Integrating Circular Economy, Capability Approach and Action Research Maria Angela Ferrario 1 Zoltã¡n Bajmã cy
Lancaster University, School of Computing and Communications, Lancaster, UK 2 University of Szeged, Faculty of Economic Research Centre, Szeged, Hungary
To be presented at the 11th International Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics ESEE), 30 june-3 july 2015, Leeds, UK-http://esee2015. org
The relentless pace of digital innovation is driven by large by economic models of growth and their demand for
novelty, generalizability and scalability. As innovation-researchers, we question the societal and environmental sustainability of this model and look for alternatives in partnership with communities, businesses, and the
reflective approach that integrates a) the principles of circular economy b) the practices of open-source
Circular Economy Capability Approach (CA Theme: 7. Special sessions Subtheme: 7. 34. Transformative Science for Transformative Social Change:
harmful to humans or the environment? Are they resourced fairly? Can they be reused? 2) Technology
We argue that the circular economy approach 10 as well as the human development and capability approach 3 are meaningful ways for exploring potentially sustainable technology development
The circular economy approach is a thinking framework that considers economy as a network of systems that
products as services that are economically strong, socially beneficial, and ecologically intelligent 10. C2c does so by following three key tenets:(
Ecover, Puma) addressing tensions between economic growth and environmental health and human wellbeing However, we argue that even a sustainably
emergence of such †opportunity gaps†is a widespread phenomenon. The study, reflection and policy
technology-innovation framework by introducing one of our technology prototypes, †Claspâ€, as a case study
from prototype to pilot. One of the main lessons learned from Clasp†s first phase of development is that
innovation that only focuses on generalizability and scalability for the relatively more affluent †averagesâ€
weakens our economy by concentrating wealth and power in the corporate network of the few 17 instead of
4. Biggeri, M. & Ferrannini, A. 2014) Opportunity Gap Analysis: Procedures and Methods for Applying the Capability
Co-designing prototypes with vulnerable communities. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 84,131-142 17. Vitali, S.,Glattfelder, J. B,
The common basic network infrastructure and the basic services 15 The sectorial services and solutions 16
The specific implementation in local nodes of innovation 17 4. MEASURES AND INSTRUMENTS FOR DIGITAL BUSINESS ECOSYSTEM
The SMES are the backbone of European economy (there are now over 19 million SMES in Europe) but they are lagging behind in the adoption of e-business as a strategic
enterprises and do generate a substantial share of GDP, are a key source of new jobs
and, as well, are a breeding ground for entrepreneurship and new business ideas However, in the new globalised business scenario, European small organisations are not
enterprises and among geographical areas The two digital divides At the Lisbon summit in March 2000, the European union representatives set the goal
of becoming the world†s most dynamic and competitive knowledge-based economy by 2010 with the need to promote an †Information Society for Allâ€,
-business †in some cases perceived as the worldwide benchmark †the situation is entirely different in regions with less developed economies, particularly in
Southern Europe ï€'The digital divide by company size arising from the significant †gaps†between
SMES and larger enterprises in the more advanced forms of electronic commerce and particularly in terms of e-business integration and associated skills.
sample was 100,000 enterprises), and reflects the situation in the period November 2000 and June 2001.
and sponsored by DG Enterprise This covered the adoption of ICT and ecommerce in all sectors of the economy
2 Benchmarking national and regional ebusiness policies for SMES Final Benchmarking report 12 june 2002 SMES and
-economic impacts of new technologies, working practices and business models. This interplay between RTD, policy, and implementation affects the business environment for
all enterprises, but is of particular relevance in informing future policies for SMES The European commission, through the Directorate General information Society and
the IST FP5 programme3, has launched several projects, which involve directly hundreds of SMES throughout Europe together with many â€oecatalystsâ€:
to Small businesses by using new and more effective business models Three main key issues should be addressed to effectively support Small Businesses
evolution toward the knowledge economy ï€'funding of longer term risk projects that will feed the Small Business cycle on an
value services aimed at creating innovation and synergies at local level among several local realities
Shortage of knowledge, skill, entrepreneurship The lack of suitable technical and managerial staff with sufficient knowledge and
managerial expertise needed for operating in a networked economy SMES critically depend on â€oeon-the-job competenceâ€.
Investments/Costs The costs of the introduction of e-business practices for a single small organisation
the initial investment and the rising cost of maintenance services may reduce their willingness to undertake the necessary investments.
In addition, SMES have to be 5 See for example ENSR Enterprise Survey 1999 as used in The European Observatory for SMES †Sixth
Report, European commission, 2000 6 Brussels, 13.3.2001-COM (2001) 136 final-Communication from the Commission to the Council, the
European parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions helping SMES to
prepared to outsource ICT services and to acquire professional skills and use consultants to help prepare for the organisational changes required by e-business
Although today†s regulatory environment seems to accommodate ebusiness satisfactorily at national level, problems may emerge
Shortage of Capital It†s well known that the European small organizations have difficulties of access to
Economic failures are an intrinsic element in a fast-changing environment like the Internet. Small organisations are reluctant to invest in ICT rather than concentrating
the investments in their core business 2. THE DIGITAL SYSTEMS EVOLUTION AND THE ADOPTION PHASES
sectors, there is generally a positive correlation between the size of an enterprise and its Internet use for business,
result, the preponderance of SMES in Europe†s economy is matched not by their use of
7 in 2000 34%of large enterprises compared to 10%of SMES10 used e-business services (source Eurostat
communications First phase: e-mail (early adopter started in 1986: The first adoption step was based on the usage of Internet for exchanging e-mails and messages.
Have their own website the 80%of large enterprises 8 SMES10=enterprises with between 10 and 249 employees
9 large enterprises are considered by Eurosta the enterprises with more than 249 employees e-mail web -presence
phases FN, September 2002 Digital Business Ecosystems page 8 6%of Spanish SMES10, 9%of Italian SMES10,
use of the Internet to perform economical transitions on-line between enterprises and consumers (B2c) or among enterprises and suppliers,
or internally inside the same enterprise (B2b) the e-commerce started, allowing to the enterprises purchases
sales, electronic auctions, e-payments. This stage brings closer interaction as customers and suppliers work together on-line
and as vendors customize content for their users. Even in the most advanced Member States, only a minority of SMES11
uses the Internet for commercial transactions and can handle transactions electronically. Against the background of the explosive growth of e-business
missing important economic opportunities E-business Fourth phase: e-business (from 1999) Internet technology has gone far beyond a
The e-business technologies allow the enterprises to effectively directly connect with clients, suppliers, and business partners.
The e-business opportunities are taken mainly by large organizations, whilst the single small organization faces with well-known barriers:
11 In 2001,6%of EU enterprises used Internet for electronic delivery and 7%for e-payments;
SMES10 and 34%of large enterprises for e-ordering. Only 3%of EU enterprises used Internet for e
-commerce for more than 2 years (20.2.02 Eurostat, ibidem obstacles e-commerce e-business FN, September 2002 Digital Business Ecosystems page 9
with services at acceptable costs and adequate quality having the possibility to acquire the knowledge of business practices and to get the technological skills
The intensive exploitation of e-business systems gradually modifies how enterprises and markets are organized. Digital systems allow to more easily unbundling operations
some of the time) will find ways to adapt to the new digital business environment.
services, and share knowledge and experiences When groups of organisations adopt networked methods of cooperative work,
associations for exploiting the market opportunities, combine their products and services, could jointly produce and offer new services and products.
