Smart growth in less developed regions – the role of EU structural funds on the example of Poland

References

• Arrow, K. 1994. “The Production and Distribution of Knowledge.” In The Economics of Growth and Technical Change. Technologies, Nations, Agents, edited by G. Silverberg, and L. Soete, 9–19. Edward Elgar: Aldershot.
   Google Scholar
• Bąk, A. 2016. “Porządkowanie liniowe obiektów metodą Hellwiga i TOPSIS – analiza porównawcza.” Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu 426: 22–31.
   Google Scholar
• Balland, P.-A., R. Boschma, J. Crespo, and D. L. Rigby. 2018. “Smart Specialization Policy in the European Union: Relatedness, Knowledge Complexity and Regional Diversification.” Regional Studies 1: 1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Becker, G. S. 1964. Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boekema, F., K. Morgan, S. Bakkers, and R. Rutten. 2000. Knowledge, Innovation and Economic Growth. The Theory and Practice of Learning Regions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. 2017. “Relatedness as Driver of Regional Diversification: A Research Agenda.” Regional Studies 51: 351–364. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2016.1254767
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camagni, R., and R. Capello. 2013. “Regional Innovation Patterns and the EU Regional Policy Reform: Toward Smart Innovation Policies.” Growth and Change 44 (2): 355–389. doi:10.1111/grow.12012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capello, R., and C. Lenzi. 2016. “Relevance and Utility of European Union Research, Technological Development and Innovation Policies for a Smart Growth.” Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space 34 (1): 52–72. doi:10.1177/0263774X15614655.
   Google Scholar
• Churski, P., and R. Perdał. 2016. “Where Do Cohesion Policy Funds Flow and Do They Have any Impact? The Polish Lesson.” Barometr Regionalny 14 (3): 7–24.
   Google Scholar
• Downs, A. 2005. “Smart Growth: Why We Discuss It More Than We Do It.” Journal of the American Planning Association 71 (4): 367–378. doi:10.1080/01944360508976707.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drucker, P. 1993. Post-Capitalist Society. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Dyker, D. A. 2004. Catching up and Falling Behind: Post-Communist Transformation in Historical Perspective. London: Imperial College Press.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/policy/themes/research-innovation/ (30.06.2017).
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 1998. Regional Innovation Systems: Designing for the Future – REGIS, Coordinator: Philip Cooke, DG XII – Science, Research and Development.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2010. Europe 2020. A Strategy for Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive Growth. COM (2010) 2020 final, Brussels, 3 March 2010.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2018. European Innovation Scoreboard 2018. European Union.
   Google Scholar
• Florida, R. 1995. “Toward the Learning Region.” Futures 27 (5): 527–536. doi: 10.1016/0016-3287(95)00021-N
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foray, D. 2015. Smart Specialisation. Opportunities and Challenges for Regional Innovation Policy. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Foray, D., P. A. David, and B. H. Hall. 2011. “Smart Specialization. From Academic Idea to Political Instrument, the Surprising Career of a Concept and the Difficulties Involved in Its Implementation”. MTEI Working Paper, November. Lausanne: MTEI.
   Google Scholar
• Foray, D., and B. Å. Lundvall. 1996. “The Knowledge-based Economy: From the Economics of Knowledge to the Learning Society.” In Employment and Growth in the Knowledge-Based Economy, edited by D. Foray and B. Å. Lundvall, 11–32. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Foray, D., and B. Van Ark. 2007. “Smart Specialisation in a Truly Integrated Research Area is the Key to Attracting More R&D to Europe.” Knowledge Economists Policy Brief No. 1.
   Google Scholar
• Fornahl, D., and T. Brenner. 2003. Cooperation, Networks and Institutions in Regional Innovation Systems. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Frenken, K., F. V. Oort, and T. Verburg. 2007. “Related Variety, Unrelated Variety and Regional Economic Growth.” Regional Studies 41 (5): 685–697. doi: 10.1080/00343400601120296
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hellwig, Z. 1968. “Zastosowanie metody taksonomicznej do typologicznego podziału krajów ze względu na poziom ich rozwoju oraz zasoby i strukturę wykwalifikowanych kadr.” Przegląd Statystyczny 4: 307–327.
   Google Scholar
• Howells, J. 2000. “Knowledge, Innovation and Location.” In Knowledge, Space, Economy, edited by J. R. Bryson, P. W. Daniels, N. Henry, and J. Pollard, 50–62. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
   Google Scholar
• Hwang, C. L., and K. Yoon. 1981. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. New York: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Iammarino, S., A. Rodríguez-Pose, and M. Storper. 2018. “Regional inequality in Europe: evidence, theory and policy implications,” Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1817, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography.
   Google Scholar
• Krueger, R., and D. Gibbs. 2008. “‘Third Wave’ Sustainability? Smart Growth and Regional Development in the USA.” Regional Studies 42 (9): 1263–1274. doi:10.1080/00343400801968403.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, D. S., and T. Lemieux. 2010. “Regression Discontinuity Designs in Economics.” Journal of Economic Literature. American Economic Association 48 (2): 281–355. doi:10.3386/w14723 doi: 10.1257/jel.48.2.281
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lever, W. F. 2002. “The Knowledge Base, Innovation and Urban Economic Growth.” In The Emergence of the Knowledge Economy. A Regional Perspective, edited by Z. J. Acs, H. L. F. de Groot, and P. Nijkamp, 107–111. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Lundvall, B. A. ed. 1992. National Systems of Innovations – Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Pinter Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Machlup, F. 1962. The Production and Distribution of Knowledge in the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maillat, D. 1995. “Milieux innovateurs et dynamique territorial.” In Économie industrielle et économie spatial, edited by A. Rallet and A. Torre, 211–232. Paris: Economica.
   Google Scholar
• Markowska, M., and D. Strahl. 2012. “European Regional Space Classification Regarding Smart Growth Level.”.” Comparative Economic Research. Central and Eastern Europe 15 (4): 233–247. doi:10.2478/v10103-012-0038-2.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, R., and P. Sunley. 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
• McCann, P., and R. Ortega-Argilés. 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
• Molle, W. 2011. European Economic Governance. The Quest for Consistency and Effectiveness. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Moulaert, F., and F. Sekia. 2003. “Territorial Innovation Models: A Critical Survey.” Regional Studies 37: 289–302. doi:10.1080/0034340032000065442.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murzyn, D. 2018. Kierunki wpływu funduszy Unii Europejskiej na rozwój inteligentny, zrównoważony i sprzyjający włączeniu społecznemu w Polsce po 2006 roku. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
   Google Scholar
• Muscio, A., A. Reid, and L. Rivera Leon. 2015. “An Empirical Test of the Regional Innovation Paradox: Can Smart Specialization Overcome the Paradox in Central and Eastern Europe?” Journal of European Economic Policy Reform 18 (2): 153–171. doi:10.1080/17487870.2015.1013545.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson, R. 1993. National Innovation Systems. Oxford: Oxford UP.
   Google Scholar
• Obrębalski, M. 2006. “Mierniki rozwoju regionalnego.” In Metody oceny rozwoju regionalnego, edited by D. Strahl, 26–37. Wrocław: Wyd. AE im. Oskara Langego we Wrocławiu.
   Google Scholar
• Oughton, C., M. Landabaso, and K. Morgan. 2002. “The Regional Innovation Paradox: Innovation Policy and Industrial Policy.” The Journal of Technology Transfer 27 (1): 97–110. doi:10.1023/A:1013104805703.
   Google Scholar
• Piech, K. 2009. Wiedza i innowacje w rozwoju gospodarczym: w kierunku pomiaru i współczesnej roli państwa. Warszawa: Instytut Wiedzy i Innowacji.
   Google Scholar
• Piech, K., and S. Radosevic. 2006. The Knowledge-based Economy in Central and Eastern Europe. Countries and Industries in a Process of Change. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, M. E. 1990. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pylak, K. 2015. “Changing Innovation Process Models: A Chance to Break out of Path Dependency for Less Developed Regions.” Regional Studies, Regional Science 2 (1): 46–72. doi:10.1080/21681376.2014.979433.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radosevic, S. 2016. “The Role of Public Research in Economic Development.” In Science, Research and Innovation Performance of the EU, 119–139. Brussels: DG for Research and Innovation, European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Schultz, T. W. 1961. “Investment in Human Capital.” The American Economic Review 51 (1): 1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schumpeter, J. A. 1934. The Theory of Economic Development. An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Reprint: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Warszawa 1960.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. 1981. “Public Action and the Quality of Life in Developing Countries.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 43 (4): 287–319. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0084.1981.mp43004001.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szostak, E. 2015. “Inteligentne specjalizacje w rozwoju region (Smart Specialization in Development of the Region).” Studia Ekonomiczne 209: 209–218.
   Google Scholar
• Thistlethwaite, D. L., and D. T. Campbell. 1960. “Regression-discontinuity Analysis: An Alternative to the Ex-Post Facto Experiment.” Journal of Educational Psychology 51: 309–317. doi:10.1037/h0044319.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar