The complexity of contemporary innovation policy and its governance in Finland

References

• Anttiroiko, A.-V. 2016. “City-As-a-Platform: The Rise of Participatory Innovation Platforms in Finnish Cities.” Sustainability 8 (9): 922. doi:10.3390/Su8090922.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arrow, K. J. 1962. “The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing.” The Review of Economic Studies 29 (3): 155–173. doi: 10.2307/2295952
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asheim, B. T. 1995. “Regionale Innovasjonssystem - en Sosialt og Territorielt Forankret Teknologipolitikk.” Nordisk Samhällsgeografisk Tidskrift 20: 17–34.
   Google Scholar
• Asheim, B. T., R. Boschma, and P. Cooke. 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. T., and L. Coenen. 2005. “Knowledge Bases and Regional Innovation Systems: Comparing Nordic Clusters.” Research Policy 34 (8): 1173–1190. doi:10.1016/J.Respol.2005.03.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Autio, E., M. Kenney, P. Mustar, D. Siegel, and M. Wright. 2014. “Entrepreneurial Innovation: The Importance of Context.” Research Policy 43 (7): 1097–1108. doi:10.1016/J.Respol.2014.01.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Autio, Rannikko, Handelberg and Kiuru 2014. “Analyses on the Finnish High-Growth Entrepreneurship Ecosystem”. Aalto University publication series BUSINESS + ECONOMY 1/2014. Helsinki: Unigrafia Oy.
   Google Scholar
• Autio, E., H. Rannikko, P. Kiuru, K. Luukkonen, R. Orenius, J. Handelberg, A. Bergenwall, et al. 2013. “The Vigo Programme Mid-Term Evaluation”, Ministry of Employment and the Economy, Report 4/2013.
   Google Scholar
• Bathelt, H., A. Malmberg, and P. Maskell. 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
• Borrás, S. 2009. . “The Widening and Deepening of Innovation Policy: What Conditions Provide for Effective Governance?”, CIRCLE Working Paper 2/2009, 1–28.
   Google Scholar
• Borrás, S., and C. Edquist. 2013. “The Choice of Innovation Policy Instruments.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 80 (8): 1513–1522. doi:10.1016/J.Techfore.2013.03.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. 2015. “Towards an Evolutionary Perspective on Regional Resilience.” Regional Studies 49 (5): 733–751. doi:10.1080/00343404.2014.959481.
   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
• Cooke, P. 1992. “Regional Innovation Systems: Competitive Regulation in the New Europe.” Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences 23 (3): 365–382.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, P. 2007. “To Construct Regional Advantage from Innovation Systems First Build Policy Platforms.” European Planning Studies 15 (2): 180–194. doi: 10.1080/09654310601078671
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, P., M. G. Uranga, and G. Etxebarria. 1997. “Regional Innovation Systems: Institutional and Organizational Dimensions.” Research Policy 26 (4–5): 475–491. doi:10.1016/S0048-73339700025-5. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(97)00025-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dutta, S., B. Lanvin, and S. Wunsch-Vincent. 2015. The Global Innovation Index 2015. Winning with Global Innovation. Ithaca, Fontainebleau and Geneva. DOI: 978-2-9522210-8-5.
   Google Scholar
• Edler, J., and J. Fagerberg. 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., and L. Georghiou. 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
• Edquist, C. 1997. Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions, and Organizations. Science, Technology & the IPE. London: Pinter Publishers/Cassell Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Edquist, C. 2011. “Design of Innovation Policy Through Diagnostic Analysis: Identification of Systemic Problems Or Failures.” Industrial and Corporate Change 20 (6): 1725–1753. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtr060
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edquist, C. 2016. “The Swedish National Innovation Council: Innovation Policy Governance to Replace Linearity with Holism Papers”, Papers in Innovation Studies Paper, 24/2016.
   Google Scholar
• Edquist, C. 2019. “Towards a Holistic Innovation Policy: Can the Swedish National Innovation Council (NIC) be a Role Model?” Research Policy 48 (4): 869–879. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edquist, C., T. Luukkonen, and M. Sotarauta. 2009. “Broad-Based Innovation Policy”. Evaluation of the Finnish National Innovation System – Full Report., Pp. 11–54. Taloustieto Oy, Helsinki University Print: Helsinki.