The boundaries among the organisations start to fade, forming networked organisation The Networked Organization is then a response to restructure
and respond to the new digital market, where there has been a growing recognition of the need for new kinds of
spider's web, the holonic enterprise and the virtual corporation. All describe new ways of organizing This process is advanced in the sectors of insurances, in the distribution, in the media
This will dramatically affect the ways enterprises are constructed and business is conducted in the future, and the actual slowly changing organisations will be
which envisages the dynamic aggregation of services and organizations, is required a further stage in ICT technology adoption which exploits the
dynamic interaction (with cooperation and competition) of several players in order to produce systemic results in terms of innovation and economic development
ï€'small and large enterprises with their associations ï€'local government and public administration The adoption and development of scalable and adaptive technologies, allows new
models of business based on the dynamic association of enterprises. The ecosystems are, in fact, characterised by intelligent software components and services, knowledge
transfer, interactive training frameworks and integration of business processes and e -governance models The latter step in the adoption of Internet-based technologies for business, where the
business services and the software components are supported by a pervasive software environment, which shows an evolutionary and self-organising behaviour,
will be named digital business ecosystems Then Sector-specific ecosystems will pop up when a particular area of business starts to
and software components and services developed for that area of business will appear. These components are based on a set of specific
In general terms both a local business environment and a digital business ecosystem could be described stressing the analogies with the natural ecosystems
In the biologic environment, genetic information, recorded in the DNA molecule, is the basis of all life.
In the economic environment, technological information, captured in books, blueprints, scientific journals, databases and the know-how of millions of
business as part of a wider ecosystem and environment. Our traditional notions of vertical and horizontal integration fail us in the new world of cooperating communities
Don Tapscott, David Ticoll, Alex Lowy, Digital Capital: Harnessing the Power of Business Webs, Harvard
James Moore, Death of Competition: Leadership and Strategy in the Age of Business Ecosystems Harperbusiness;
and other stakeholders of these primary species including government agencies, regulators, associations, standards bodies, and representatives
which could be software components, applications, services, knowledge, business models, training modules, contractual frameworks, laws, â€
species, i e. services not interesting for the market are less and less used, becoming less and less present in the ecosystems, until they disappear.
innovative species (digital services, but also innovative business models, sectorial services.)) continuously appear and decree the obsolescence of the other â€oedigital
species†Gradually more complex species appears, often originated by the composition of simpler digital species (components, basic services.
As the natural ecosystems, the digital species should have enough individuals to survive and the digital ecosystems should be
populated by a sufficient number of species (a critical mass of species) for being appealing for the market and continue ad exist
a common support environment and a generic basic infrastructure, which includes basic services components generic integrated solutions and infrastructure components
ï€'The sector-specific ecosystems: services, solutions and components specialized for a specific sector (e g. agro-food, tourism, manufacturing) or
transversal applications (e g. logistics) that use the services of the common support environment ï€'The instances of the sector-specific ecosystem applied to a specific node of
innovation, geographical area (or to a network of them), supporting, and being supported by a local community.
These networked instances forms the network of ecosystems instrument for networking the European enterprises and organizations in a business excellence network
In the natural environment, the ecosystem needed for the proliferation of complex species (e g. the lion) needs the presence of other species (e g. the antelope) in
ecological equilibrium. These species also need an infrastructure, which is composed again by other species (e g. baobab, grass) and other components (e g. water, salts
In the same way in a digital business ecosystem some services could be considered required component of basic infrastructure (e g. micropayment system, credit-card
basic services the three layers FN, September 2002 Digital Business Ecosystems page 14 even in the local services
The following table presents the parallelism among natural ecosystem, economic business ecosystem and digital business ecosystem, providing examples and showing
business models Open source models operating systems Simple species Grass worms tiger Small organizations universities c hambe r s o f
Basic e-services Simple services Accounting sys Payment sys Groupware sys Group o f species in
symbiosis Species in symbiosis: †Networked organizations specific value chains Aggregated services CRM, ERP, user
profiling Local ecosystem/s Savanna j u n g l e /ecosystems of Amazonas Regional economy
/multiregional economy L o c a l d i g i t a l ecosystem /network of local
digital ecosystems Digital environment +se rv i ces f o r agrifood in 3 innovation nodes
ecosystems Global natural environment Global world business Network of digital ecosystems Network of local digital
ecosystems for innovation The three facets The community, in order to exploit the synergies of the systemic sharing of community
ï€'Services and technological solutions, sharing vision, decisions and solutions that are able to share the infrastructure, together with the choices and the
services, solution, knowledge, training, methods for the local organisations†business All the ecosystems are interrelated and there is a continuous osmosis of â€oedigital
which includes components and basic services, knowledge sharing facilities and as well as models for business process integration are the ITC
The common basic network infrastructure and the basic services The generic technological infrastructure represents the basic dynamic building block for
environment and is composed by ï€'the infrastructure: network architectural modules which include the services which
implements the standard protocols and the services which allows the network communication, the interoperability and definition of common semantics, the
dynamic webservices deployment, the seamless communication among the processes ï€'a set of basic e-services,
which could be used as basic component for developing solutions for different business sectors The network infrastructure provides support in the definition and implementation of the
protocols for the discovery, look up and join mechanism. Spontaneous and dynamic detection and inclusion of the dynamically appearing and disappearing
digital evolution the common basic infrastructure FN, September 2002 Digital Business Ecosystems page 16 services/components/solutions of the ecosystem is a key functionality provided by the
infrastructure. An extraordinary level of distribution and sophistication is needed, in addition, the ontology mechanisms and distributed description services are considered
as key components of the basic service network support infrastructure In addition to the basic services, a set of components and basic generic services not
depending from a specific application sector could be provided by the basic infrastructure. They might include systems for electronic payment, for certification and
the knowledge sharing aspect and the business models and practices Therefore, it also includes instruments for knowledge sharing, for knowledge basis set
All the modules, components, services and basic methodologies composing the infrastructure are implemented on a set of nodes of the ecosystem,
dependability of the system/subsystems/services The sectorial services and solutions Above the basic infrastructure layer there is the sector specific layer, i e. the â€oedigital
species†tailored for specific sectors or transversal application Sector-specific ecosystems will pop up when a particular area of business starts to
and software components and services developed for that area of business appear. These components are based on a set of specific requirements
ï€'Specific ontologies which describe the semantics of data, services, processes for that business sector ï€'Sector-specific education and training modules
business models; repository of practices, business solutions, regulations; newsletters ï€'†The services, following the digital ecosystem philosophy are subject to selection and
basic components sectorial components FN, September 2002 Digital Business Ecosystems page 17 evolution. Several versions of similar services coexist, with different level of
functionality, licenses, and costs. They follow the same â€oenatural selection†mechanism they will continue to exist until will be a critical mass of active nodes implementing and
see a global ecosystem environment, which includes all the generic and sector-specific components/services which they are authorized to â€oediscover†based on needs and
business agreements The specific implementations in the local nodes of innovation When a set of organizations of a geographical area embrace the sector-specific
The technological infrastructure, the components, the services â€oelives†within a set of interconnected computer nodes based on the geographical areas which
development will be fostered by exploiting the integrated digital environment and by mobilising all local players including local authorities, innovation and research centres
more sophisticated and widespread use of e-based services for reducing enterprises administrative overheads in accomplishing their administrative duties would create an
incentive for many enterprises to faster adoption of ICT It is crucial to activate also virtual communities,
contributes to develop strategies, technological solutions, digital services, business models. In this landscape of virtual distributed communities, the active participation of
electronically available and purchasable services, virtually all barriers to becoming intermediaries disappear †a process of natural selection will take place around profit to
companies and value to customers. †4. MEASURES AND INSTRUMENTS FOR DIGITAL BUSINESS ECOSYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION
Objective The long-term objective is to create an integrated, distributed pervasive network of local digital ecosystems for small business organisations and for local e-governance
which cooperate exchanging dynamically resources, applications, services and knowledge. It will constitute a global digital ecosystems environment able to
continuously evolve aimed at fostering local economic growth through networked nodes of innovation This objective could be achieved by developing an innovative evolving generic
infrastructure for the creation of business-specific ecosystems as result of synergies between European research and national and local innovation activities, continuously
management of the Chile†s economy; the largest project ever launched on this subject (â€oehow should cybernetics be used in the exercise of national
Shortage of knowledge, skill, entrepreneurship Actions: Creation of local â€oecompetence centers†on e-business and on the local
knowledge basis including models and e-business practice, benchmark implementation of digital business ecosystems Lack of technological solutions and of interoperability
Investment/Costs Actions: software sharing, common development of open source software open and distributed common infrastructure
Shortage of Capital Actions: support for venture capital, investment forum Stafford Beer, Platform for Change,, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1995
23 Stafford Beer, Fanfare for Effective Freedom, Cybernetic Praxis in Government, The 3 rd Richard Goodman
27 Mihaela Ulieru, Scott S. Walker, Robert W. Brennan, The Holonic enterprise as a Collaborative Information
which maximize the opportunities of success and selfsutainability of the ecosystems, should be identified From an initial analysis several models seems the most suitable for the implementation
business models ï€'for the â€oedigital species†of specialised ecosystem: encouraging the maximum coexistence and diversity of models and licences, supporting as much as
competition ï€'for the local instances of the ecosystem: the models are decided by the local
ï€'Critical mass of services and of users ï€'Maximising the number of â€oedigital species†populating the ecosystem
information and services Open source basic infrastructure To guarantee that the ecosystems attracts a critical mass of developers of services and
therefore of users, is critical to guarantee evolution and continuity of services in time within an open infrastructure
The basic infrastructure represents the â€oebusiness tone†which connects the applications and the services of the community, it should provide the equal opportunities of business
and visibility to all participants, and therefore its mechanisms should be transparent and could be inspected.
The basic infrastructure of the common ecosystem environment is composed by the infrastructure network and by architectural modules,
-services (e g. electronic payment, interoperability modules, CSCW,),which could be used as component for developing solutions for different business sectors.
e-services provided by the ecosystem, could exist in different versions, with different level of complexity and sophistication, following different license models and costs
These e-services will evolve as all the â€oedigital species†of the ecosystem Models for sector-specific ecosystems
integration of new components and services For the services and components, specific training and knowledge sharing modules
knowledge basis, business modules, is fundamental for the evolution and selfsustainability of the ecosystem The user (or other â€oedigital speciesâ€) could select the more adequate service or
ï€'fosters the private entrepreneurship on the sector of production of software components and services
Any player could produce components or solutions, not being forced to adapt a specific business or license mode:
respect the large enterprises and compared to the other regions The objective of an early adoption could be reached only thanks to a clear action plans
for Europe to quickly exploit the new opportunities of the economy and in particular the Internet.
with the Commission's recent eeurope initiative as well as its Communication †Strategies for jobs in the Information Society'28.
2005), for â€oepromoting a favourable environment for the creation of new jobs, to boost productivity, to modernise public services,
and to give everyone the opportunity to participate in the global information society. eeurope 2005
secure services, applications and content based on a widely available †infrastructure29. â€oewhere necessary and without distorting competition, public financing
instruments will give increased priority to supporting the development of information infrastructure and projects, notably in the less-favoured regions. †30
28 Brussels, 13.3.2001-COM (2001) 136 final-Communication from the Commission to the Council, the
common European global strategy, keeping in consideration the global environment The success of the implementation depends at local level from the consensus and the
ï€'enterprises (in particular SMES and enterprise organizations ï€'government and of public administration The regions (or local areas) which succeed in the application of digital sectorial
ï€'a critical mass of enterprises (including the small organizations) use the ecosystem as business tool
ï€'number of applications and services present ï€'diffusion and availability of the infrastructure Stimulus for small and local ICT software and service providers
and the competition, providing to the small providers equal opportunities to offer their services and products, stimulating the local
technological knowledge and development. A new component, although produced by a small producer in remote areas, is visible on the ecosystem and, thanks to the seamless
environment. The risk to this dependence is one of the obstacles, which delays the small organizations in embracing ICT technologies,
education and training could help to develop a local entrepreneurship, which could go beyond the technical support, localization and the development of small local solutions
and could compete in a global market offering innovative components or services, or offering adaptation and integration of components.
