Favourable social innovation ecosystem(s)? – An explorative approach

References

• Arnkil, R., Järvensivu, A., Koski, P., & Piirainen, T. (2010). Exploring Quadruple Helix. Outlining user-oriented innovation models. Report of Quadruple Helix research for the CLIQ Project. Tampere.
   Google Scholar
• Asheim, B. (2007). Differentiated knowledge bases and varieties of regional innovation systems. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 20(3), 223–241. doi:10.1080/13511610701722846.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asheim, B., Boschma, R., & Cooke, P. (2011). Constructing regional advantage: Platform policies based on related variety and differentiated knowledge bases. Regional Studies, 45(7), 893–904. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2010.543126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asheim, B., Grillitsch, M., & Trippl, M. (2016). Regional innovation systems: Past – present – future. In R. Shearmur, C. Carrincazeaux, & D. Doloreux (Eds.), Handbook on the geographies of innovation (pp. 45–62). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Asheim, B., & Isaksen, A. (1997). Location, agglomeration and innovation: Towards regional innovation systems in Norway? European Planning Studies, 5(3), 299–330. doi: 10.1080/09654319708720402
   Google Scholar
• Asheim, B., & Isaksen, A. (2002). Regional innovation systems: The integration of local ‘sticky’ and global ‘ubiquitous’ knowledge. Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(1), 77–86. doi: 10.1023/A:1013100704794
   Google Scholar
• Aslesen, H., Martin, R., & Sardo, S. (2018). The virtual is reality! On physical and virtual space in software firms’ knowledge formation. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 1–14. doi:10.1080/08985626.2018.1552314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Augstein, J. (Ed.). (2017). Reclaim autonomy. Selbstermächtigung in der digitalen Weltordnung. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Avelino, F., Dumitru, A., Cipolla, C., Kunze, I., & Wittmayer, J. (2019). Translocal empowerment in transformative social innovation networks. European Planning Studies, 1–23. doi:10.1080/09654313.2019.1578339.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avelino, F., & Wittmayer, J. (2018). Transformative social innovation and its multi-actor nature. In J. Howaldt, C. Kaletka, A. Schröder, & M. Zirngiebl (Eds.), Atlas of social innovation – New practices for a better future (pp. 46–49). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle, TU Dortmund University.
   Google Scholar
• Avelino, F., Wittmayer, J., Pel, B., Weaver, P., Dumitru, A., Haxeltine, A., … O’Riordan, T. (2019). Transformative social innovation and (dis)empowerment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 145, 195–206. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balland, P.-A., Boschma, R., & Frenken, K. (2015). Proximity and innovation: From statics to dynamics. Regional Studies, 49(6), 907–920. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2014.883598
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bathelt, H., Malmberg, A., & Maskell, P. (2004). Clusters and knowledge: Local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography, 28(1), 31–56. doi: 10.1191/0309132504ph469oa
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blöcker, A., & Rehfeld, D. (2000). Regionale Innovationspolitik und innovative Regionalpolitik. In S. Georg, M. Renate, & S. Thomas (Eds.), Politik und Technik. Politische Vierteljahresschrift (Vol. 31, pp. 388–404). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. doi: 10.1007/978-3-322-80387-0_21
   Google Scholar
• Bloom, P., & Dees, G. (2008). Cultivate your ecosystem. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 47(Winter 2008), 47–53.
   Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. (2018). A concise history of the knowledge base literature: Challenging questions for future research. In A. Isaksen, R. Martin, & M. Trippl (Eds.), New avenues for regional innovation systems – Theoretical advances, empirical cases and policy lessons (pp. 23–40). Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical review. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61–74. doi: 10.1080/0034340052000320887
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschma, R., & Frenken, K. (2006). Why is economic geography not an evolutionary science? Towards an evolutionary economic geography. Journal of Economic Geography, 6(3), 273–302. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbi022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschma, R., & Ter Wal, A. (2007). Knowledge networks and innovative performance in an industrial district: The case of footwear district in the South of Italy. Industry and Innovation, 14(2), 177–199. doi: 10.1080/13662710701253441
   Google Scholar
• Brandsen, T., Cattacin, S., Evers, A., & Zimmer, A. (Eds.). (2016). Social innovations in the urban context. Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, K. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 2008, 85–92.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, T., & Wyatt, J. (2010). Design thinking for social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Winter, 2010, 31–35.
   Google Scholar
• Butzin, A., & Terstriep, J. (2018). Actors roles in social innovation. In J. Howaldt, C. Kaletka, A. Schröder, & M. Zwirngiebl (Eds.), Atlas of social innovation – New practices for a better future (pp. 78–81). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle, TU Dortmund.
   Google Scholar
• Cairns, G. (2017). Can design inform effective social innovation? The Design Journal, 20(6), 725–734. doi: 10.1080/14606925.2017.1370658
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camagni, R. (1991). Local ‘milieu’, uncertainty and innovation networks: Towards a new dynamic theory of economics space. In R. Camagni (Ed.), Innovation networks (pp. 121–144). London: Belhaven Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carayannis, E., Grigoroudis, E., Campbell, D., Meissner, D., & Stamati, D. (2018). The ecosystem as helix: An exploratory theory-building study of regional co-opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as quadruple/quintuple helix innovation models. R&D Management, 48(1), 148–162. doi: 10.1111/radm.12300
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castro Spila, J., Luna, Á, & Unceta, A. (2016). Social innovation regimes. An explanatory framework to measure social innovation. SIMPACT Working Paper, 2016(1). Gelsenkirchen: Institute for Work and Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Chalmers, D., & Balan-Vnuk, E. (2012). Innovating not-for-profit social ventures: Exploring the microfoundations of internal and external absorptive capacity routines. International Small Business Journal, 31(7), 785–810. doi: 10.1177/0266242612465630
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chesbrough, H., & Bogers, M. (2014). Explicating open innovation. Clarifying an emerging paradigm for understanding innovation. In H. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, & J. West (Eds.), New frontiers in open innovation (pp. 3–28). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Coenen, L., Campbell, S., & Wiseman, J. (2018). Regional innovation systems and transformative dynamics: Transitions in coal regions in Australia and Germany. In A. Isaksen, R. Martin, & M. Trippl (Eds.), New avenues for regional innovation systems – Theoretical advances, empirical cases and policy lessons (pp. 199–217). Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Convivialistes, L. (2014). Convivialist Manifesto. A declaration of interdependence. Global Dialoges 3. Duisburg: Centre for Global Cooperation Research.
   Google Scholar
• Cooke, P. (1992). Regional innovation systems: Competitive regulation in the New Europe. Geoforum, 23(3), 365–382. doi: 10.1016/0016-7185(92)90048-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, P. (2007). To construct regional advantage from innovation systems first build policy platforms. European Planning Studies, 15(2), 179–194. doi: 10.1080/09654310601078671
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, P. (Ed.). (2013). Re-framing regional development. Evolution, innovation and transition. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cooke, P. (2016). The virtues of variety in regional innovation systems and entrepreneurial ecosystems. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 2(1), 13. doi: 10.1186/s40852-016-0036-x
   Google Scholar
• Cooke, P., Heidenreich, M., & Braczyk, H.-J. (Eds.). (2004). Regional innovation systems: The role of governance in a globalized world (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cooke, P., & Rehfeld, D. (2011). Path dependence and new paths in regional evolution: In search of the role of culture. European Planning Studies, 19(11), 1909–1929. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2011.618685
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, P., Uranga, M., & Etxebarria, G. (1997). Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organisational dimensions. Research Policy, 26(4–5), 475–491. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(97)00025-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, P., Uranga, M., & Etxebarria, G. (1998). Regional systems of innovation: An evolutionary perspective. Environment and Planning A, 30(9), 1563–1584. doi: 10.1068/a301563
   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. doi: 10.1080/09654310902978231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahlström, M., & James, L. (2012). Regional policies for knowledge anchoring in European regions. European Planning Studies, 20(11), 1867–1887. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2012.723425
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davids, M., & Frenken, K. (2018). Proximity, knowledge base and the innovation process: Towards an integrated framework. Regional Studies, 52(1), 23–34. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2017.1287349
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, J. E. (2002). Narrative and social movements: The power of stories. In J. E. Davis (Ed.), Stories of change: Narrative and social movements (pp. 3–30). Albany: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deserti, A., Rizzo, F., & Cobanli, O. (2018). From social design to design for social innovation. In J. Howaldt, C. Kaletka, A. Schröder, & M. Zirngiebl (Eds.), Atlas of social innovation. New practices for better futures (pp. 66–69). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle, TU Dortmund.
   Google Scholar
• Djellal, F., & Gallouj, F. (2012). Social innovation and service innovation. In H.-W. Franz, J. Howaldt, & J. Hochgerner (Eds.), Challenge social innovation (pp. 119–137). Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Esping-Andersen, G. (2013). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Etzioni, A. (1968). The active society. A theory of societal and political processes. London: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and ‘Mode 2’ to a triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitjar, R., & Huber, F. (2015). Global pipelines for innovation: Insights from the case of Norway. Journal of Economic Geography, 15(3), 561–583. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbu017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foray, D. (2016). On the policy space of smart specialization strategies. European Planning Studies, 24(8), 1428–1437. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2016.1176126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fornahl, D., & Hassink, R. (Eds.). (2017). The life cycle of clusters. A policy perspective. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Frenken, K., van Oort, F., & Verburg, T. (2007). Related variety, unrelated variety and regional economic growth. Regional Studies, 41(5), 685–697. doi: 10.1080/00343400601120296
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geels, F. (2005a). Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 72(6), 681–696. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2004.08.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geels, F. (2005b). Technological transitions and system innovations. A co-evolutionary and socio-technical analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Geiselberger, H. (Ed.). (2017). Die große Regression. Eine internationale Debatte über die geistige Situation der Zeit. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Godin, B. (2012). Social innovation: Utopias of innovation from c.1830 to the present. Project on the Intellectual History of Innovation, Working Paper No. 11.
   Google Scholar
• Goldstein, J., Hazy, J., & Silberstang, J. (2010). A complexity science model of social innovation in social enterprise. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 101–125. doi: 10.1080/19420671003629763
   Google Scholar
• Grabher, G. (Ed.). (1993). The weakness of strong ties. The lock-in of regional development in the Ruhr area. In The Embedded Firm. On the Socioeconomics of Industrial Networks (pp. 255–277). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Grillitsch, M. (2018). Following or breaking regional development paths: On the role and capability of the innovative entrepreneur. Regional Studies, 1–11. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2018.1463436
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, P., & Soksice, D. (Eds.). (2001). Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, T., & Mattes, J. (2017). Proximity and power in collaborative innovation projects. Regional Studies, 1–12. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2016.1263387
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howaldt, J., Schröder, A., Kaletka, C., Rehfeld, D., & Terstriep, J. (2016). Mapping the world of social innovation: A global comparative analysis across sectors and world regions. Dortmund: SI-DRIVE.
   Google Scholar
• Howaldt, J., & Schwarz, M. (2017). Social innovation and human development—How the capabilities approach and social innovation theory mutually support each other. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 18(2), 163–180. doi: 10.1080/19452829.2016.1251401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hölscher, K., Wittmayer, J., Avelino, F., & Giezen, M. (2019). Opening up the transition arena: An analysis of (dis)empowerment of civil society actors in transition management in cities. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 145, 176–185. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.004.
   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. doi:10.1093/jeg/lbu026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isaksen, A., & Jakobsen, S.-E. (2017). New path development between innovation systems and individual actors. European Planning Studies, 25(3), 355–370. doi:10.1080/09654313.2016.1268570.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isaksen, A., Martin, R., & Trippl, M. (2018). New avenues for regional innovation systems and policy. In A. Isaksen, R. Martin, & M. Trippl (Eds.), New avenues for regional innovation systems – Theoretical advances, empirical cases and policy lessons (pp. 1–19). Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Jenson, J. (2015). Social innovation: Redesigning the welfare diamond. In A. Nicholls, J. Simon, & M. Gabriel (Eds.), New frontiers in social innovation (pp. 89–106). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Kleverbeck, M., Mildenberger, G., Schröer, A., & Terstriep, J. (2019). Regional social innovation networks. In S. Weber, I. Truschkat, C. Schröder, L. Peters, & A. Herz (Eds.), Organisation und Netzwerke. Beiträge der Kommission Organisationspädagogik (pp. 355–374). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
   Google Scholar
• Kleverbeck, M., Terstriep, J., Deserti, A., & Rizzo, F. (2017). Social entrepreneurship: The challenge of hybridity. In A. David & I. Hamburg (Eds.), Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial skills in Europe (pp. 47–76). Leverkusen: Barbara Budrich Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Klofsten, M., Bienkowska, D., Laur, I., & Sölvell, I. (2015). Success factors in cluster initiative management: Mapping out the ‘big five’. Industry and Higher Education, 29(1), 65–77. doi:10.5367/ihe.2015.0237.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knudsen, J. (2018). The sociocultural basis for innovation. In A. Isaksen, R. Martin, & M. Trippl (Eds.), New avenues for regional innovation systems – Theoretical advances, empirical cases and policy lessons (pp. 61–83). Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Komatsu, T., Deserti, A., Rizzo, F., Celi, M., & Alijani, S. (2016). Social innovation business models: Coping with antagonistic objectives and assets. In S. Alijani & C. Karyotis (Eds.), Finance and economy for society: Integrating sustainability (critical studies on corporate responsibility, governance and sustainability (Vol. 11, pp. 315–347). Bingley: Emerald Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Kraus, B. (2019). Relational constructivism and relational social work. In S. Webb (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of critical social work. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Laestadius, S. (1998). The relevance of science and technology indicators: The case of pulp and paper. Research Policy, 27(4), 385–395. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00050-X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laur, I. (2015). Clusters as intermediaries: A study of their management and stakeholders (Dissertation Dissertation). Linköping: Linköping University.
   Google Scholar
• Loorbach, D. (2010). Transition management for sustainable development: A prescriptive, complexity-based governance framework. Governance, 23(1), 161–183. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0491.2009.01471.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacCallum, D., Moulaert, F., Hillier, J., & Haddock, S. (Eds.). (2009). Social innovation and territorial development. Farnham: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2009). Entrepreneurship in and around institutional voids: A case study from Bangladesh. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(5), 419–435. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.04.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everybody designs. An introduction to design for social innovation. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, R. (2009). The design of business: Why design thinking is the next competitive advantage. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, R., Aslesen, H., Grillitsch, M., & Herstad, S. (2018). Regional innovation systems and global flows of knowledge. In A. Isaksen, R. Martin, & M. Trippl (Eds.), New avenues for regional innovation systems – Theoretical advances, empirical cases and policy lessons (pp. 127–147). Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2006). Path dependence and regional economic evolution. Journal of Economic Geography, 6(4), 395–437. doi:10.1093/jeg/lbl012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattes, J. (2012). Dimensions of proximity and knowledge bases: Innovation between spatial and non-spatial factors. Regional Studies, 46(8), 1085–1099. doi:10.1080/00343404.2011.552493.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAdam, M., & Debackere, K. (2018). Beyond ‘triple helix’ toward ‘quadruple helix’ models in regional innovation systems: Implications for theory and practice. R&D Management, 48(1), 3–6. doi:10.1111/radm.12309.
   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. doi:10.1080/00343404.2013.799769.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meichenitsch, K., Neumayr, M., & Schenk, M. (Eds.). (2016). Neu! Besser! Billiger! Soziale innovation als leeres Versprechen. Wien: Mandelbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Menzel, M.-P., & Fornahl, D. (2010). Cluster life cycles – Dimensions and rationales of cluster evolution. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(1), 205–238. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtp036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moghadam Saman, S., & Kaderabkova, A. (2015). Social innovation in new member states. Part II – Survey of expert panel. SIMPACT Working Paper. Gelsenkirchen: Institute for Work and Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Montanari, F. (2014). Creative territories as breeding ground for social innovation ecosystems. In F. Sgaragli (Ed.), Enabling social innovation ecosystems for community-led territorial development (pp. 33–40). Rome: Fondazione Giacomo Brodolini.
   Google Scholar
• Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., & Hillier, J. (2013). Social innovation: Intuition, precept, concept, theory and practice. In F. Moulaert, D. MacCallum, A. Mehmood, & A. Hamdouch (Eds.), The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research (pp. 13–24). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Moulaert, F., Martinelli, F., Gonzalez, S., & Swyngedouw, E. (2007). Introduction: Social innovation and governance in European cities. Urban development between path-dependency and radical innovation. European Urban and Regional Studies, 14(3), 195–209. doi: 10.1177/0969776407077737
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moulaert, F., Mehmood, A., MacCallum, D., & Leubolt, B. (2017). Social innovation as a trigger for transformations. The role of research. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
   Google Scholar
• Mulgan, G., Tucker, S., Ali, R., & Sanders, B. (2007). Social innovation. What it is, why it matters and how it can be accelerated. London: Young Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Murray, R., Caulier-Grice, J., & Mulgan, G. (2010). The open book of social innovation. In young foundation (Series Ed.), social innovator series: Ways to design, develop and grow social innovation. London: Young Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Nicholls, A., Simon, J., & Gabriel, M. (2015). Introduction: Dimensions of social innovation. In A. Nicholls, J. Simon, & M. Gabriel (Eds.), New frontiers in social innovation research (pp. 1–26). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Nicholls, A., & Ziegler, R. (2015). An extended social grid model for the study of marginalization processes and social innovation. CrESSI Working Papers: Vol. 2/2015 (revised 4/2017).
   Google Scholar
• North, D. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, M. (2006). Frontiers of justice: disability, nationality, species membership. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oeij, P., Dhondt, S., & Rehfeld, D. (2017). Social innovation in employment. Dortmund.
   Google Scholar
• Owen, R., Bessant, J., & Heintz, M. (Eds.). (2013). Responsible innovation. Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation society. Sussex: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Owen, R., Stilgoe, J., Macnaghten, P., Gorman, M., Fisher, E., & Guston, D. (2013). A framework for responsible innovation. In R. Owen, J. Bessant, & M. Heintz (Eds.), Responsible innovation. Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation society (pp. 27–50). Sussex: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Pelka, B., & Terstriep, J. (2016). Mapping social innovation maps: The state of research practice across Europe. European Public & Social Innovation Review, 1(1), 3–16. doi: 10.31637/epsir.16-1.1
   Google Scholar
• Perkins, D., & Zimmerman, M. (1995). Empowerment theory, research, and application. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(5), 569–579. doi:10.1007/BF02506982.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, M. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. New York, NY: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Putman, R. (1993). The prosperous community: Social capital and public life. The American Prospect [ Internet], 13, 35–42.
   Google Scholar
• Rehfeld, D., Butzin, A., & Terstriep, J. (2016). Ökonomische, soziale und politische Innovation. Forschung aktuell: Vol. 12/2016. Gelsenkirchen: Institut Arbeit und Technik.
   Google Scholar
• Rehfeld, D., Schartinger, D., Weber, M., & Rhomberg, W. (2018). Ready for take-off? Processes of social innovation. In J. Howaldt, C. Kaletka, A. Schröder, & M. Zirngiebl (Eds.), Atlas of social innovation. New practices for a better future (pp. 81–81). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle, TU Dortmund University.
   Google Scholar
• Rehfeld, D., & Terstriep, J. (2013). Socio-cultural dynamics in spatial policy: Explaining the on-going success of cluster politics. In P. Cooke (Ed.), Re-framing regional development: Evolution, innovation and transition (pp. 274–294). Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Rehfeld, D., Terstriep, J., Welschhoff, J., & Alijani, S. (2015). Comparative report on social innovation framework. Deliverable D1.1 of the project «Boosting the Impact of Social Innovation across Europe through Economic Underpinnings» (SIMPACT), European Commission – 7th Framework Programme. Brussels: European Commission, DG Research & Innovation.
   Google Scholar
• Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. doi: 10.1007/BF01405730
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rychen, F., & Zimmermann, J.-B. (2008). Clusters in global knowledge-based economy: Knowledge gatekeepers and temporary proximity. Regional Studies, 42(6), 767–776. doi: 10.1080/00343400802088300
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salais, R., & Storper, M. (1992). The four ‘worlds’ of contemporary industry. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 16(2), 169–193. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035199
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santner, D. (2017). Cluster-internal and external drivers of cluster renewal: Evidence from two German agricultural engineering case studies. European Planning Studies, 1–18. doi:10.1080/09654313.2017.1385730.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santner, D. (2018). Proximity and modes of innovation – Evidence from two agricultural engineering industries in north-west Germany. European Planning Studies, 26(5), 877–894. doi:10.1080/09654313.2018.1427700.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santos, F., Pache, A.-C., & Birkholz, C. (2015). Making hybrids work: Aligning business models and organizational design for social enterprises. California Management Review, 57(3), 36–58. doi: 10.1525/cmr.2015.57.3.36
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sauer, T., Elsen, S., & Garzillo, C. (Eds.). (2016). Cities in transition. Social innovation for Europe’s urban sustainability. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schot, J., & Steinmueller, W. (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
• Schubert, C. (2018). Social innovation. A new instrument for social change? In W. Rammert, A. Windeler, H. Knoblauch, & M. Hutter (Eds.), Innovation society today (pp. 371–391). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Pres.
   Google Scholar
• Sotarauta, M., & Suvinen, N. (2018). Institutional agency and path creation. In A. Isaksen, R. Martin, & M. Trippl (Eds.), New avenues for regional innovation systems – Theoretical advances, empirical cases and policy lessons (pp. 85–104). Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Sternberg, R. (2007). Entrepreneurship, proximity and regional innovation systems. Tijdschrift Voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 98(5), 652–666. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9663.2007.00431.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stiglitz, J., & Greenwald, B. (Eds.). (2014). Creating a learning society. A new approach to growth, development, and social progress. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42(9), 1568–1580. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strambach, S., & Halkier, H. (2013). Reconceptualizing change. Path dependency, path plasticity and knowledge combination. Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie, 57(1–2), 1–14. doi: 10.1515/zfw.2013.0001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terstriep, J. (Ed.). (2016a). Boosting SI’s social and economic impact. Gelsenkirchen: Institute for Work and Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Terstriep, J. (Ed.). (2016b). Boosting SI’s economic and social impact. Gelsenkirchen: Institute for Work and Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Terstriep, J., Kleverbeck, M., Deserti, A., & Rizzo, F. (2015). Comparative report on social innovation across Europe. Deliverable D3.2 of the project «Boosting the impact of social innovation in Europe through Economic Underpinning» (SIMPACT), European Commission – 7th Framework Programme. Brussels: European Commission, DG Research and Innovation.
   Google Scholar
• Terstriep, J., & Lüthje, C. (2018). Innovation, knowledge and relations – On the role of clusters for firms’ innovativeness. European Planning Studies, 26(11), 2167–2199. doi:10.1080/09654313.2018.1530152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiwari, M. (2017). Exploring the role of the capability approach in social innovation. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 18(2), 181–196. doi:10.1080/19452829.2016.1271312.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todeva, E., & Ketikidis, P. (2017). Regional entrepreneurship and innovation management: Actors. Helices and Consensus Space. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 5(1), 57–76. doi:10.25019/MDKE/5.1.04.
   Google Scholar
• Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2005). One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research Policy, 34(8), 1203–1219. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2005.01.018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2011). Regional innovation systems. In P. Cooke, B. Asheim, R. Boschma, R. Martin, D. Schwartz, & F. Tödtling (Eds.), Handbook of regional innovation and growth (pp. 455–467). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2018). Regional innovation policies for new path development – Beyond neo-liberal and traditional systemic views. European Planning Studies, 36(9), 1779–1795. doi:10.1080/09654313.2018.1457140.
   Google Scholar
• Totterdill, P., Cressey, P., Exton, R., & Terstriep, J. (2015). Stimulating, resourcing and sustaining social innovation. Towards a new mode of policy production and implementation. SIMPACT Working Paper. Gelsenkirchen: Institute for Work and Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Trippl, M., Grillitsch, M., & Isaksen, A. (2017). Exogenous sources of regional industrial change. Progress in Human Geography, 42(5), 687–705. doi:10.1177/0309132517700982.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trippl, M., & Tödtling, F. (2007). Developing biotechnology clusters in non-high technology regions—The case of Austria. Industry & Innovation, 14(1), 47–67. doi:10.1080/13662710601130590.
   Google Scholar
• Uyarra, E., Marzocchi, C., & Sorvik, J. (2018). How outward looking is smart specialisation? Rationales, drivers and barriers. European Planning Studies, 26(12), 2344–2363. doi:10.1080/09654313.2018.1529146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35–67. doi: 10.2307/2393808
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Von Jacobi, N., Edmiston, D., & Ziegler, R. (2017). Tackling marginalisation through social innovation? Examining the EU social innovation policy agenda from a capabilities perspective. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 1–15. doi:10.1080/19452829.2016.1256277.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wascher, E., Hebel, F., Schrot, K., & Schultze, J. (2018). Social innovation labs – A starting point for social innovation. Dortmund: sfs/TU Dortmund.
   Google Scholar
• Weber, E., & Khademian, A. (2008). Wicked problems, knowledge challenges, and collaborative capacity builder in network settings. Public Administration Review, 68(2), 334–349. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00866.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weisser, G. (1978). Beiträge zur Gesellschaftspolitik. Göttingen: Otto Schwarz & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Ziegler, R. (2017). Social innovation as a collaborative concept. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 30(4), 388–405. doi:10.1080/13511610.2017.1348935.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, M. (2000). Empowerment theory handbook of community psychology (pp. 43–63). New York: Kluver Academic/Plenum Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Zukauskaite, E. (2018). Variety of regional innovation systems and their institutional characteristics. In A. Isaksen, R. Martin, & M. Trippl (Eds.), New avenues for regional innovation systems – Theoretical advances, empirical cases and policy lessons (pp. 41–60). Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar