Smart Specialisation in Moderately Innovative Regions – A Qualitative Study of Poland and Lithuania

• Authors: Svetlana Keil

Title variants

PL

Inteligentna specjalizacja w regionach umiarkowanie innowacyjnych – badanie jakościowe Polski i Litwy

Abstracts

PL

Kraje członkowskie Unii Europejskiej (UE) musiały przygotować strategie inteligentnej specjalizacji (S3) zgodnie z warunkowością ex-ante, by móc korzystać z unijnych funduszy strukturalnych i inwestycyjnych (EFSI). Podejście S3 było nowatorskie i szczególnie trudne dla regionów uznawanych za umiarkowanych innowatorów. Niniejsze badanie jest częścią większego projektu badawczego i ma na celu zbadanie, w jaki sposób nowe wymogi dotyczące kształtowania polityki innowacyjnej wpływają na istniejące tradycje tworzenia polityki w tego typu regionach oraz w jaki sposób przyjęto S3 w kontekście lokalnego otoczenia instytucjonalnego. Ponadto badanie ma na celu wyjaśnienie uzasadnienia głównych wyzwań związanych z S3. Przypadki Polski i Litwy są analizowane metodą jakościową, na podstawie wywiadów i analizy istniejących dokumentów. Perspektywy teorii strukturacji i teorii neoinstytucjonalnej są stosowane do interpretacji danych. Podejście i wyzwania w obu krajach wydają się początkowo podobne, jednak po głębszej analizie pojawiają się różnice w zakresie złożoności procesów, wdrażania i oceny S3.

EN

Smart specialisation (S3) strategies had to be prepared by the European Union (EU) member states in compliance with ex-ante conditionality to receive EU Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF). The approach of S3 has been novel and especially challenging for the regions regarded as moderate innovators1. This study is a part of a larger research project and it aims to explore how novel innovation policy-making requirements affect existing policy-making traditions in such regions and how S3 has been adopted in the context of the local institutional environment. Furthermore, the study seeks to explain the rationale behind the main challenges for the S3. The cases of Poland and Lithuania are analysed using a qualitative method, based on interviews and analysis of existing documents. Structuration theory and neo-institutional theory perspectives are applied to interpret the data. At the first sight, approaches and challenges in both countries seem alike; however, when zoomed closer, the differences emerge in terms of complexity of the processes, implementation, and evaluation of S3.

Keywords

EN

smart specialisation; entrepreneurial discovery process (EDP); innovation; policy; innovation systems

PL

inteligentna specjalizacja; proces przedsiębiorczego odkrywania (PPO); polityka innowacji; systemy innowacji

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydział Nauk Ekonomicznych
• Journal: Studia i Materiały
• Year: 2019
• Issue: 1(30)
• Pages: 5-19

Dates

published

2019

Contributors

author

Svetlana Keil

• Faculty of Management, University of Warsaw

• https://orcid.org/0000000231660103

References

• Barley, S.R., & Tolbert, P.S. (1997). Institutionalization and structuration: Studying the links between action and institution. Organization Studies, 18(1), 93–117.
• Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2015). Business research methods. USA: Oxford University Press.
• Capello, R., & Kroll, H. (2016). From theory to practice in smart specialization strategy: Emerging limits and possible future trajectories. European Planning Studies, 24(8), 1393–1406.
• Cooke, P., Uranga, M.G., & Etxebarria, G. (1998). Regional systems of innovation: An evolutionary perspective. Environment and Planning A, 30(9), 1563–1584.
• DiMaggio, P.J., & Powell, W.W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
• Doloreux, D., & Parto, S. (2005). Regional innovation systems: Current discourse and unresolved issues. Technology in Society, 27(2), 133–153.
• Dunauskas, S., Jaujininkas, V., Lapienis, J., Reimeris, R., & Valatka, V. (2017). Sumanios specializacijos pažanga. Pirmoji ataskaita. Vilnius. Dunauskas, S., Izgorodin, A., Jakubavičius, A., Kamaitis, P., Penelyte, I., Rakštyte-Hoimian, J., & Žemaityte, R. (2018). Sumanios specializacijos igyvendinimo pažangos vertinimas. LIETUVOS RESPUBLIKOS UKIO MINISTERIJA, VŠI MOKSLO IR STUDIJU STEBESENOS IR ANALIZES CENTRAS. Retrieved from https://strata.gov.lt/images/tyrimai/sumanios-specializacijos-pazangos-vertinimas.pdf.
• European Commission (S3 Platform). (n.d.). Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. Retrieved on 2 December 2019 from http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/entrepreneurial-discovery-edp.
• European Commission (Regional Policy). (n.d.). EU Regional and Urban Development, Regional Policy. Retrieved on 25 January 2019 from https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/atlas/programmes/.
• Edquist, C. (2005). Systems of innovation: Perspectives and challenges. In The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford University Press. ERAWATCH Network. (2006).
• ERAWATCH country specialisation report. Country: Lithuania. ERAWATCH Network. (2006). ERAWATCH country specialisation report. Country: Poland.
• Esinvesticijos.lt: 2014–2020 EU Investment in Lithuania. Retrieved on 25 January 2019 from from https://esinvesticijos.lt/lt//finansavimas/finansavimoskyrimo-schema.
• Eurostat. (n.d.). Retrieved on 25 January 2019 from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/statistics-a-z/abc.
• Foray, D. (2015). Smart specialisation. Opportunities and challenges for regional innovation policy. London and New York: Routledge.
• Gianelle, C., Guzzo, F., & Mieszkowski, K. (2019, May). Smart specialisation from concept to practice. Smart specialisation – JRC policy insights, JRC116297.
• Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
• Górzyński, M., & Jakubiak, M. (2009). ERAWATCH country report 2008. An assessment of research system and policies. Poland.
• Gray, B., Purdy, J.M., & Ansari, S. (2015). From interactions to institutions: Microprocesses of framing and mechanisms for the structuring of institutional fields. Academy of Management Review, 40(1), 115–143.
• Hinings, C.R., Greenwood, R., Reay, T., & Suddaby, R. (2004). The dynamics of change in organizational fields. In M.S. Poole & A.H. Van de Ven, Handbook of organizational change and innovation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Jarzabkowski, P. (2008). Shaping strategy as a structuration process. Academy of Management Journal, 51(4), 621–650.
• Kriaucioniene, M. (2009). ERAWATCH country report 2008. An assessment of research system and policies. Lithuania.
• Klincewicz, K. (2014). ERAWATCH country reports 2013: Poland. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
• Klincewicz, K., Marczewska, M., & Szkuta, K. (2018). RIO country report 2017: Poland. Research and Innovation Observatory country report series. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
• Kroll, H. (2015). Efforts to implement smart specialization in Practice-Leading unlike horses to the water. European Planning Studies, 23(10), 2079–2098.
• Kroll, H. (2019). Eye to eye with the innovation paradox: Why smart specialization is no simple solution to policy design. European Planning Studies, 27(5), 932–951.
• Lawrence, T.B., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutions and institutional work. In The SAGE handbook of organization studies (pp. 215–254).
• Lawrence, T., Suddaby, R. , & Leca, B. (2011). Institutional work: Refocusing institutional studies of organization. Journal of Management Inquiry, 20(1), 52–58.
• Liu, Z., Yin, Y., Liu, W., & Dunford, M. (2015). Visualizing the intellectual structure and evolution of innovation systems research: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 103(1), 135–158.
• Marklund, G., Naczinsky, C., Ziarko, W., Winckler, G., Puukka, J., File, J.M., … & Melin, G. (2017). Peer review: Poland’s higher education and science system: Horizon 2020 policy support facility.
• Marques, P., & Morgan, K. (2018). The heroic assumptions of smart specialisation: A sympathetic critique of regional innovation policy. In New avenues for regional innovation systems–theoretical advances, empirical cases and policy lessons (pp. 275–293).
• Meyer, J.W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.
• Mieszkowski, K., & Kardas, M. (2015). Facilitating an entrepreneurial discovery process for smart specialisation. The case of Poland. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 6(2), 357–384. doi:10.1007/s13132-015-0242-y.
• Ministerstwo Rozwoju (MR). (2016). Krajowa inteligentna specjalizacja. Retrieved on 2 December 2018 from http://www.smart.gov.pl/pl/monitorowaniwyniki.
• Ministerstwo Inwestycji i Rozwoju, Departament Koordynacji Wdrażania Funduszy Unii Europejskiej. (2019). Wybór projektów w ramach krajowych i regionalnych programów na lata 2014–2020 (stan na 30 czerwca 2019 roku). Warszawa.
• Mokslo ir studiju stebesenos ir analizes centras (MOSTA): sumani2020.lt Retrieved on 2 December 2018 from http://sumani2020.lt/naujienos/98-ekspertai-ivertino-sumanios-specializacijoskrypciu-perspektyvas.
• Nill, J. (2008). ERAWATCH analytical country report 2007: Poland.
• North, D.C. (1991). Institutions. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 97–112.
• OECD. (2016). OECD reviews of innovation policy: Lithuania 2016. Paris: OECD Publishing.
• Orlikowski, W. J. (1996). Improvising organizational transformation over time: A situated change perspective. Information Systems Research, (7)1, 63–92.
• Otręba-Szklarczyk, A., Pierzchała, M., Strzebońska, A., Szklarczyk, D., Ulatowska, R., Winogrodzka, D., & Worek, B. (2017). Ewaluacja ex-ante projektu pozakonkursowego „Monitoring krajowej inteligentnej specjalizacji” Programu Operacyjnego Inteligentny Rozwój 2014–2020: raport końcowy z badania ewaluacyjnego. Warszawa-Kraków.
• Paliokaite, A. (2015). Stairway to excellence country report: Lithuania. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies.
• Paliokaite, A. (2017). Specific support for Lithuania – Background report. Horizon 2020 policy support facility. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
• Paliokaite, A., Martinaitis, Ž., & Reimeris, R. (2015). Foresight methods for smart specialisation strategy development in Lithuania. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 101, 185–199.
• Paliokaite, A., Petraite, M., & Gonzalez Verdesoto, E. (2018). RIO country report 2017: Lithuania. Research and Innovation Observatory country report series. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
• Polish Chamber of Commerce for High Technology. (2011). Foresight Technologiczny Przemysłu InSight 2030. Tom III – Badanie Delphy i konsultacje społeczne. Retrieved on 7 December 2018 from http://iztech.pl/studiaanalizy/366-foresight-terchnologiczny-przemysu-insight-2030.
• Program Operacyjny Inteligentny Rozwój na lata 2014-2020 (POIR). Retrieved on 24 January 2019 from https://www.poir.gov.pl/.
• Suddaby, R. (2006). From the editors: What grounded theory is not. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 633–642.
• Švietimo, Mokslo ir Sporto Ministerija (ŠMM). Sumani specializacija Retrieved on 24 January 2019 from https://www.smm.lt/web/lt/mokslas/sumani_spec.
• Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2005). One size fits all?: Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research Policy, 34(8), 1203–1219.
• Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2011). 33 Regional innovation systems. In Handbook of regional innovation and growth (pp. 455–465).
• Trippl, M., Zukauskaite, E., & Healy, A. (2019). Shaping smart specialization: The role of place specific factors in advanced, intermediate and less-developed European regions. Regional Studies, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2019.1582763.
• Visionary Analytics. (2017a). Veiksmu programos uždaviniu, skirtu moksliniams tyrimams, eksperimentinei pletrai ir inovacijoms skatinti, igyvendinimo pažangos vertinimo paslaugos: Galutine vertinimo ataskaita. Vilnius.
• Visionary Analytics. (2017b). Evaluation of progress in implementing the objectives of the operational programme designed for promotion of research and development and innovations: Summary of the final report. Vilnius.
• World Bank Group. Toward an innovative Poland: The entrepreneurial discovery process and business needs analysis. Retrieved on 24 January 2018 from http://documents.worldbank.org.

Identifiers

DOI

10.7172/1733-9758.2019.30.1

Biblioteka Nauki

2188991