Search

Although economic geography has made considerable progress in explaining the emergence of new industrial development paths, a number of issues have yet to be sufficiently explored. The purpose of this article is to contribute to economic geography research on path creation by developing a conceptual framework that specifies key conditions and reinforcing mechanisms for path creation, on the one hand, and barriers to the materialization of such conditions and mechanisms, on the other hand. As such, the framework moves beyond firm-centric perspectives and argues that path creation needs to be understood as a collective endeavor incorporating both firm and nonfirm actors. By implication, this necessitates an understanding of the broader contexts that shape path creation processes, including how the dynamics of an emerging path are affected by the dynamics of established paths. The authors employ this framework to analyze Norway's offshore wind power (OWP) industry. Their analysis reveals that an initial enabling context for OWP path creation turned into more constrained conditions. Similar to findings from a number of other studies, they identify branching between related sectors as a primary path creation mechanism. However, they find that this mechanism is vulnerable to shifting contextual conditions, which for various reasons resulted in the studied emerging path losing resources and legitimacy, thus implying potential negative path interdependence. The authors also identify barriers to path creation in the institutional environment, particularly in terms of lack of policy coherence in support for key resource formation processes that are pivotal for path creation processes to generate sustained momentum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of the article is to investigate innovation collaboration among firms in different types of regions in Norway. Informed by literature on innovation network and regional development, the authors examine whether firms in some regions participate more frequently in innovation collaboration than firms in other regions. They also discuss regional differences in type of innovation collaboration. The analysis is based on data from the Sixth Norwegian Community Innovation Survey (CIS), collected by Statistics Norway in 2008, which provided both descriptive statistics and could be used for logistic regression analysis. Key findings are that the likelihood of innovation collaboration is inversely related to region size, and innovation collaboration is especially prevalent among firms in rural regions. A further finding is that firms in rural regions are more involved in bridging linkages (collaboration with different type of actors) than firms in the capital and metropolitan regions. These differences are attributed to the ‘organizational thinness’ of rural regions, which indicate as lack of specific resources in the regions and therefore creates a need for external collaborators. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

While the concept of ‘lock-in’ has been popular as a catch-all concept for explaining negative externalities associated with entrenched institutions in old industrial regions, recent research suggests a more nuanced account centred on path-dependent evolution. More specifically, regional economic development and restructuring might be better understood if lock-in is studied in relation to other potentially co-evolving processes, such as economic adjustment and renewal. The article indicates patterns of structural change and reported innovations, and the authors question how lock-in has co-evolved with various processes of adjustment and renewal in the old industrial area of the Grenland region in Norway, focusing on the period between 2000 and 2011. They pay specific attention to various measures of restructuring in the process manufacturing industry, the related mechanical manufacturing industry, and the emergence of a local information and communications technology (ICT) industry. While the Grenland region displays elements of economic lock-in and a continued dependence on process manufacturing, it has experienced substantial structural shifts that suggest regional renewal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article investigates the long-term effects of 10 restructuring programmes (RPs) in Norway. RP is a policy instrument rooted in endogenous theory aimed at peripheral regions with particularly negative development trajectories. The purposes of RPs are to contribute to the development of new jobs, improve business development capacity, and diversify local economic structures. The authors' analysis is informed by the concept of regional resilience, which seeks to capture the differential and uneven ability of places and regions to react, respond, and cope with change. Through methodological triangulation the analysis covers changes in employment, entrepreneurial activity, and ‘soft factors’ such as endogenous development capacity. The analysis reveals that regions with RPs demonstrate long-term growth and increased industrial and relational diversity. The RP policy instrument thus appears to have contributed to enhanced resilience in different ways in the 10 case regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy instruments evolve over time. The authors elaborate on the development of an important initiative in regional policy in Norway, referred to as ‘the restructuring instrument’. The Norwegian Government established the instrument in 1983, and it is still used as a means for addressing job losses in key industries in rural areas. The authors describe development trends and dominant modes of policy regulation in Western economies in the post-war period in relation to the profiles of local restructuring programmes. The first case, the 1988 restructuring programme in Mo i Rana, demonstrates the influence of Keynesian thinking in a Fordist mode of accumulation. The second case, the 1999 restructuring programme in Åmot, links neo-Schumpeterian policy thinking to post-Fordist economies. The third case, the 2008 restructuring programme in Ålvik, illustrates the operation of the instrument in a more regionalised world of tailor-made solutions. The article indicates a causal relationship between hegemonic ideas about policy formulation in the post-war Western economies and policy-practice at the local level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper argues that no single formula exists for how universities can stimulate innovation activity and industrial development in a particular region. The type of university-industry cooperation must be fined-tuned according to the knowledge base of the university and to the dominant mode of innovation in the regional industry. This article discusses two different modes of innovation: science, technology, innovation (STI) and doing, using, interacting (DUI). The unit of analysis is innovation and cooperation with universities in two regional industries in Norway, which are dominated by the two modes of innovation: STI (marine biotechnology in Tromsø) and DUI (oil and gas equipment suppliers in Agder). The empirical analyses demonstrate the different roles that universities play in these two regional industries. The University of Tromsø is the main organization behind the development of the marine biotechnology industry in Tromsø and is an important knowledge node and source of biotechnology spin-offs. Equipment suppliers in Agder have become world leaders in some niches, almost without research cooperation with universities. A general lesson is that the dominant mode of innovation in a regional industry makes a difference to the role universities can play in stimulating the development of the industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyses to which extent and in what way the Oslo region may be considered as an innovative and dynamic city in the Norwegian context. Although the European Union Community Innovation Survey (CIS II) concludes that the Oslo region has the same share of innovative firms as the national average, other data sources convincingly demonstrate that Oslo is an innovative city in the Norwegian context, having for example comparatively many 'radically' innovative firms and a high rate of new firm formation. However, knowledge organizations in Oslo do not function as hubs in wider innovation systems to any large degree. The empirical results may most fruitfully be explained with reference to a 'bottom-up' theoretical approach, that considers specific local and regional resources, relations and routines as important sources of innovation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]