   Google Scholar
• Flanagan, K., E. Uyarra, and M. Laranja. 2011. “Reconceptualising the ‘Policy Mix’ For Innovation.” Research Policy 40 (5): 702–713. doi:10.1016/J.Respol.2011.02.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foray, D., P. a. David, and B. Hall. 2009. “Smart Specialisation – The Concept.” Knowledge Economists Policy Brief 9 (85): 1–5. doi:10.1016/J.Pcad.2013.03.008.
   Google Scholar
• Foray, D., P. a. David, and B. H. Hall. 2011. “Smart Specialisation - From Academic Idea to Political Instrument, the Surprising Career of a Concept and the Difficulties Involved in Its Implementation”, MTEI Working Paper, 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, C. 1987. Technology and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. London, UK: Pinter Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Geels, F. W. 2004. “From Sectoral Systems of Innovation to Socio-Technical Systems: Insights About Dynamics and Change from Sociology and Institutional Theory.” Research Policy 33 (6): 897–920. doi:10.1016/J.Respol.2004.01.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geels, F. W. 2005. Technological Transitions and System Innovations: A Co-Evolutionary and Socio-Technical Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Georghiou, L., J. Edler, E. Uyarra, and J. Yeow. 2014. “Policy Instruments for Public Procurement of Innovation: Choice, Design and Assessment.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 86: 1–12. doi:10.1016/J.Techfore.2013.09.018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Government Research and Innovation Council. 2014. Uudistava Suomi: Tutkimus- ja innovaatiopolitiikan suunta 2015–2020. Accessed December 12, 2016. http://Valtioneuvosto.Fi/Tin/Aineistoja.
   Google Scholar
• The Government Science and Technology Council. 2000. Katsaus: Tiedon ja osaamisen haasteet, 2000. Accessed December 12, 2016. http://Valtioneuvosto.Fi/Tin/Aineistoja.
   Google Scholar
• The Government Science and Technology Council. 2003. Osaaminen, innovaatiot ja kansainvälistyminen. Accessed December 12, 2016. http://Valtioneuvosto.Fi/Tin/Aineistoja.
   Google Scholar
• Hämäläinen, T. J. 2015. “Governance Solutions for Wicked Problems: Metropolitan Innovation Ecosystems as Frontrunners to Sustainable Well-Being.” Technology Innovation Management Review 5 (10): 31–41. doi: 10.22215/timreview/935
   Google Scholar
• Harmaakorpi, V. 2004. Building a Competitive Regional Innovation Environment – The Regional Development Platform Method as a Tool for Regional Innovation Policy. PhD diss. Doctoral Dissertation Series 2004/1, Helsinki University of Technology, Lahti Center.
   Google Scholar
• Hollanders, H., Es-Sadki, N., Bugilescu, B., Rivera Leon, L., Griniece, E., and Roman, L. 2014. Regional Innovation Scoreboard 2014. doi:10.2769/88893
   Google Scholar
• Isenberg, D. J. 2010. “How to Start an Entrepreneurial Revolution.” Harvard Business Review 88 (6): 41–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kautonen, M. 2006. The Regional Innovation System Bottom-Up: A Finnish Perspective. a Firm-Level Study with Theoretical and Methodological Reflections. Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 1167, Tampere University Press, Tampere.
   Google Scholar
• Klein Woolthuis, R., M. Lankhuizen, and V. Gilsing. 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
• Koski, O., K. Husso, P. Kutinlahti, M. Huuskonen, and S. Nissinen. 2019. “Outlook for Finland's Innovation Policy.” Publications of the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment 2019: 18.
