scholarly journals Regional innovation systems: Systematic literature review and recommendations for future research

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1463606 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo M. Pino ◽  
Ana María Ortega
2008 ◽  
pp. 1599-1602
Author(s):  
Robin Teigland ◽  
Andrew Schenkel

In the past two decades, the related concepts of regional innovation systems and clusters have become widely circulated in both academic and policy circles. Both concepts depart from the idea that innovations predominantly occur as a result of interactions between various actors, rather than as a result of a solitary genius (Håkansson, 1987; von Hippel; 1988; Lundvall, 1992), and that innovation and industrial transformation result from interactions across sets of actors within a spatially defined territory (e.g., countries, regions). Researchers within this field posit that most innovations are based on some form of problem solving in which someone generally perceives a problem and turns to someone else for help and advice (Teigland, Lindqvist, Malmberg & Waxell, 2004), and that spatial proximity seems to enhance the processes of interactive learning and innovation (Malmberg & Maskell, 2002). These assumptions draw striking parallels to the traditional concept of communities of practice (Brown & Duguid, 1991; Orr, 1990; Wenger, 1998), which are emergent groups of people who know each other relatively intimately and who primarily work together directly in face-to-face situations since learning and knowledge are situated within a physical setting (Teigland, 2003). Thus, the purpose of this short article is to provide a brief discussion of clusters and regional innovation systems, and propose broad areas of future research in which the community of practice concept can contribute to our understanding of clusters and regional innovation systems.


Author(s):  
Robin Teigland ◽  
Andrew Schenkel

In the past two decades, the related concepts of regional innovation systems and clusters have become widely circulated in both academic and policy circles. Both concepts depart from the idea that innovations predominantly occur as a result of interactions between various actors, rather than as a result of a solitary genius (Håkansson, 1987; von Hippel; 1988; Lundvall, 1992), and that innovation and industrial transformation result from interactions across sets of actors within a spatially defined territory (e.g., countries, regions). Researchers within this field posit that most innovations are based on some form of problem solving in which someone generally perceives a problem and turns to someone else for help and advice (Teigland, Lindqvist, Malmberg & Waxell, 2004), and that spatial proximity seems to enhance the processes of interactive learning and innovation (Malmberg & Maskell, 2002). These assumptions draw striking parallels to the traditional concept of communities of practice (Brown & Duguid, 1991; Orr, 1990; Wenger, 1998), which are emergent groups of people who know each other relatively intimately and who primarily work together directly in face-to-face situations since learning and knowledge are situated within a physical setting (Teigland, 2003). Thus, the purpose of this short article is to provide a brief discussion of clusters and regional innovation systems, and propose broad areas of future research in which the community of practice concept can contribute to our understanding of clusters and regional innovation systems.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 2764 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liliya Satalkina ◽  
Gerald Steiner

Digital entrepreneurship is an essential driver within the innovation system. It changes the structure, aims, and networking mechanisms of the overall business system and, ultimately, affects the various levels and dimensions of the innovation system. Bringing inevitable changes to the innovation system, digital technologies may not only provide new business opportunities but also be disruptive and cause new vulnerabilities. In order to gain a rigorous understanding of the hybrid concept of digital entrepreneurship and its role within the transformation of the innovation system, we conducted a systematic literature review. The results of 52 core papers allow for the identification of key categories of digital entrepreneurship and also its differentiation from other types of business activities. The analysis leads to the distinction of the determinants of digital entrepreneurship within three core dimensions of the innovation system, which encompass the entrepreneur (including, e.g., behavioral, competence. and mentality patterns, as well as personal outcomes and consequences of entrepreneurial activity), the entrepreneurial process (including activities that concern digitalization in organizational management processes, transformations within strategic and operational activities, and digital start-up establishment), and its relevant ecosystem (which encompasses, among others, the influence that external infrastructure and institutions have on digital entrepreneurship development). The systematization of the existing literature is highly relevant for future research that aims to understand the interrelations between the transformation of entrepreneurial structures within innovation systems as well as the socioeconomic system in general. Such understanding requires further extended research in fields related to method, content, and theory.


Author(s):  
Muhammad Yousaf ◽  
Petr Bris

A systematic literature review (SLR) from 1991 to 2019 is carried out about EFQM (European Foundation for Quality Management) excellence model in this paper. The aim of the paper is to present state of the art in quantitative research on the EFQM excellence model that will guide future research lines in this field. The articles were searched with the help of six strings and these six strings were executed in three popular databases i.e. Scopus, Web of Science, and Science Direct. Around 584 peer-reviewed articles examined, which are directly linked with the subject of quantitative research on the EFQM excellence model. About 108 papers were chosen finally, then the purpose, data collection, conclusion, contributions, and type of quantitative of the selected papers are discussed and analyzed briefly in this study. Thus, this study identifies the focus areas of the researchers and knowledge gaps in empirical quantitative literature on the EFQM excellence model. This article also presents the lines of future research.


2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 231-254
Author(s):  
Mie Jung Kim ◽  
Chae,Dae-Seok

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document