The Diversity of Innovation in the European Union: Mapping Latent Dimensions and Regional Profiles

Abstract

Regional innovation systems are a relevant approach when analysing territories from either a theoretical or an operational point of view. In the last few years, the development of several different comparisons of innovative profiles of sub-national level demonstrates the interest in this paradigm. The article proposes, through an analysis of 175 regions, a typology of regional innovative profiles to understand the diversity of innovation in the European Union. Multivariate statistics were used to find the dimensions underlying the innovation phenomena and to create homogenous groups of regions that display similar profiles. First, Factorial Analysis was used to reduce regional indicators to their latent dimensions (Technological Innovation, Human Capital, Economic Structure and Labour Market Availability). Second, a hierarchical analysis of clusters was undertaken, resulting in five groupings of regions (Disadvantaged Regions, Average Regions, Central Regions, Large Economic Centres and Innovating Regions). The results of the study are compared with other relevant analyses and some consensual ideas are achieved. Physical proximity still has a relevant impact on innovation processes. The planning and policy-making of innovation must take into account this profile diversity and should originate actions adapted to each specific context. With a political agenda such as Lisbon's, which intends to create a competitive territory, the focus on an indicator such as gross domestic product is extremely inadequate for fundamental decisions related to financing regional policy. More meaningful analysis like the one carried out in the article could be an example to evaluate future regional budgets in terms of European regional policy.

Acknowledgements

This paper had important contributions from João Guerreiro (Professor in the University of the Algarve), Tiago Santos Pereira (Researcher in CES – Centre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra) and Ana Rita Cruz (Researcher in the University of Algarve). I would also like to thank two anonymous referees for their helpful comments.

Notes

According to Innovating Regions in Europe Network (IRE Network, 2005) 33 regional innovation strategies (RIS, 1994–2001), 70 regional innovation and technology transfer strategies (1994–2001), 16 regional innovation strategies in countries recently associate (RIS-NAC, 2001–2004) and 33 projects of regional innovation strategies in new member-states and associated countries (2005), have been developed with the support of the EU. On the other hand, 145 regions have developed Regional Programs in the scope of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) Innovative Actions, many of them as a continuation of the implementation of their regional innovation strategy.

The hierarchical methods refer to the development of a hierarchy and the formation of groups in a sequential order that can be graphically represented. From a pre-determined set of cases we define a number of groups (clusters) which are disjunctive (no common elements) and each sub-group is hierarchically defined, i.e. included in other group until successively we reach the complete set of cases (that includes all sub-groups).

In the 2006 APDR Congress (Portuguese Association of Regional Development) were presented two papers with similar approaches: Inovação e Desenvolvimento Regional: uma análise empírica ao comportamento das regiões portuguesas no contexto europeu of João Lourenço Marques, Gonçalo de Sousa Santinha and Eduardo Anselmo Castro; Clusters de Regiões na União Europeia of Cristina del Campo, Carlos M. F. Monteiro and João O. Soares.

The High Tech 1 cluster has three regions, two of the UK and another from Finland, two belonging to Great Economic Centres and the other to Innovating Regions. The High Tech 2 cluster includes two regions from Germany and two from Holland, the three being Innovating Regions. The Strong Innovation/high Income cluster includes eight Innovating Regions, six Great Economic Centres and two Average Regions. The Medium-low innovation and high-income cluster groups 21 Average Regions, 6 Great Economic Centres and 1 Central Region. The Low innovation and average income cluster aggregates 33 Central Regions, 4 Disadvantaged Regions and 1 Innovating Region. The cluster Low innovation and Income includes 43 Disadvantaged Regions, 7 Central Regions and 6 Average Regions.