   Google Scholar
• Krugman, P. R., and M. Obstfeld. 1991. International Economics: Theory and Policy. 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Addison Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhlmann, S., P. Shapira, and R. E. H. M. Smits. 2010. “Introduction. A Systemic Perspective: The Innovation Policy Dance.” In The Theory and Practice of Innovation Policy: An International Research Handbook, edited by S. Kuhlmann, P. Shapira, and R. E. H. M. Smits, 1–22. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Kuusi, T., M. Pajarinen, P. Rouvinen, and T. Valkonen. 2016. Arvio T&K-Verokannusteen Vaikutuksista Yritysten Toimintaan Suomessa. Helsinki: The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
   Google Scholar
• Lähteenmäki-Smith, K., K. Halme, T. Lemola, K. Piirainen, K. Viljamaa, K. Haila, a. Kotiranta, et al. 2013. “Licence to SHOK?” - External Evaluation of the Strategic Centres for Science, Technology and Innovation. MEE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Lahtinen, H., H. Pekkala, K. Halme, V. Salminen, V. Härmälä, J. Wiikeri, H. Lamminkoski, et al. 2016. “Growth factors and bottlenecks for business start-ups”. Publications of the Government's analysis, assessment and research activities 30/2016.
   Google Scholar
• Laranja, M., E. Uyarra, and K. Flanagan. 2008. “Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation: Translating Rationales Into Regional Policies in a Multi-Level Setting.” Research Policy 37: 823–835. doi:10.1016/J.Respol.2008.03.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemola, T. 2002. “Convergence of National Science and Technology Policies: The Case of Finland.” Research Policy 31 (8–9): 1481–1490. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00077-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemola, T. 2020. Kohti Uutta Tutkimus- ja Innovaatiopolitiikkaa – Suomen Tiede-, Teknologia- ja Innovaatiopolitiikan Kehityskaari 1960-Luvulta 2020-Luvulle. Tampere: Vastapaino.
   Google Scholar
• Lundvall, B-Å. 1992. National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Pinter Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Lundvall, B-Å, and S. Borrás. 2005. “Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy.” In The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, edited by J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, and R. R. Nelson, 599–631. Oxford: University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mazzucato, M. 2016. “From Market Fixing to Market-Creating: A New Framework for Innovation Policy.” Industry and Innovation 23 (2): 140–156. doi:10.1080/13662716.2016.1146124.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miettinen, R. 2002. The National Innovation System. Scientific Concept or Political Rhetoric. Helsinki: Edita.
   Google Scholar
• Miettinen, R. 2013. Innovation, Human Capabilities, and Democracy: Towards an Enabling Welfare State. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Employment and the Economy. 2008. Proposal for Finland’s National Innovation Strategy. Helsinki.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, J. F. 1993. “Predators and Prey: A New Ecology of Competition.” Harvard Business Review, May/June: 75–86.
   Google Scholar
• Niinikoski, M.-L. 2011. Innovation: Formation of a Policy Field and a Policy-Making Practice. PhD diss. Aalto University Publication Series. Doctoral Dissertations, 1799-4934, 40/2011.
   Google Scholar
• Niinikoski, M.-L., and S. Kuhlmann. 2015. “In Discursive Negotiation: Knowledge and the Formation of Finnish Innovation Policy.” Science and Public Policy 42 (1): 86–106. doi:10.1093/Scipol/Scu003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niinikoski, M.-L., J. Lunabba, T. Raivio, Riikka Lehti, and P. Pessala. 2012. Yliopistolakiuudistuksen Vaikutusten Arviointi. Helsinki: Opetus- ja kulttuuriministeriö.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2017. OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: Finland 2017. Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Ormala, E. 2019. “Securing Finland’s competitiveness and economic growth in the 2020s”. Publications of the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment 2019:1.
   Google Scholar
• Papaioannou, T., D. V. Wield, and J. C. Chataway. 2009. “Knowledge Ecologies and Ecosystems? An Empirically Grounded Reflection on Recent Developments in Innovation Systems Theory.” Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 27 (2): 319–339. doi:10.1068/c0832.
   Google Scholar
• Pelkonen, Nieminen and Lehenkari 2014. “Evaluation of the Research and Innovation Council of Finland”. Publications of the Ministry of Education and Culture 2014:6.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, M. E. 1998. “Clusters and the New Economics of Competition.” Harvard Business Review 76 (6): 77–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rinkinen, S. 2015. “Smart Regional Innovation Policies - from Cluster Approaches to Place-Based Policies.” International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development 6 (2): 204–218. doi:10.1504/IJIRD.2015.069719.
   Google Scholar
• Rinkinen, S. 2016. Clusters, Innovation Systems and Ecosystems: Studies on Innovation Policy’s Concept Evolution and Approaches for Regional Renewal. Lappeenranta: Lappeenranta University of Technology, University Press. Acta Universitatis Lappeenrantaensis 728.
   Google Scholar
• Rinkinen, S., and V. Harmaakorpi. 2017. “The Business Ecosystem Concept in Innovation Policy Context: Building a Conceptual Framework.” Innovation: the European Journal of Social Science Research, 1–17. doi:10.1080/13511610.2017.1300089.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rotmans, J., R. Kemp, and M. Van Asselt. 2001. “More Evolution Than Revolution: Transition Management in Public Policy.” Foresight (los Angeles, Calif ) 3 (1): 15–31. doi:10.1108/14636680310471253.
   Google Scholar
• Sabel, C., and A. Saxenian. 2008. A Fugitive Success Finland’s Economic Future. Helsinki: Sitra.
   Google Scholar
• Schumpeter, J. a. 1934. The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schumpeter, J. a. 1942. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper & Brothers.
   Google Scholar
• Simmie, J. 2014. “Regional Economic Resilience: A Schumpeterian Perspective.” Raumforschung Und Raumordnung 72 (2): 103–116. doi:10.1007/S13147-014-0274-Y.
   Google Scholar
• Slembeck, T. 1997. “The Formation of Economic Policy: A Cognitive-Evolutionary Approach to Policy-Making.” Constitutional Political Economy 8 (3): 225–254. doi: 10.1023/A:1009027913985
   Google Scholar
• Smith, K. R. 2006. “Building an Innovation Ecosystem: Process, Culture and Competencies.” Industry and Higher Education 20 (4): 219–224. doi:10.5367/000000006778175801.
   Google Scholar
• Solow, R. M. 1956. “A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 70 (1): 65–94. doi: 10.2307/1884513
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sorvisto, P., and M. Sotarauta. 2016. “Venture Capital Ecosystem in Finland – Fragile and Thin.” In Innovation Ecosystems, Competencies and Leadership, edited by M. Sotarauta, T. Heinonen, P. Sorvisto, and J. Kolehmainen, 68–78. Helsinki. Tekes Review 329/2016.
   Google Scholar
• Sotarauta, M., and M. Kautonen. 2007. “Co-Evolution of the Finnish National and Local Innovation and Science Arenas: Towards a Dynamic Understanding of Multi-Level Governance.” Regional Studies 41 (8): 1085–1098. doi:10.1080/00343400701292284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sotarauta, M., and K.-J. Kosonen. 2013. “Customized Innovation Policies and the Regions: Digital Content Services and Intelligent Machinery in Finland.” European Urban and Regional Studies 20 (2): 258–274. doi:10.1177/0969776411428499.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stam, E. 2015. “Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Regional Policy: A Sympathetic Critique.” European Planning Studies 23 (9): 1759–1769. doi:10.1080/09654313.2015.1061484.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tödtling, F., and M. Trippl. 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
• Tukiainen, T., S. Leminen, and M. Westerlund. 2015. “Cities as Collaborative Innovation Platforms.” Technology Innovation Management Review 5 (10): 16–23. doi: 10.22215/timreview/933
   Google Scholar
• Uyarra, E. 2010. “What Is Evolutionary About “Regional Systems of Innovation”? Implications for Regional Policy.” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 20 (1): 115–137. doi:10.1007/S00191-009-0135-Y.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uyarra, E., and K. Flanagan. 2010. “From Regional Systems of Innovation to Regions as Innovation Policy Spaces.” Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 28 (4): 681–696. doi:10.1068/C0961.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veugelers, R., K. Aiginger, D. Breznitz, C. Edquist, G. Murray, G. Ottaviano, A. Hyytinen, et al. 2009. Evaluation of the Finnish National Innovation System – Full Report.
   Google Scholar
• Voß, J.-P., D. Bauknecht, and R. Kemp. 2006. Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Weber, K. M., and H. Rohracher. 2012. “Legitimizing Research, Technology and Innovation Policies for Transformative Change.” Research Policy 41 (6): 1037–1047. doi:10.1016/J.Respol.2011.10.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Werker, C., and S. Athreye. 2004. “Marshal’s Disciples: Knowledge and Innovation Driving Regional Economic Development and Growth.” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 14 (5): 505–523. doi:10.1007/S00191-004-0237-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar