Territorial Innovation in Less Developed Regions

This chapter explores the new models of innovation that have emerged as a response to societal challenges and it focuses on the role of the municipality as a catalyst of social and technological innovation. After discussing the advent of these new models of societal innovation—and the diverse communities of public, private and civic actors that are driving them—the chapter provides an empirical illustration of these new models of innovation by focusing on the experience of the Cardiff Capital Region, where ten municipalities have formed a new governance system to catalyse territorial innovation in an old industrial region.

This study maps the scientific production on the performance of regional innovation systems from 1989 to 2017. Qualitative and quantitative procedures are employed to reveal key characteristics of the research field to complement previous systematic reviews. The evolution in the absolute number of articles has been non-monotone. Complementarity between the literature of national innovation systems and regional innovation systems is not always verified given that a negative elasticity is observed in the period [2004, 2006]. Leading contributors are open to collaborative research with follower researchers thereby suggesting consistency between the theory disseminated by the field and professional conduct of main contributors. Results indicate high level of receptivity by international journals and gradual relevance of empirical analysis over time. Empirical studies are classified based on three distinct analytical approaches—case studies, benchmarking and scoring—resulting from co-occurrence analysis of text data. Main methods and indicators to measure regional performance are identified. A trend to adopt composite indicators is observed. Scoring articles use more indicators and cover higher number of dimensions relative to benchmarking articles, but efforts are currently developed to reduce the gap. This review confirms that the research field is characterised by a dichotomy between theoretical and empirical contributions since the survey of most used indicators suggests that empirical studies mainly adopt those capable of capturing the impact of top-down processes on regional innovation, while theoretical contributions disclose the need to use indicators that capture the impact of bottom-up processes. Overcoming difficulties related to performance measurement is also mandatory.

There is a growing awareness that innovation policies at the European Union (EU) should be redirected to address the climate change challenge. However, given that abrupt changes are difficult to occur as incremental options are more typical in our societies, one can understand the difficulties for these policies to stimulate the required rapid changes towards a more sustainable development. Assuming that fast transformations can, nevertheless, occur under certain conditions, it is crucial to assess how policymakers can proactively look for, and identify such settings, in innovation policies, particularly for less developed regions. The concept of social tipping dynamics, as small and nonlinear dynamics that trigger disruptive societal changes, frames this chapter’s rationale. Based on this, the chapter discusses key public policy sectors, interventions and actors’ agency in innovation policies that can be tailored as social triggers to promote disruptive changes to push society away from a ‘hothouse’ Earth scenario.

Considering the specific context of the Centro Region of Portugal and the multifactorial challenges that underlie territorial development and innovation in low-density regions, this study aimed to develop a framework of network and mediation strategies for territorial innovation, covering both conceptual and technological aspects.

The methodological approach for the development of this study is based on a set of relevant procedures, including a systematic and a narrative review of literature, mapping community-led initiatives, interviews, and focus groups with leaders of community-led initiatives in Tourism and Health and Well-being fields.

This methodological approach made it possible to analyze the role and relevance of networks and mediation in territorial-based innovation, and to better understand the potential impact on territorial innovation of informal participatory dynamics and communication strategies, considering the different agents and stakeholders involved in the empowerment and civic engagement of populations.

As a result of this study, a framework was developed that allows defining strategies for using emerging digital media, as tools to expand the potential of existing networks, and create new ways of mediating communication and interaction among citizens, practices, and resources. This framework is intended to be the basis for the development of a digital platform aiming at enabling the mediation of communication and collaboration processes between different agents in territorial innovation.

In the current complex and uncertain times, where local and global scales are increasingly interdependent, territorial innovation policies are crucial to ensure a cohesive and sustainable territorial development of regions. These policies assume a critical role in the case of less developed regions (LDRs) as they often lack the resources of leading regions such as accessibilities, support infrastructures or a critical mass of actors, making innovation more difficult and undermining the capacity to face global challenges. This chapter discusses the historical construction of territorial innovation models and concepts throughout the last decades and how they have been applied in LDRs in Europe. Then, it builds on this review to contribute to a new conceptual approach that aims to redirect and support different forms of innovation and inspirational territorial visions for the future of these regions. This critical discussion reflects on the role of what is territorial, its characteristics, peoples and contexts, in close relation to what is non-territorial, global and interdependent, its dimensions, complexities and impacts to propose an integrated framework that can influence the processes of territorial innovation for local–global needed sustainability transitions.

Cohesion Policy is a major investment policy of the EU, aiming at reducing disparities between regions. This policy’s key specificity is its regional and multilevel governance approach, mobilising stakeholders from several layers of government (e.g., EU, national, regional, local) for its design and implementation. Analysing its contribution to digitalisation can thus fuel wider reflections on the territorial dimension of innovation, and more specifically on the role that public policies can play to develop it. Indeed, Cohesion Policy has a long history of support to digitalisation, i.e., the process of diffusion of Information and Communication Technologies and their uses for diverse applications. Since the 1990s and 2000s, Cohesion Policy has highlighted the importance of a holistic approach to digitalisation, going beyond sole technological aspects. The prioritisation of digitalisation within Cohesion Policy has also been consecrated in recent strategies, such as the Digital Agenda, and through a gradual increase of dedicated funding.

Several rationales and expected benefits exist for a regionalised and multilevel governance approach towards digitalisation. The ability to adapt to local contexts, especially for less developed regions, and the potential to bridge top-down with bottom-up initiatives, are for instance notable assets. In practice, the Cohesion Policy framework has integrated regulatory mechanisms and other initiatives that could help to reap these benefits. During the 2014–2020 period, it notably includes the concentration of funding and specific requirements for ICT projects, strategic approaches/methodologies (Smart Specialisation Strategies—S3) and territorialised instruments (e.g., Integrated Territorial Investments—ITI).

First empirical evidence from the literature and examples of specific projects allows identifying successes and limits on how the framework of Cohesion Policy helps to secure the benefits of a multilevel governance and regional approach towards digitalisation. A key contribution of its framework is its ability to favour strategy-building and partnerships between stakeholders at different levels, for instance through ITI or S3. Success conditions for digitalisation-related activities also include administrative capacity and the quality of strategic planning. However, the less developed regions that could benefit the most from Cohesion Policy’s intervention for digitalisation may lack these favourable conditions. It is hence critical to support capacity building to fully secure benefits for all regions.

This chapter presents the prototyping process of the CeNTER mobile application, designed to mediate interactions among active agents in territory-based innovation, as well as the most relevant results from the first usability tests carried out with experts. The prototype was developed under a User Centered Design (UCD) approach. In the initial design phase, a specification of the app was worked out with the contribution of potential users. Afterward, a high-fidelity prototype was developed using the Principle prototyping tool, offering functionalities similar to the final product. Finally, the evaluation phase was conducted with the collaboration of five experts in the field of digital technologies, and other five experts in the field of Tourism, Health, and Well-being. Although there are still several improvements to be addressed, the overall experts’ opinions show that the CeNTER app is a sustainable and timely contribution, with an interesting potential to help in fostering territorial innovation in the Centro Region of Portugal.

Cities and urban systems transformations towards sustainability are paramount for global change. These transformations aim at systemic change necessary to tackle socio-ecological challenges, decision-making processes (e.g., policy, plans, programmes), and governance issues, in urban systems. To advance policies and planning for urban transformation is necessary to understand the type of capacity that enables the desirable change. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is an environmental policy tool with the potential to help this transformation towards urban sustainability. This chapter explores how SEA contributes to the enhancement of urban systems transformations capacity. Specifically, this chapter examines how an SEA for Sustainability place-based conceptual framework is linked with urban transformations’ scholarship and how SEA can contribute to urban transformations capacity towards sustainability. Findings show that SEA for Sustainability is aligned with three main themes that are focused on the urban transformations’ literature: governance and community empowerment; knowledge co-production and cooperation networks, resilience enhancement. Overall, this work lays the foundation for future research into examining the effects of SEA in urban systems transformation and exploring opportunities to enhance sustainability in these territories.

In order to understand the successes and failure of innovation policy, taking as an example smart specialisation, it is necessary to recognise that policy processes unfold as a result of interactions between state and non-state actors, in a complex context.

First, taking our cues from political science, it is necessary to recognise that the basic assumptions about the context for policy design and implementation are very different from the assumptions in neat, linear models of policymaking which assume that policy emerges from informed debate and consensus (Weible and Sabatier 2017). These assumptions are: ambiguity, (2) time constraints, (3) problematic policy preferences, (4) unclear technology, (5) fluid participation and (6) stream independence.

Analysed as a policy process, in order for smart specialisation to be effective, it would have to be adopted within the three streams and at all geographical scales. Policymakers and non-state actors would have to recognise the lack of better innovation policy as a problem, but also recognise the central tenets of S3 (regionalisation of policy, EDP, prioritisation) as the key to address this problem. The networks of individuals and organisations working within the problem stream of innovation, would also have to understand and engage with this concept, and provide their technical support to its implementation. Finally, the state and non-state actors in the political stream, would have to accept smart specialisation as a viable solution to a problem that they accepted as relevant and be willing to break with, or adapt, previous innovation policies (assuming that they existed) in order to implement this new one. All these assumptions are problematic and need to be tested empirically.

In the last decade, the development of a wide European Union approach to urban policy has reached a stronger stage of consolidation. However, the accomplishments of the EU Urban Agenda are highly dependent on decentralised styles of territorial governance, and domestic contexts can be detrimental of some of the intended changes. In Portugal, the European Cohesion Policy has been catalyst of important changes in public subregional governance, strengthening the role of intermunicipal coordination. Still, in the ongoing programming cycle, Territorial Pacts as chief instruments of Cohesion Policy delivering, at this level, coexist with municipal urban policy financing schemes (via municipal Strategic Plans of Urban Sustainable Development (PEDU), with a noticeable lack of coordination between them. If, as recognised, the enveloping of funds through Territorial Pacts has given preponderance to contractual relations over strategic planning exercises at intermunicipal level, the missing link with municipal strategic plans is eventually curtailing the potential of strategic territorial coordination at the subregional scale. The chapter addresses these issues by deepening the debate on relevant dimensions of subnational governance and by exploring the results so far produced by the PEDU’s financing scheme in the Centro Region of Portugal.

Low-density and rural territories (LDTs) face structural challenges that are cause and consequence of a vicious circle of decline that compromises their development and attractiveness. Entrepreneurship and innovation have been pointed out as key factors for the sustainable development and competitiveness of those territories, being increasingly studied and promoted by policymakers and scholars. Thus, creating, developing and sustaining an ecosystem that fosters entrepreneurship and innovation is pivotal. However, most of the existent ecosystems’ frameworks provide a national or regional perspective, and most academic studies focus mainly on urban territories due to their dynamism, size and impact in national economies. Considering the specific characteristics and needs of LDTs and considering that each territory is unique, this paper aims to identify the main processes, driving factors, barriers and outcomes detected in the creation of an ecosystem that promotes entrepreneurship and innovation. With an exploratory approach based on four Portuguese LDTs, secondary data gathered from reports and public statistical databases, this study has identified local municipalities as the main drivers of the ecosystem, being responsible for its design, funding and dynamisation. This top-down approach entails several constraints related to the political cycles and the need to align with national policies, which are often out of step with the local reality. Implications for literature and policymakers on local development strategies to make the most of entrepreneurship and innovation for economic and social development, breaking the declining cycle of their territories, are taken.

Tourism is widely recognised as one of the key sectors for the development of countries and an important source of income, employment and wealth creation, with an impact on the social, economic and environmental levels in territories. This chapter aims to understand to what extent tourism can act as an inducer of the development process in low-density territories (LDTs).

The demographic urgency that Portugal is experiencing, the bipolarised territories between the interior and the coast and the growing importance of the tourism sector are the main drivers for this research. From a total of 165 municipalities considered as LDTs, 112 valid responses were obtained, which corresponds to a response rate of 67.9%.

The questionnaire to municipalities LDTs, showed the different configurations and visions on how tourism can help to mitigate existing problems and enhance the emergence of solutions. It was possible to perceive the current importance of tourism in the context of LDTs—strengthening of the local economic base of the LDTs, external image of the municipalities, preservation of heritage, involvement of the population—and the future importance that will be progressive and even more evident.

The main contributions of this research are a greater understanding of the situation and uniqueness of LDTs, a better understanding of the territorial dynamics that involve the relationship between territorial development and tourism, and the fundamental role of municipalities in support of tourist activity.

Despite this conceptual proximity, territorial cohesion and innovation have their own agendas, almost always disconnected from a territorial strategy that considers the specificities of each space as central elements to development. Some data that support this statement will be presented using the research carried out in the Centro Region of Portugal, namely interviews with 21 mayors. In general, we contribute to a better understanding of territorial policy options and to the identification of priority areas for a necessary dialogue between territorial cohesion and innovation. Based on this research, we argue that the regional/local development dynamics and projects, especially those related to territorial cohesion, competitiveness and innovation contribute significantly to the citizens’ well-being. These development dynamics which are structurally unbalanced and the consequences of these imbalances are harmful to the quality of life of the territories. Thus, public policies—as spatial planning, territorial governance instrument and intervention mechanism—acquire great relevance in the management and mitigation of these imbalances. The focus is then placed on the effectiveness of public policy since the development of the territory and the quality of life of societies depends on it. Considering the existence of a wide range of factors that prevent or reduce this effectiveness, it is essential to ensure a dialogue and convergence between the two fields of action that structure local and regional development dynamics, that is, territorial cohesion and innovation.