IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa02p099.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluation, foresight and participation as new elements for regional innovation policy practice: lessons from the regional innovation strategies (RIS)

Author

Listed:
  • Haarich, Silke Nicole
  • Uyarra, Elvira

Abstract

Science, technology and innovation policies are experiencing numerous developments and changes in their orientation and design, which demand corresponding adaptation of policy evaluation methods and practices. Innovation systems are evolving towards more complex socially distributed structures of knowledge production activities, involving an increasing intertwining between science and technology, greater multidisciplinarity and specialisation in technological knowledge bases and a diversity of knowledge generating organisations. These changes require new forms of intervention, based on adaptability, policy learning and evolution, systemic coordination and the enhancement of firms & innovative capabilities. Moreover, there is a regained interest in sub-national (regional and local) levels of accumulation of innovative capabilities. Indeed, regional innovation policies are becoming more and more important, which in turn represents an important opportunity to be seized specially by less developed regions in narrowing the technology gap with more advanced ones. In addition, new and more sophisticated tools of policy intelligence and planning such as technology foresight are being employed. These new tendencies in innovation policies pose new challenges for the assessment and evaluation of these activities. Along with the actual intents to build new and effective capacities, the institutionalisation of evaluation systems is now a precondition for the implementation of organisational learning within the policy and decision making frameworks. Evaluation is definitely one of the most adequate instruments to foster processes of reflexivity and continuous learning within organisations. Even so, evaluation has to be implemented and executed during the entire process of policy design, implementation and analysis to be useful, which requires the development of new capacities and strengthening the existing ones, in order to institutionalise the evaluation practices and build up a comprehensive `evaluation system. Within this context, the demand for evaluation activities and its stimulation is as important as the promotion of the evaluation supply capacities, i.e. the existence of training and qualification facilities for evaluators, the communication between professionals by means of journals, networks, professional organizations, etc. The new regional innovation policies and the need for new evaluation practices suppose now a great opportunity for, on the one hand, the institutionalisation of evaluation within this new policy field and, on the other, the development of new evaluation methods and techniques, adapted to the particularities of regional innovation policy practices and knowledge based activities. The aim of this paper is to inquire into the adequacy of current evaluation systems and methods to the changes in the objectives and practices for regional innovation policies, supported by EU Structural Funds. The paper begins with a brief account of changes in the objectives and guidelines of European regional innovative actions. This discussion is followed by an assessment of the relevance of traditional evaluation practices for the monitoring of the effectiveness of these policies. This analysis will evidence a series of shortcomings and challenges in policy evaluation and will underline the importance of the institutionalisation of evaluation. This framework will be illustrated using evidence of innovative actions in Spanish regions. Practical policy recommendations will be advanced in the final section.

Suggested Citation

  • Haarich, Silke Nicole & Uyarra, Elvira, 2002. "Evaluation, foresight and participation as new elements for regional innovation policy practice: lessons from the regional innovation strategies (RIS)," ERSA conference papers ersa02p099, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa02p099
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa02/cd-rom/papers/099.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kuhlmann, Stefan & Boekholt, Patries & Georghiou, Luke & Guy, Ken & Heraud, Jean-Alain & Laredo, Philippe & Lemola, Tarmo & Loveridge, Denis & Luukkonen, Terttu & Moniz, António & Polt, Wolfgang & Rip, 1999. "Improving Distributed Intelligence in Complex Innovation Systems," MPRA Paper 6426, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised May 1999.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Koschatzky, Knut, 2009. "The uncertainty in regional innovation policy: some ration-ales and tools for learning in policy making," Working Papers "Firms and Region" R6/2009, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    2. Knut Koschatzky & Thomas Stahlecker, 2009. "A new Challenge for Regional Policy-Making in Europe? Chances and Risks of the Merger Between Cohesion and Innovation Policy," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 7-25, September.
    3. Koschatzky, Knut & Stahlecker, Thomas, 2009. "Cohesion policy at the interface between regional development and the promotion of innovation," Working Papers "Firms and Region" R3/2009, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).

    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. Ebersberger, Bernd & Edler, Jakob & Lo, Vivien, 2006. "Improving policy understanding by means of secondary analyses of policy evaluation: a concept development," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 12, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    2. Nuno Boavida, 2011. "How composite indicators of innovation can influence technology policy decision?," IET Working Papers Series 03/2011, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, IET/CICS.NOVA-Interdisciplinary Centre on Social Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology.
    3. Kuhlmann, Stefan, 2001. "Future governance of innovation policy in Europe -- three scenarios," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 953-976, June.
    4. Kuitunen, Soile, 2000. "The Role Of Eu Structural Funds In Enhancing The Emergence Of Regional Innovations And Innovation Policiestheoretical Points Of Departure And Some Empirical Findings," ERSA conference papers ersa00p426, European Regional Science Association.
    5. Laranja, Manuel & Uyarra, Elvira & Flanagan, Kieron, 2008. "Policies for science, technology and innovation: Translating rationales into regional policies in a multi-level setting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 823-835, June.
    6. Auvinen, Heidi & Ruutu, Sampsa & Tuominen, Anu & Ahlqvist, Toni & Oksanen, Juha, 2015. "Process supporting strategic decision-making in systemic transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 97-114.
    7. Pedrosa Sanz, Rosario & Moñux Chércoles,Diego & Miranda Escolar,Belen & Aleixandre Mendizábal,Guillermo & Aleixandre Gómez González, Francisco Javier, 2007. "La Evaluación del Impacto Social de las Políticas Regionales de I+d+i: Hacia una Lista de Control/The Evaluation of the Social Impact of Regional Rtd and Innovation Policies: Towards a Checklist," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 25, pages 215-244, Abril.
    8. Vladimir Komarov, 2012. "Main Principles of Innovation Theory," Published Papers 173, Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy, revised 2013.
    9. Block, Carolin & Wustmans, Michael & Laibach, Natalie & Bröring, Stefanie, 2021. "Semantic bridging of patents and scientific publications – The case of an emerging sustainability-oriented technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    10. Tuomo Uotila & Toni Ahlqvist, 2007. "Linking Technology Foresight and Regional Innovation Activities: Network Facilitating Innovation Policy in Lahti Region, Finland," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(10), pages 1423-1443, July.
    11. Cocchi, Andrea, 2011. "Business models as systemic instruments for the evolution of traditional districts?," MPRA Paper 33766, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Daniele Rotolo & Ismael Rafols & Michael Hopkins & Loet Leydesdorff, 2014. "Scientometric Mapping as a Strategic Intelligence Tool for the Governance of Emerging Technologies," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-10, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    13. Georg Aichholzer, 2001. "Delphi Austria - An Example of Tailoring Foresight to the Needs of a Small Country," ITA manu:scripts 01_02, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    14. Moniz, António & Gomes, Cláudia, 2002. "Impactos sociais do desinvestimento [Social Impacts of divestment]," MPRA Paper 5882, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Sep 2002.

    More about this item

    Lists

    This item is featured on the following reading lists, Wikipedia, or ReplicationWiki pages:
    1. Technology Assessment

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa02p099. 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: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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.