Patterns of Knowledge Creation in European Regions: An Analysis by the Phases of the EU-Enlargements

Author(s):  
Thomas Baumert
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 477
Author(s):  
Martina Neuländtner

Modelling the complex nature of regional knowledge creation is high on the research agenda. It deals with the identification of drivers for regional knowledge creation of different kinds, among them inter-regional networks and agglomeration factors, as well as their interplay; i.e., in which way they influence regional knowledge creation and accordingly, innovation capabilities—in the short- and long-term. Complementing a long line of tradition—establishing a link between regional knowledge input indicators and knowledge output in a regression framework—we propose an empirically founded agent-based simulation model that intends to approximate the complex nature of the multi-regional knowledge creation process for European regions. Specifically, we account for region-internal characteristics, and a specific embedding in the system of region-internal and region-external R&D collaboration linkages. With first exemplary applications, we demonstrate the potential of the model in terms of its robustness and empirical closeness. The model enables the replication of phenomena and current scientific issues of interest in the field of geography of innovation and hence, shows its potential to advance the scientific debate in this field in the future.


Author(s):  
Virginija Kargytė ◽  
Rando Värnik ◽  
Vilija Aleknevičienė

The European Commission expects that the development of bioeconomy across the EU will boost its rural and coastal economies. Although these areas have comparatively more spare biomass, at the same time they are associated with lower levels of entrepreneurship and R&D; activities. One can argue that more urbanized and industrialized regions with higher innovation potential will develop high value added bio-based industries, while rural and coastal economies will remain or become to a greater extent biomass providers. Therefore, the article aims to explore links between regional biomass availability, bioeconomy business cluster and innovation potential, as well as how the development of bioeconomy can evolve in different groups of regions. For this purpose, bioeconomy development factors including aspects of innovation economics are analysed in year of 2016 using data of 237 NUTS 3 level regions of Norden, Western and Central Europe. Research results reveal that analysed regions can not be simply separated into potential bioeconomy development ‘losers’ and ‘winners’, however, several groups of analysed regions have distinctly higher potential in certain bioeconomy fields.


2013 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 601-614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matjaz Nahtigal

The ongoing European crisis has revealed many deficiencies in the existing European institutional architecture. One of the crucial deficiencies is the unsustainable European regional disparity between the most developed European regions and those regions that are falling behind—a gap that is growing. This pattern of development creates an unsustainable pattern for the future development of the EU. The gap between the advanced segments of society with access to up-to-date knowledge, skills, technology, capital, and other resources and the excluded segments of society is also growing within the advanced European regions. Such observations indicate the need for far stronger anti-dualist economic, social, and legal policy at all levels of European polity. The EU’s response to the crisis has been inadequate as it has ignored the diversity of needs as well as opportunities for local and regional populations across the EU. Instead of focusing the economic, social, and legal reconstruction on a “one size fits all” model imposed from the top, the EU should spur local and regional innovations, initiatives, and development dynamics from below. Thus, in the EU, we need more policy space as well as more opportunities for economic, legal, social, and political innovations at the local, regional, and national levels. We need to create an EU that supports—not suppresses—diversity, sustainability, plurality, and the co-existence of institutional models. The idea of subsidiarity, diversity, and initiatives from below should be revived in order to create a more sustainable future for the EU.


2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 226-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valeria Andreoni ◽  
Stefano Galmarini

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to use multidimensional approach to provide a well-being description across European regions. Design/methodology/approach – By considering the set of socioeconomic indicators provided by Eurostat for the EU 266 NUTS-2 regions, three main analyses have been performed for the year 2009: first, the “ideal point” technique has been used to identify: the best EU performances; the number and type of indicators that needs to be improved in every European regions. Second, a map of well-being has been elaborated to provide a picture summarizing the regional values in comparison to the European average. Third, Gini coefficient has been calculated to identify the indicators performing the largest inequalities across EU. The method presented in this paper is suitable to be complemented with subjective ranking of values and preference, making the proposed methodology useful to investigate well-being in a national, regional or individual scale. Findings – By providing a multidimensional description of well-being across the 266 EU regions, the present paper identifies and maps the existing differences on socioeconomic performance. Originality/value – The results provided can be useful to design policies oriented to reduce inequalities and to promote socioeconomic and environmental convergences across European regions. As far as the authors know, this is the first paper that provides a map of regional socioeconomic well-being across Europe.


2016 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 83-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniela Di Cagno ◽  
Andrea Fabrizi ◽  
Valentina Meliciani ◽  
Iris Wanzenböck

Author(s):  
Yuliia Oleksiivna Chaliuk ◽  
Nadiia Mykhailivna Dovhanyk

Urgency of the research. Taken into consideration the existing advantages of Ukraine as a powerful European State, promising directions of its development is being involved in cross-border cooperation. Target setting. Modern analysis of regional development of Ukraine testifies to the presence of negative trends, in particular, to deepen inter-regional differences, economic disparities and the exacerbation of social problems. Concerning this. crossborder cooperation is becoming an important factor of sustained development of Ukraine, a channel of involvement in European integration. Actual scientific researches and issues analysis. Devoted to problems of euroregìonal policy of Ukraine are the researches of such scholars as V. O. Martynyuk, N. A. Mikula, C. C. Troyan, L. I. Fedulova, T. M. Uhnovska, A. Hubert. Uninvestigated parts of general matters defining. Further analysis is needed for the system of institutional and financial mechanisms of innovative development of euroregions. For Ukraine, urgent is a need of scientific justification of cross-border partnership benefits and problems, as well as a need of developing regulatory procedures providing the clustering process. The research objective. The analysis of the social partnership of Ukraine with the EU in the framework of cross-border clusters and euroregions. The statement of basic materials. The article deals with priorities of cooperation between Ukraine and the EU within the European regions and cross-border clusters. Based on the data SWOT-analysis identified the main objectives of European regions, effective mechanisms for inter-regional cooperation. Conclusions. It is important to implement in national statistical agencies the collection and processing of cross-border statistics in accordance with the recommendations of Eurostat; allocate budget funds for co-financing projects supported by the European Commission; create together with the Governments of neighboring States special funds, which will be accumulating finances to support social initiatives.


Author(s):  
Nadezhda V. Borisova ◽  

Introduction: the discussions on regionalization in the EU countries as a result of regional policy and inter-regional collaboration bring forward the issue of the regions’ political agency and its assessment criteria. Objectives: to determine the possibility of comprehensive assessment of the regions’ political agency in the scope of their commitment to multilevel government. Methods: concept analysis, descriptive analysis. Results: concept analysis of political agency allows to determine structural and functional links between elements that make political agency come into being and gain momentum. “Sub-national regionalism and multi-level policy” database provided the empirical basis for re-conceptualization and preliminary interpretation. Descriptive analysis allows revealing potential explanations for expressiveness of the political agency in the cases of EU regions in the scope of their commitment to multilevel government. Conclusions: firstly, enjoying equal political and institutional opportunities and having equal access to multilevel governance, European regions use them differently. Secondly, even within one country the identical autonomous (self-rule) status of regions doesn’t result in identical schemes of party system regionalization. Thirdly, there are crucial differentiations between regions of “the old” and “the new” EU members; these can be seen in the scope of inclusion into the EU programs and success of regional parties in European elections. Fourthly, by contrast, mother tongue rather than religion becomes the basis for regional identity and regionalism linked with it.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 59-71
Author(s):  
P. V. Oskolkov

Having been in the 2000s far from the spotlight of the news, European separatism is gradually returning to the information fi eld, which is partly due to the alerting reports from Scotland and Catalonia. The paper attempts to answer the following questions: what is the nature of the ethnoregional separatism in the EU, how does disintegrational agenda cohabit with the European integration dynamics, and what are the prospects for European separatism. The review of the theoretical framework within which ethnic and regionalist separatism exists is followed by the analysis of the empirics gained from diff erent European regions claiming independence or autonomy, such as Scotland, Catalonia, Flanders, Brittany, and many others, in 2000–2021. The author attempts to demythologize the widespread misconception about separatism as a potentially deadly threat to the EU nation-states or the European unity. The research is situated within the constructivist view towards ethnicity and the symbolic practices employed by the separatists; this paradigm is complemented by the institutional approach to the EU governing bodies and practices. The author comes to the following conclusions: currently, disintegrative projects within the EU nation-states cannot be successful, because of the position of the EU and the member states, and due to the uncertainties in the ethnic regions themselves (however, Scotland makes for an important exception, because of Brexit). Most separatist cases in the EU are either of instrumental or of a pure autonomist nature and do not enjoy any support from the integrational grouping that is not ready for the troubles the “internal extension” might cause. Moreover, if in the late 20th century, a discernible trend for decentralization and devolution was present, now the pendulum took the reversed direction, or at least remains unmoving; the author observes the trend for recentralization or at least for the freezing of the current fragile balance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document