IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/egu/wpaper/2608.html

Divided We Fall Behind. Why a fragmented EU cannot compete in complex technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Pierre-Alexandre BALLAND
  • Valentina DI GIROLAMO
  • Florence BENOIT
  • Julien RAVET
  • Alexandr HOBZA

Abstract

Fragmentation in the European Union's R&I system is increasingly acknowledged as a major hindrance to its performance. However, theoretical frameworks and empirical evidence remain scarce. This paper introduces a novel complexity-based approach to analyse the competitiveness costs of R&I fragmentation, focusing specifically on hub connectivity as a key metric. Using a comprehensive dataset combining patent records (OECD REGPAT) and scientific publications (OpenAlex) from 2000 to 2023, we examine R&I networks across multiple spatial levels and technological domains. Our analysis identifies three critical findings. First, the European R&I system is much more fragmented compared to the US, with major European hubs showing notably weaker interconnectivity than their US counterparts. Second, we demonstrate that hub connectivity becomes particularly crucial for complex technologies and scientific fields. Third, we find that there is an efficiency gap between the US and Europe in all domains, but it is most pronounced in complex ones, resulting in a substantial competitive disadvantage in strategic sectors. These findings have significant implications for European innovation policy and suggest the urgent need for targeted interventions to enhance cross- regional R&I collaboration in complex technological and scientific domains.

Suggested Citation

  • Pierre-Alexandre BALLAND & Valentina DI GIROLAMO & Florence BENOIT & Julien RAVET & Alexandr HOBZA, 2026. "Divided We Fall Behind. Why a fragmented EU cannot compete in complex technologies," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2608, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised May 2026.
  • Handle: RePEc:egu:wpaper:2608
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://econ.geo.uu.nl/peeg/peeg2608.pdf
    File Function: Version May 2026
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jasjit Singh & Matt Marx, 2013. "Geographic Constraints on Knowledge Spillovers: Political Borders vs. Spatial Proximity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(9), pages 2056-2078, September.
    2. Cesar A. Hidalgo & Ricardo Hausmann, 2009. "The Building Blocks of Economic Complexity," Papers 0909.3890, arXiv.org.
    3. Milenko Fadic & José Enrique Garcilazo & Ana I. Moreno-Monroy & Paolo Veneri, 2019. "Classifying small (TL3) regions based on metropolitan population, low density and remoteness," OECD Regional Development Working Papers 2019/06, OECD Publishing.
    4. Takashi Iino & Hiroyasu Inoue & Yukiko U. Saito & Yasuyuki Todo, 2021. "How does the global network of research collaboration affect the quality of innovation?," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 5-48, January.
    5. Montobbio, Fabio & Sterzi, Valerio, 2013. "The Globalization of Technology in Emerging Markets: A Gravity Model on the Determinants of International Patent Collaborations," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 281-299.
    6. Michael Fritsch & Martina Kauffeld-Monz, 2010. "The impact of network structure on knowledge transfer: an application of social network analysis in the context of regional innovation networks," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 44(1), pages 21-38, February.
    7. Sidonia Proff & Thomas Brenner, 2014. "The dynamics of inter-regional collaboration: an analysis of co-patenting," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 52(1), pages 41-64, January.
    8. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Cristian Jara-Figueroa & Sergio G. Petralia & Mathieu P. A. Steijn & David L. Rigby & César A. Hidalgo, 2020. "Complex economic activities concentrate in large cities," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(3), pages 248-254, March.
    9. Kevin Morgan, 2007. "The Learning Region: Institutions, Innovation and Regional Renewal," Chapters, in: Roel Rutten & Frans Boekema (ed.), The Learning Region, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Esposito, Christopher R., 2023. "The geography of breakthrough invention in the United States over the 20th century," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    11. Fleming, Lee & Sorenson, Olav, 2001. "Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1019-1039, August.
    12. Kevin Morgan, 2007. "The Learning Region: Institutions, Innovation and Regional Renewal," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(sup1), pages 147-159.
    13. Fally, Thibault, 2015. "Structural gravity and fixed effects," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 76-85.
    14. Morescalchi, Andrea & Pammolli, Fabio & Penner, Orion & Petersen, Alexander M. & Riccaboni, Massimo, 2015. "The evolution of networks of innovators within and across borders: Evidence from patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 651-668.
    15. Andres Rodriguez-Pose & Riccardo regstdcenzi, 2008. "Research and Development, Spillovers, Innovation Systems, and the Genesis of Regional Growth in Europe," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(1), pages 51-67.
    16. Maskell, Peter & Malmberg, Anders, 1999. "Localised Learning and Industrial Competitiveness," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 23(2), pages 167-185, March.
    17. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & David Rigby, 2017. "The Geography of Complex Knowledge," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 93(1), pages 1-23, January.
    18. Fabio Montobbio & Valerio Sterzi, 2013. "The globalization of technology in emerging markets: a gravity model on the determinants of international technological collaborations," Post-Print hal-00779894, HAL.
    19. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    20. Thomas Scherngell & Michael Barber, 2011. "Distinct spatial characteristics of industrial and public research collaborations: evidence from the fifth EU Framework Programme," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 46(2), pages 247-266, April.
    21. Jarno Hoekman & Koen Frenken & Frank Oort, 2009. "The geography of collaborative knowledge production in Europe," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 43(3), pages 721-738, September.
    22. Janpieter Pol & Koen Frenken, 2025. "Fragmentation of national research systems: the case of the Netherlands," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(6), pages 3213-3227, June.
    23. Frank van der Wouden, 2020. "A history of collaboration in US invention: changing patterns of co-invention, complexity and geography," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(3), pages 599-619.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Milad Abbasiharofteh & Tom Broekel & Lars Mewes, 2024. "The role of geographic distance and technological complexity in U.S. interregional co-patenting over almost two centuries," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 56(7), pages 2003-2022, October.
    2. Morescalchi, Andrea & Pammolli, Fabio & Penner, Orion & Petersen, Alexander M. & Riccaboni, Massimo, 2015. "The evolution of networks of innovators within and across borders: Evidence from patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 651-668.
    3. Mewes, Lars & Broekel, Tom, 2022. "Technological complexity and economic growth of regions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(8).
    4. Gergő Tóth & Zoltán Elekes & Adam Whittle & Changjun Lee & Dieter F. Kogler, 2022. "Technology Network Structure Conditions the Economic Resilience of Regions," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 98(4), pages 355-378, August.
    5. Simensen, Erlend Osland & Abbasiharofteh, Milad, 2022. "Sectoral patterns of collaborative tie formation: Investigating geographic, cognitive, and technological dimensions," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 31(5), pages 1223-1258.
    6. Broekel, Tom & Klarl, Torben, 2025. "The long-term evolution of technological complexity and its relationship with economic growth," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    7. Tubiana, Matteo & Miguelez, Ernest & Moreno, Rosina, 2022. "In knowledge we trust: Learning-by-interacting and the productivity of inventors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    8. Erlend Osland Simensen & Milad Abbasiharofteh, 2022. "Sectoral patterns of collaborative tie formation: investigating geographic, cognitive, and technological dimensions [Endogenous effects and cluster transition: a conceptual framework for cluster policy]," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(5), pages 1223-1258.
    9. Julia Bachtrögler-Unger & Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Ron Boschma & Thomas Schwab, 2023. "Technological Capabilities and the Twin Transition in Europe. Opportunities for Regional Collaboration and Economic Cohesion," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 33926503.
    10. van der Wouden, Frank & Youn, Hyejin, 2023. "The impact of geographical distance on learning through collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    11. Antonelli, Cristiano & Crespi, Francesco & Quatraro, Francesco, 2022. "Knowledge complexity and the mechanisms of knowledge generation and exploitation: The European evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(8).
    12. van der Wouden, Frank, 2022. "Are Chinese cities getting smarter in terms of knowledge and technology they produce?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    13. Qin, Xionghe & Zhang, Dong & Wang, Song & Grimes, Seamus, 2025. "A blessing and a curse: Identifying how knowledge complexity influences regional innovation efficiency in the presence of varying spatial externalities," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    14. Balland, Pierre-Alexandre & Broekel, Tom & Diodato, Dario & Giuliani, Elisa & Hausmann, Ricardo & O'Clery, Neave & Rigby, David, 2022. "Reprint of The new paradigm of economic complexity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(8).
    15. Niccolò Innocenti & Francesco Capone & Luciana Lazzeretti & Sergio Petralia, 2022. "The role of inventors’ networks and variety for breakthrough inventions," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 101(1), pages 37-57, February.
    16. Jie Zhang & Bindong Sun & Chuanyang Wang, 2024. "Interplay between Network Position and Knowledge Production of Cities in China Based on Patent Measurement," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-17, October.
    17. Laurent R. Bergé, 2017. "Network proximity in the geography of research collaboration," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 96(4), pages 785-815, November.
    18. Eduardo Gonçalves & Henrique Silva Costa & Rosa Livia Montenegro & Tulio Chiarini & Juliana Gonçalves Taveira, 2023. "Green technology co-patenting networks: international dynamics," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 1603-1627, April.
    19. Eduardo Hernandez-Rodriguez & Ron Boschma & Andrea Morrison & Xianjia Ye, 2024. "Functional upgrading and downgrading in global value chains: The role of complementary interregional value chain linkages in EU regions," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2432, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Oct 2024.
    20. Hidalgo, César A., 2023. "The policy implications of economic complexity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • C18 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Methodolical Issues: General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:egu:wpaper:2608. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask the person in charge to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deguunl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.