Exploring the normative turn in regional innovation policy: responsibility and the quest for public value

References

• 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. doi: 10.1093/cje/bey019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balmer, A. S., Calvert, J., Marris, C., Molyneux-Hodgson, S., Frow, E., Kearnes, M., … Martin, P. (2016). Five rules of thumb for post-ELSI interdisciplinary collaborations. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 3(1), 73–80. doi: 10.1080/23299460.2016.1177867
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barca, F. (2009). Agenda for a reformed cohesion policy. Brussels: European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• Boon, W., & Edler, J. (2018). Demand, challenges and innovation. Making sense of new trends in innovation policy. Science and Public Policy, 45(4), 435–447.
   Google Scholar
• Borrás, S. (2009). “The Widening and Deepening of Innovation Policy: What Conditions Provide for Effective Governance?” CIRCLE Working Paper2009/02.
   Google Scholar
• Boschma, R., & Frenken, K. (2011). The emerging empirics of evolutionary economic geography. Journal of Economic Geography, 11(2), 295–307. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbq053
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovis, C. H. (2017). Public procurement as economic or policy exercise. European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, 12(3), 213. doi: 10.21552/epppl/2017/3/3
   Google Scholar
• Bozeman, B. (2002). Public value failure: When efficient markets may not do. Public Adm. Rev, 62, 145–161. doi: 10.1111/0033-3352.00165
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bozeman, B. (2007). Public values and public interest: Counterbalancing economic individualism. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management. Public Administration Review, 74(4), 445–456. doi: 10.1111/puar.12238
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cabinet Office. (2015). Social Value Act Review, 15 February 2015. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/social-value-act-review
   Google Scholar
• Castaldi, C., Frenken, K., & Los, B. (2015). Related variety, unrelated variety and technological breakthroughs: An analysis of US state-level patenting. Regional Studies, 49(5), 767–781.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CLES. (2015). Creating a good local economy. The role of anchor institutions. Manchester: Centre for Local Economic Strategy.
   Google Scholar
• Coenen, L., Hansen, T., & Rekers, J. V. (2015). Innovation policy for grand challenges. An economic geography perspective. Geography Compass, 9, 483–496. doi: 10.1111/gec3.12231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crevoisier, O., & Jeannerat, H. (2009). Territorial knowledge dynamics: From the proximity paradigm to multi-location milieus. European Planning Studies, 17(8), 1223–1241.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dale-Clough, L. (2015). Public procurement of innovation and local authority procurement: Procurement modes and framework conditions in three European cities. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 28(3), 220–242. doi: 10.1080/13511610.2015.1012709
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eder, J. (2018). Innovation in the periphery: A critical survey and research agenda. International Regional Science Review, 42(2), 119–146. doi: 10.1177/0160017618764279
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edler, J., & Fagerberg, J. (2017). Innovation policy: What, why, and how? Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(1), 2–23. doi: 10.1093/oxrep/grx001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edler, J., & Georghiou, L. (2007). Public procurement and innovation—resurrecting the demand side. Research Policy, 36(7), 949–963. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2007.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erridge, A. (2007). Public procurement, public value and the Northern Ireland unemployment pilot project. Public Administration, 85(4), 1023–1043. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00674.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erridge, A., & McIlroy, J. (2002). Public procurement and supply management strategies. Public Policy and Administration, 17(1), 52–71. doi: 10.1177/095207670201700105
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2014). Rome Declaration on Responsible Research and Innovation in Europe. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/rome_declaration_RRI_final_21_November.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Exworthy, M., & Powell, M. (2004). Big windows and little windows: Implementation in the ‘congested state’. Public Administration, 82(2), 263–281. doi: 10.1111/j.0033-3298.2004.00394.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, M., Hadjimichael, T., Lanahan, L., & Kemeny, T. (2016). The logic of economic development: A definition and model for investment. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 34(1), 5–21. doi: 10.1177/0263774X15614653
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, M., & Lowe, N. (2018). Policy and collective action in place. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 11(2), 335–351. doi: 10.1093/cjres/rsy011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher, E., Mahajan, R. L., & Mitcham, C. (2006). Midstream modulation of technology: Governance from within. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 26(6), 485–496. doi: 10.1177/0270467606295402
   Google Scholar
• Fitjar, R., Benneworth, P., & Asheim, P. (2018). Towards Regional Responsible Research and Innovation? Paper presented at the Regional Innovation Policies Conference, Bergen, Nov 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Frenken, K. (2017). A complexity-theoretic perspective on innovation policy. Complexity, Innovation and Policy (Special Issue), 3(1), 35–47.
   Google Scholar
• Gee, S., & Uyarra, E. (2013). A role for public procurement in system innovation: The transformation of the Greater Manchester (UK) waste system. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 25(10), 1175–1188. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2013.843660
   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 & Social Change, 86, 1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.09.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guston, D. H. (2014). Understanding “anticipatory governance”. Social Studies of Science, 44(2), 218–242. doi: 10.1177/0306312713508669
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartley, J., Alford, J., Knies, E., & Douglas, S. (2017). Towards an empirical research agenda for public value theory. Public Management Review, 19(5), 670–685. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2016.1192166
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartmann, D. (2014). Economic complexity and human development. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Horvat, M. (2011). The new framework for EU research and innovation. Science, 334(November 2011), 1066–1068. doi: 10.1126/science.1214295
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Iammarino, S., Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Storper, M. (2018). Regional inequality in Europe: Evidence, theory and policy implications. Journal of Economic Geography, 19(2), 273–298.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssen, M. (2015). Cross-specialization and structural holes: The case of the Dutch Topsectors. Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography, 15, 19.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. (2003). Technologies of humility: Citizen participation in governing science. Minerva, 41, 233–244. doi: 10.1023/A:1025557512320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeannerat, H., & Crevoisier, O. (2016). Editorial: From “territorial innovation models” to “territorial knowledge dynamics”: On the learning value of a new concept in regional studies. Regional Studies, 50, 185–188. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2015.1105653
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, G., & Muers, S. (2002). Creating public value. London: Cabinet Office, Strategy Unit.
   Google Scholar
• Kogler, D. F. (2015). Evolutionary economic geography–theoretical and empirical progress. Regional Studies, 49(5), 705–711. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2015.1033178
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynch, M. (2000). Against reflexivity. Theory, Culture and Society, 17(13), 26–54. doi: 10.1177/02632760022051202
   Google Scholar
• Marris, C. (2015). The construction of imaginaries of the public as a threat to synthetic biology. Science as Culture, 24(1), 83–98. doi: 10.1080/09505431.2014.986320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, H., & Coenen, L. (2015). Institutional context and cluster emergence: The biogas industry in Southern Sweden. European Planning Studies, 23(10), 2009–2027. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2014.960181
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazzucato, M. (2013). The entrepreneurial state: Debunking private vs. public sector myths. London: Anthem Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mazzucato, M. (2018a). The value of everything: Making and taking in the global economy. London: Penguin Books UK.
   Google Scholar
• Mazzucato, M. (2018b). Mission-oriented research & innovation in the European Union. A problem-solving approach to fuel innovation-led growth. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• McLeod, C., & Nerlich, B. (2017). Synthetic biology, metaphors and responsibility. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 13(1). doi: 10.1186/s40504-017-0061-y
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Morgan, K. (2013). Path dependence and the state. In P. Cooke (Ed.), Re-framing regional development: evolution, innovation, and transition (pp. 318–340). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, K. (2017). Nurturing novelty: Regional innovation policy in the age of smart specialisation. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 35(4), 569–583.
   Google Scholar
• Nowotny, H. (2000). Transgressive competence: The narrative of expertise. European Journal of Social Theory, 3(1), 5–21.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2011). Fostering Innovation to Address Social Challenges. Proceedings of the CSTP Expert Workshop on Fostering Innovation to address Social Challenges, pp. 1–99. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/47861327.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Peck, F., & Cabras, I. (2011). The impact of local authority procurement on local economies: The case of Cumbria. North West England. Public Policy and Administration, 26(3), 307–331. doi: 10.1177/0952076709356859
   Google Scholar
• Phelps, N. A., Atienza, M., & Arias, M. (2018). An invitation to the dark side of economic geography. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 50(1), 236–244. doi: 10.1177/0308518X17739007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickernell, D., Kay, A., Packham, G., & Miller, C. (2011). Competing agendas in public procurement: An empirical analysis of opportunities and limits in the UK for SMEs. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 29(4), 641–658. doi: 10.1068/c10164b
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ribeiro, B., Bengtsson, L., Benneworth, P., Bührer, S., Castro-Martínez, E., Hansen, M., … Shapira, P. (2018). Introducing the dilemma of societal alignment for inclusive and responsible research and innovation. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 5(3), 316–331. doi: 10.1080/23299460.2018.1495033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ribeiro, B., Smith, R., & Millar, K. (2017). A mobilising concept? Unpacking academic representations of responsible research and innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23(1), 81–103. doi: 10.1007/s11948-016-9761-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rip, A. (2014). The past and future of RRI. Life Sciences Society and Policy, 10(1), 17. doi: 10.1186/s40504-014-0017-4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2018). The revenge of the places that don’t matter (and what to do about it). Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 11(1), 189–209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rolfstam, M. (2015). Public procurement of innovation for a better world: A consolidation or a new beginning? Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 28(3), 211–219. doi: 10.1080/13511610.2015.1065139
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Røpke, I. (2012). The unsustainable directionality of innovation - The example of the broadband transition. Res. Policy, 41, 1631–1642. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlaile, M. P., Urmetzer, S., Blok, V., Andersen, A. D., Timmermans, J., Mueller, M., … Pyka, A. (2017). Innovation systems for transformations towards sustainability? Taking the normative dimension seriously. Sustainability, 9(12), 2253.
   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. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1999). Commodities and capabilities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, R. F. I. (2004). Focusing on public value: Something new and something old. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 63(4), 68–79. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8500.2004.00403.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, J. (2016). Geoengineering as collective experimentation. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(3), 851–869. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9646-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42, 1568–1580. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2018). Regional innovation policies for new path development–beyond neo-liberal and traditional systemic views. European Planning Studies, 26(9), 1779–1795.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uyarra, E., & Flanagan, K. (2010). Understanding the innovation impacts of public procurement. European Planning Studies, 18(1), 123–143. doi: 10.1080/09654310903343567
   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. doi: 10.1177/2399654417694620
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valovirta, V. (2015). Building capacity for public procurement of innovation. In C. Edquist, N. Vonortas, J. M. Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, & J. Edler (Eds.), Public procurement for innovation (pp. 65–86). Cheltenham and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• von Schomberg, R. (2011). Prospects for technology assessment in a framework of responsible research and innovation’. In M. Dusseldorp & R. Beecroft (Eds.), Technikfolgen abschätzen lehren. Bildungspotenziale transdisziplinärer Methoden (pp. 39–61). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Wanzenböck, I., & Frenken, K. (2018). The subsidiarity principle: Turning challenge-oriented innovation policy on its head (No. 1806). Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography.
   Google Scholar
• Weber, K. M., & Rohracher, H. (2012). Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change: Combining insights from innovation systems and multi-level perspective in a comprehensive “failures” framework. Research Policy, 41, 1037–1047. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• What Works Centre For Local Economic Growth. (2018). Local procurement. Retrieved from http://www.whatworksgrowth.org/public/files/18-05-03_Local_Procurement_v4.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Woolthuis, R. K., Lankhuizen, M., & Gilsing, V. (2005). A system failure framework for innovation policy design. Technovation, 25(6), 609–619. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2003.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar