Towards a problem-oriented regional industrial policy: possibilities for public intervention in framing, valuation and market formation

REFERENCES

• Aiginger, K. (2007). Industrial policy: A dying breed or a re-emerging phoenix. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 7(3–4), 297–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10842-007-0025-7
   Google Scholar
• Aiginger, K., & Rodrik, D. (2020). Rebirth of industrial policy and an agenda for the twenty-first century. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 20(2), 189–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10842-019-00322-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ansell, C., Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2017). Improving policy implementation through collaborative policymaking. Policy & Politics, 45(3), 467–486. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557317X14972799760260
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ansell, C., & Torfing, J. (2015). How does collaborative governance scale? Policy & Politics, 43(3), 315–329. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557315X14353344872935
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antal, A. B., Hutter, M., & Stark, D. (2015). Moments of valuation: Exploring sites of dissonance. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bacchi, C. (2009). Analysing policy. Pearson Higher Education AU.
   Google Scholar
• Bailey, D., Glasmeier, A., Tomlinson, P. R., & Tyler, P. (2019). Industrial policy: New technologies and transformative innovation policies? Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 12(2), 169–177. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsz006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey, D., Pitelis, C., & Tomlinson, P. R. (2018). A place-based developmental regional industrial strategy for sustainable capture of co-created value. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 42(6), 1521–1542. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bey019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barman, E. (2016). Caring capitalism. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Battilana, J., Leca, B., & Boxenbaum, E. (2009). How actors change institutions: Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Annals, 3(1), 65–107. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520903053598
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beckert, J. (2009). The social order of markets. Theory and Society, 38(3), 245–269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-008-9082-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 611–639. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergek, A. (2019). Technological innovation systems: A review of recent findings and suggestions for future research. In F. Boons, & A. McMeekin (Eds.), Handbook of sustainable innovation (pp. 200–218). Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788112574
   Google Scholar
• Berkhout, F. (2006). Normative expectations in systems innovation. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18(3–4), 299–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537320600777010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bessy, C., & Chauvin, P.-M. (2013). The power of market intermediaries: From information to valuation processes. Valuation Studies, 1(1), 83–117. https://doi.org/10.3384/vs.2001-5992.131183
   Google Scholar
• Biggi, G., & Giuliani, E. (2021). The noxious consequences of innovation: What do we know? Industry and Innovation, 28(1), 19–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2020.1726729
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binz, C., & Truffer, B. (2017). Global innovation systems – A conceptual framework for innovation dynamics in transnational contexts. Research Policy, 46(7), 1284–1298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.05.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boltanski, L., & Thévenot, L. (2006). On justification: Economies of worth. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boon, W. P. C., Edler, J., & Robinson, D. K. R. (2020). Market formation in the context of transitions: A comment on the transitions agenda. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 34, 346–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.11.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boon, W. P. C., Moors, E. H. M., Kuhlmann, S., & Smits, R. E. H. M. (2011). Demand articulation in emerging technologies: Intermediary user organisations as co-producers? Research Policy, 40(2), 242–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.09.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borrás, S., & Edler, J. (2020). The roles of the state in the governance of socio-technical systems’ transformation. Research Policy, 49(5), 103971. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.103971
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bours, S. A. M. J. V., Wanzenböck, I., & Frenken, K. (2021). Small wins for grand challenges. A bottom-up governance approach to regional innovation policy. European Planning Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2021.1980502
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, R. (2021). Mission-oriented or mission adrift? A critical examination of mission-oriented innovation policies. European Planning Studies, 29(4), 739–761. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1779189
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, R., & Mawson, S. (2019). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and public policy in action: A critique of the latest industrial policy blockbuster. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 12(3), 347–368. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsz011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callon, M. (2007). An essay on the growing contribution of economic markets to the proliferation of the social. Theory, Culture & Society, 24(7-8), 139–163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callon, M., & Muniesa, F. (2005). Peripheral vision: Economic markets as calculative collective devices. Organization Studies, 26(8), 1229–1250. doi:10.1177/0170840605056393
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang, P. H.-J., Andreoni, D. A., & Kuan, M. L. (2013). International industrial policy experiences and the lessons for the UK (Future of Manufacturing Project: Evidence Paper No. 4). Foresight, Government Office for Science.
   Google Scholar
• Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Bruneel, J., & Mahajan, A. (2014). Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems. Research Policy, 43(7), 1164–1176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.04.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coenen, L., Hansen, T., & Rekers, J. V. (2015). Innovation policy for grand challenges. An economic geography perspective. Geography Compass, 9(9), 483–496. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coenen, L., & Morgan, K. (2020). Evolving geographies of innovation: Existing paradigms, critiques and possible alternatives. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift – Norwegian Journal of Geography, 74(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/00291951.2019.1692065
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conway, R., Masters, J., & Thorold, J. (2017). From design thinking to systems change. How to invest in innovation for social impact. RSA Action and Research Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Davoudi, S. (2009). Scalar tensions in the governance of waste: The resilience of state spatial Keynesianism. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 52(2), 137–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640560802666495
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dewald, U., & Truffer, B. (2012). The local sources of market formation: Explaining regional growth differentials in German photovoltaic markets. European Planning Studies, 20(3), 397–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.651803
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doganova, L., & Karnøe, P. (2015). Building markets for clean technologies: Controversies, environmental concerns and economic worth. Industrial Marketing Management, 44, 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2014.10.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dutton, J. E., & Jackson, S. E. (1987). Categorizing strategic issues: Links to organizational action. Academy of Management Review, 12(1), 76–90. https://doi.org/10.2307/257995
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eames, M. et al. (2006). Negotiating contested visions and place-specific expectations of the hydrogen economy. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18(3–4), 361–374. doi:10.1080/09537320600777127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fastenrath, S., & Coenen, L. (2021). Future-proof cities through governance experiments? Insights from the Resilient Melbourne Strategy (RMS). Regional Studies, 55(1), 138–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2020.1744551
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferraro, F., Etzion, D., & Gehman, J. (2015). Tackling grand challenges pragmatically: Robust action revisited. Organization Studies, 36(3), 363–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840614563742
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flanagan, K., & Uyarra, E. (2016). Four dangers in innovation policy studies – and how to avoid them. Industry and Innovation, 23(2), 177–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2016.1146126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fligstein, N., & Dauter, L. (2007). The sociology of markets. Annual Review of Sociology, 33(1), 105–128. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.33.040406.131736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foray, D. (2014). Smart specialisation: Opportunities and challenges for regional innovation policy. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Foray, D. (2018). Smart specialization strategies as a case of mission-oriented policy – A case study on the emergence of new policy practices. Industrial and Corporate Change, 27(5), 817–832. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dty030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fothergill, S., Gore, T., & Wells, P. (2019). Industrial strategy and the UK regions: Sectorally narrow and spatially blind. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 12(3), 445–466. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsz016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franco-Torres, M., Rogers, B. C., & Ugarelli, R. M. (2020). A framework to explain the role of boundary objects in sustainability transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 36, 34–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2020.04.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frenken, K. (2017). A complexity-theoretic perspective on innovation policy. Complexity, Governance & Networks, 3(1), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.20377/cgn-41
   Google Scholar
• Froud, J., Johal, S., Moran, M., Salento, A., & Williams, K. (2018). Foundational economy: The infrastructure of everyday life. Manchester University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Garud, R., Jain, S., & Kumaraswamy, A. (2002). Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: The case of Sun microsystems and java. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 196–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geiger, S., Harrison, D., Kjellberg, H., & Mallard, A. (2014). Being concerned about markets. In S. Geiger, D. Harrison, H. Kjellberg, & A. Mallard (Eds.), Concerned markets (pp. 1–18). Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781782549758.00008.
   Google Scholar
• George, E., Chattopadhyay, P., Sitkin, S. B., & Barden, J. (2006). Cognitive underpinnings of institutional persistence and change: A framing perspective. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 347–365. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.20208685
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Georghiou, L., Edler, J., Uyarra, E., & Yeow, J. (2014). Policy instruments for public procurement of innovation: Choice, design and assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 86, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.09.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grillitsch, M., & Hansen, T. (2019). Green industry development in different types of regions. European Planning Studies, 27(11), 2163–2183. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1648385
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grillitsch, M., & Sotarauta, M. (2020). Trinity of change agency, regional development paths and opportunity spaces. Progress in Human Geography, 44(4), 704–723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132519853870
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hajer, M. A. (1995). The politics of environmental discourse: Ecological modernization and the policy process. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hajer, M., & Laws, D. (2006). Ordering through discourse. In M. Moran, M. Rein, & R. E. Godin (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public policy (Vol. 6, pp. 251–268). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, T. (2021). The foundational economy and regional development. Regional Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2021.1939860
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hassink, R., & Gong, H. (2019). Six critical questions about smart specialization. European Planning Studies, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1650898.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Head, B. W. (2019). Forty years of wicked problems literature: Forging closer links to policy studies. Policy and Society, 38(2), 180–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2018.1488797
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heiberg, J., Binz, C., & Truffer, B. (2020). The geography of technology legitimation. How multi-scalar legitimation processes matter for path creation in emerging industries. Economic Geography, 96(5), 470–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/00130095.2020.1842189
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herstad, S. J., Bloch, C., Ebersberger, B., & van de Velde, E. (2010). National innovation policy and global open innovation: Exploring balances, tradeoffs and complementarities. Science and Public Policy, 37(2), 113–124. https://doi.org/10.3152/030234210X489590
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoornbeek, J. A., & Peters, B. G. (2017). Understanding policy problems: A refinement of past work. Policy and Society, 36(3), 365–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2017.1361631
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoppe, R. (2011). The governance of problems: Puzzling, powering, participation. Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Huguenin, A., & Jeannerat, H. (2017). Creating change through pilot and demonstration projects: Towards a valuation policy approach. Research Policy, 46(3), 624–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.01.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iammarino, S., Rodriguez-Pose, A., & Storper, M. (2019). Regional inequality in Europe: Evidence, theory and policy implications. Journal of Economic Geography, 19(2), 273–298. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lby021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isaksen, A. (2015). Industrial development in thin regions: Trapped in path extension? Journal of Economic Geography, 15(3), 585–600. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbu026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iuel-Stissing, J., Pallesen, T., Karnøe, P., & Jacobsen, P. H. (2020). Governing system transitions in the context of scattered agency: Flexibility, action, and ecologies of epistemic equipment. Energy Research & Social Science, 69, 101730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101730
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssen, M. J., & Frenken, K. (2019). Cross-specialisation policy: Rationales and options for linking unrelated industries. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 12(2), 195–212. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsz001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S.-H. (2015). Dreamscapes of modernity: Sociotechnical imaginaries and the fabrication of power. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kempton, L. (2015). Delivering smart specialization in peripheral regions: The role of Universities. Regional Studies, Regional Science, 2(1), 489–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681376.2015.1085329
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kivimaa, P., Boon, W., Hyysalo, S., & Klerkx, L. (2019). Towards a typology of intermediaries in sustainability transitions: A systematic review and a research agenda. Research Policy, 48(4), 1062–1075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kornberger, M., Justesen, L., Madsen, A. K., & Mouritsen, J. (2015). Making things valuable. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (2014). What Is the style of matters of concern? In N. Gaskill, & A. J. Nocek (Eds.), The lure of Whitehead (pp. 92–126). University of Minnesota Press. https://doi.org/10.5749/minnesota/9780816679959.003.0004.
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, T. (2003). Institutionalism: On the need to firm up notions of social structure and the human subject. Journal of Economic Issues, 37(1), 175–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.2003.11506562
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lester, R. K., & Piore, M. J. (2004). Innovation – The missing dimension. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lowe, N., & Feldman, M. (2008). Constructing entrepreneurial advantage: Consensus building, technological uncertainty and emerging industries. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 1(2), 265–284. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsn007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowe, N., & Feldman, M. P. (2018). Breaking the waves: Innovating at the intersections of economic development. Economic Development Quarterly, 32(3), 183–194. doi:10.1177/0891242418783848
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacKinnon, D., Dawley, S., Pike, A., & Cumbers, A. (2019). Rethinking path creation: A geographical political economy approach. Economic Geography, 95(2), 113–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/00130095.2018.1498294
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, H., Martin, R., & Zukauskaite, E. (2019). The multiple roles of demand in new regional industrial path development: A conceptual analysis. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 51(8), 1741–1757. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X19863438
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, R. (2015). Rebalancing the spatial economy: The challenge for regional theory. Territory, Politics, Governance, 3(3), 235–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2015.1064825
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, R. (2021). Rebuilding the economy from the COVID crisis: Time to rethink regional studies? Regional Studies, Regional Science, 8(1), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681376.2021.1919191
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazzucato, M. (2016). From market fixing to market-creating: A new framework for innovation policy. Industry and Innovation, 23(2), 140–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2016.1146124
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazzucato, M. (2018). Mission-oriented innovation policies: Challenges and opportunities. Industrial and Corporate Change, 27(5), 803–815. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dty034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCann, P., & Ortega-Argilés, R. (2015). Smart specialization, regional growth and applications to European Union Cohesion Policy. Regional Studies, 49(8), 1291–1302. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2013.799769
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCann, P., & Soete, L. (2020). Place-based innovation for sustainability (JRC Working Papers No. JRC121271). Joint Research Centre (Seville). https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipt/iptwpa/jrc121271.html
   Google Scholar
• Medd, W., & Marvin, S. (2008). Making water work: Intermediating between regional strategy and local practice. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 26(2), 280–299. https://doi.org/10.1068/d3205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metcalfe, J. S. (2008). Entrepreneurship: An evolutionary perspective. In The Oxford handbook of entrepreneurship. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199546992.003.0003.
   Google Scholar
• Metcalfe, J. S., James, A., & Mina, A. (2005). Emergent innovation systems and the delivery of clinical services: The case of intra-ocular lenses. Research Policy, 34(9), 1283–1304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.01.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, F. A., & Lehoux, P. (2020). The innovation impacts of public procurement offices: The case of healthcare procurement. Research Policy, 49(7), 104075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104075
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Möllering, G. (2009). Market constitution analysis: A New framework applied to solar power technology markets (MPIfG Working Paper No. 09/7). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1456833
   Google Scholar
• Montero, S. (2020). Leveraging Bogotá: Sustainable development, global philanthropy and the rise of urban solutionism. Urban Studies, 57(11), 2263–2281. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098018798555
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan, K., & Marques, P. (2019). The public animateur: Mission-led innovation and the ‘smart state’ in Europe. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 12(2), 179–193. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsz002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morozov, E. (2014). To save everything, click here: The folly of technological solutionism. PublicAffairs.
   Google Scholar
• Mortensen, H. B. (2018). The valuation history of Danish wind power: The ongoing struggle of a challenger technology to prove its worth to society. Aalborg Universitetsforlag. https://doi.org/10.5278/vbn.phd.tech.00040
   Google Scholar
• Narula, R. (2002). Innovation systems and ‘inertia’ in R&D location: Norwegian firms and the role of systemic lock-in. Research Policy, 31(5), 795–816. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00148-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters, G. B. (2005). The problem of policy problems. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 7(4), 349–370.
   Google Scholar
• Pfotenhauer, S. M., Juhl, J., & Aarden, E. (2019). Challenging the ‘deficit model’ of innovation: Framing policy issues under the innovation imperative. Research Policy, 48(4), 895–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pihlajamaa, M., & Merisalo, M. (2021). Organizing innovation contests for public procurement of innovation – A case study of smart city hackathons in Tampere, Finland. European Planning Studies, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2021.1894097.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reijonen, S., & Tryggestad, K. (2012). The dynamic signification of product qualities: On the possibility of ‘greening’ markets. Consumption Markets & Culture, 15(2), 213–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/10253866.2012.654961
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rein, M., & Schön, D. A. (1977). Problem setting in policy research. In C. H. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in public policy making (pp. 235–251). Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Rodrik, D. (2004). Industrial policy for the twenty-first century (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 617544). Social Science Research Network. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=617544
   Google Scholar
• Roscoe, P., & Townley, B. (2016). Unsettling issues: Valuing public goods and the production of matters of concern. Journal of Cultural Economy, 9(2), 121–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/17530350.2015.1107852
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rutten, R. (2017). Beyond proximities The socio-spatial dynamics of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography, 41(2), 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132516629003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaeffer, C., & Smits, M. (2015). From matters of fact to places of concern? Energy, environmental movements and place-making in Chile and Thailand. Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences, 65, 146–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.07.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlaile, M. P., Urmetzer, S., Blok, V., Andersen, A. D., Timmermans, J., Mueller, M., Fagerberg, J., & Pyka, A. (2017). Innovation systems for transformations towards sustainability? Taking the normative dimension seriously. Sustainability, 9(12), 2253. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122253
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schot, J., & Steinmueller, W. E. (2018). Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change. Research Policy, 47(9), 1554–1567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwanen, T. (2018). Thinking complex interconnections: Transition, nexus and geography. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 43(2), 262–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12223
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seyfang, G., & Smith, A. (2007). Grassroots innovations for sustainable development: Towards a new research and policy agenda. Environmental Politics, 16, 584–603. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010701419121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw, E., & Carter, S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship. Theoretical antecedents and empirical analysis of entrepreneurial processes and outcomes. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 14(3), 418–434. doi: 10.1108/14626000710773529
   Google Scholar
• Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1992). Master frames and cycles of protest. In A. D. Morris & C. M. Mueller (Eds.), Frontiers in social movement theory (pp. 133–155). Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stark, D. (2017). For what it’s worth. In C. Cloutier, J.-P. Gond, & B. Leca (Eds.), Research in the sociology of organizations (Vol. 52, pp. 383–397). Emerald. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X20170000052011.
   Google Scholar
• Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2005). One size fits all?: Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research Policy, 34(8), 1203–1219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.01.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turnbull, N., & Hoppe, R. (2019). Problematizing ‘wickedness’: A critique of the wicked problems concept, from philosophy to practice. Policy and Society, 38(2), 315–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2018.1488796
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uyarra, E., & Flanagan, K. (2021). Going beyond the line of sight: Institutional entrepreneurship and system agency in regional path creation. Regional Studies, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2021.1980522
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uyarra, E., Flanagan, K., Magro, E., & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J. M. (2017). Anchoring the innovation impacts of public procurement to place: The role of conversations. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 35(5), 828–848. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399654417694620
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uyarra, E., Ribeiro, B., & Dale-Clough, L. (2019). Exploring the normative turn in regional innovation policy: Responsibility and the quest for public value. European Planning Studies, 27(12), 2359–2375. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1609425
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uyarra, E., Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J., Flanagan, K., & Magro, E. (2020). Public procurement, innovation and industrial policy: Rationales, roles, capabilities and implementation. Research Policy, 49(1), 103844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.103844
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Hulst, M., & Yanow, D. (2016). From policy ‘frames’ to ‘framing’ theorizing a more dynamic, political approach. The American Review of Public Administration, 46(1), 92–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074014533142
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Lente, H., Hekkert, M., Smits, R., & Van Waveren, B. (2003). Roles of systemic intermediaries in transition processes. International Journal of Innovation Management, 7(3), 247–279. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919603000817
   Google Scholar
• Van Winden, W., & Carvalho, L. (2019). Intermediation in public procurement of innovation: How Amsterdam’s startup-in-residence programme connects startups to urban challenges. Research Policy, 48(9), 103789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.04.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinsel, L., & Russell, A. L. (2020). The innovation delusion: How our obsession with the new has disrupted the work that matters most. Currency.
   Google Scholar
• Wanzenböck, I., & Frenken, K. (2020). The subsidiarity principle in innovation policy for societal challenges. Global Transitions, 2, 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glt.2020.02.002
   Google Scholar
• Wanzenböck, I., Wesseling, J. H., Frenken, K., Hekkert, M. P., & Weber, K. M. (2020). A framework for mission-oriented innovation policy: Alternative pathways through the problem–solution space. Science and Public Policy, 47(4), 474–489. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scaa027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar