRIPPL (2005) by looking carefully at specific regional endowments and its relationship to innovation barriers of weak or vulnerable regions (see also TRIPPL and OTTO, 2009; ASHEIM et al., 2011; COENEN, 2007; ISAKSEN, 2001).”
One size fits all?: Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach (2005, background): “This does not rule out that there are innovative companies in such regions, but often the critical mass for a dynamic cluster development is not reached (e.g. Isaksen 2001 for the Arendal region in Norway).”
Do Cooperative Research and Development (R&D) Subsidies Stimulate Regional Innovation Efficiency? Evidence from Germany (2015, background): “A frequent feature of such programmes is the stimulation of cooperation and interaction among regional organizations, which is argued to foster local collective learning processes (ISAKSEN, 2001).”
Entrepreneurial motivation and self-employment: evidence from expectancy theory (2017, background): “According to Isaksen (2001), these requirements highlight the need for a person to possess a certain business acumen, with not only the professional and business qualifications but also a favourable predisposition towards entrepreneurship (BarbaSánchez and Atienza-Sahuquillo 2012).”
Green industry development in different types of regions (2019, background): “…Trippl (2016, p. 49) this has resulted in the development of regional typologies based on ‘(1) key actors and governance (Asheim & Isaksen, 2002; Cooke, 1998); (2) the strengths in radical versus incremental innovations (Cooke, 2004); and (3) RIS failures (Isaksen, 2001; Tödtling & Trippl, 2005)’.”