increases the shared fund of knowledge, opening up alternatives to generate services of greater total value and a higher quality level, to the benefit of all involved:
Smelser, 1956) and communication 3 Luhmann, 1975; 1984; Shannon, 1948. However, an explicit analytical framework for conceptualizing the systemic nature of Triple Helix
Parsons sees a social system as part of a social action system that comprises the economy (social adaptation to
Luhmann sees social systems as systems of communication, which operate by processing †meaning†and constantly recreating themselves through their communication, subject to
what is considered meaningful and what is not, in a process of self-regeneration called autopoiesis
contributing to economic growth and job creation see, for example Startx, Stanford†s student start-up accelerator, which in less than a year
6 trained 90 founders and 27 companies 4 or the Team Academy-the Entrepreneurship Centre
of Excellence of JAMK University of Applied sciences in Jyvã¤skylã¤,Finland, where students run their own cooperative businesses based on real-life projects
entrepreneurship and incubation programmes and new training modules at venues such as interdisciplinary centres, science parks, academic spin-offs, incubators (Etzkowitz, 2008
Almeida, Mello and Etzkowitz, 2012. Thirdly, universities†capacity to generate technology has changed their position, from a traditional source of human resources and knowledge to a
characterised by a limited state intervention in the economy (e g. the US, some Western Europe countries), industry is the driving force, with the other two spheres as ancillary
skilled human capital, and government mainly as a regulator of social and economic mechanisms. In the transition to a Knowledge Society, a balanced regime is emerging
environments for innovation are created at the intersections of the spheres. This is where creative synergies emerge
communication (Luhmann, 1975,1984) and mathematical theory of communication Shannon, 1948), which sees the University, Industry and Government as co-evolving sub
communication and differentiation: a functional one, between science and markets, and an institutional one, between private and public control at the level of universities, industries and
seen as selection environments, and the institutional communications between them act as selection mechanisms, which may generate new innovation environments
and ensure thus the †regeneration†of the system (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff, 2000; Leydesdorff, 2000.
The activities of the Triple Helix actors are measured in terms of probabilistic entropy, which when negative, suggests a self-organizing dynamic that may temporarily be stabilized in the
overlay of communications among the carrying agencies (e g. Leydesdorff, 2003 Leydesdorff, Dolfsma and Van der Panne, 2006
innovation stakeholders are more mature and have attained more complex forms of interaction, the simplified perspective described above is no longer sufficient.
foundations, professional/trade associations, service organizations, not-for-profit corporations, trusts, etc..In universities, key R&d performers are the academic
interaction with users, acquisition of patents and licenses, consultancy services, etc On a broader scale, non-R&d innovation is also present in the creation and change of
technology incubators), financial support institutions (public and private venture capital firms, angel networks, seed capital funds, etc.
changing market demands. Also, institutional boundaries are more permeable Etzkowitz, 2012) as the single institutional spheres of University, Industry and
communication and interconnectivity between people and institutions, mobility of people and financial capital, delocalisation and globalisation of production sites, labour and social
relationships, etc. Elements like generation and internalization of new skills and abilities required for integration into dynamic work environments, access to both information and
knowledge, uneven development of scientific and technological (including organisational knowledge across different sectors of activity, approach to intellectual property rights and the
individual and institutional innovation and entrepreneurship initiate and reinforce each other o The †Innovation Organizer†is defined as a person that typically occupies a key
stakeholders from different organizational backgrounds and perspectives can come together to generate and gain support for new ideas promoting economic and social
finance as the engine of New York†s economy. In 2011, New York†s Mayor Bloomberg
no interest in entrepreneurship, but in firm-formation as useful source for developing technology needed to advance basic research goals
high-tech entrepreneurship, which is virtually always a collective phenomenon. A new high-tech firm typically takes off with the support of persons with technical and
However, in the US a strong ideology of individual entrepreneurship usually suppresses the contributions of collaborators and pushes a single individual to
entrepreneurship is accepted openly, as individuals are inhibited culturally from attempting an entrepreneurial act unless backed up by a group
control, investment and provision of public venture capital, which is a traditional task for the Industry sphere (e g.
support and even funding to encourage entrepreneurial ventures, thus enacting some of the traditional role of industry.
practical, shorter-term oriented opportunities of the vocational training institutions to the more complex, long-term programmes of the university (Ranga et al. 2008
bring together various stakeholders to define a common vision and implement a medium-to long-term Strategic
Research Agenda in key industrial areas for Europe's competitiveness and economic growth http://cordis. europa. eu/technology-platforms/.
JTIS), a form of long-term public-private partnerships that combine private sector investment and/or national
overlapping through network centralisation, complementary investments for information dissemination that may lead to economic benefits and easier access to information flows within the network by governments and firms
increasing their choices about specialisation, co-operation and competition (Steinmueller, 1994 16 purpose to create a †critical mass†of knowledge resources to strengthen the local, regional
o Dispersal of some national public research organisations from the capital to less research-intensive regions.
the capital to other regions to strengthen their knowledge base o Relocation and aggregation of existing research resources-in North Carolina†s
leverage location-specific knowledge assets to induce new investment and create new value 17 o Creation of new university resources to support the development of new industries or
School of Entrepreneurship as a joint initiative of Stockholm University, Royal Institute of technology (KTH), and more recently also including the Royal Art
individual innovation efforts that come together in a form of â€oepublic†entrepreneurship go well beyond firm formation and provide the energy and focus for a variety of institution
programmes and business plan competitions that are now are implemented increasingly worldwide (Morris, 1998) and are a key element for economic and social development in a
national, regional or local innovation environment. The creation of an Innovation Space can take place through various mechanisms,
and government in creating a venture capital industry to support new firm formation and growth (Etzkowitz, 2002.
o Building an integrated environment for university technology transfer and entrepreneurship activities. When a university establishes a liaison or technology
transfer office, it soon realizes that a much broader range of services and support structures are required
in order to market intellectual property and create spin-off firms. Sometimes, this involves inserting the new innovation mechanism into a
broader institutional environment such as a national or regional-wide network of transfer offices in order to identify market opportunities and partners.
Other times, an alliance with local city and regional governments may pave the way to funding an
incubator facility to assist in spinning off firms. A good example of this approach to building an innovation Space is the Flemish Catholic University of Leuven (KUL
thriving regional innovation network including incubators, science parks, business centres, venture capitalists, spin-off companies and international R&d intensive
industrial district into a platform for knowledge-based enterprises.@@22 has been very successful in attracting national and multinational firms to locate in Barcelona, but its
between an environment with untapped resources and one that has put them to use to achieve
which invented the contemporary format for the venture capital firm building upon family investment firms with a professional staff.
political strategy to make the venture capital firm a viable entity by lobbying to 22 change laws that prevented large financial institutions from investing in risky
ventures o Providing solutions to conflict or crisis situations, such as socioeconomic crises caused by loss of manufacturing industries
be too weak to restart the economy. A shift to a knowledge-based economy was
sought, in which universities would play a greater role, moving on from the position of R&d labs for industry they had played earlier.
firms that also outsourced economic activities abroad caused a financial crisis and a policy-making dilemma of whether to continue to support a relatively small group of
of the interacting Triple Helix spheres and of their environment. We see this process similar
newly-emerging radio industry in the 1920†s and invented the venture capital firm to expand
A venture capital approach was taken with a few promising ideas, like computer networking winnowed from a larger collection (Miller, 1997
business opportunities within ICT that is unique in Sweden 14 14 Selected from †A History of Kista Science City†at
stakeholders, such as firms, universities and research institutes, or between small start-up firms and larger (customer) firms (Cooke, 2001),
External investments as key inputs for regional development come in response to improved infrastructure, fiscal incentives and programmes provided by federal or
state governments that aim to promote technology and high-growth entrepreneurship through public and private partnerships, stimulate growth in a designated region and the development
factors, such as strong knowledge base, skilled labour services and proximity to sources of knowledge and expertise, are much more important than cost reductions, especially for high
are more dependent on the resources of their local environments. Therefore, creating the infrastructure for local knowledge creation and knowledge-based firm formation and growth
-tech entrepreneurship and local capacity-building through better use of local capital resources, increased local control and greater equity (Blakely, 1989.
communication between the Triple Helix actors involved. The spaces are thus a central 15 For example, integrating research groups
The Brazilian popular cooperative incubator model was invented bottom-up by a university incubator and a NGO campaign against hunger to teach poor people from the favelas how to organise a cooperative and create
-1980s to understand innovation and economic growth in evolutionary systems where institutions and learning processes are of central importance (Freeman, 1987,1988;
dynamic, self-organizing business environments (Johannson et al. 2005), etc ï Sectoral Innovation Systems (Breschi and Malerba, 1997;
can be accelerated by top-down or bottom-up initiatives that need a favourable environment 33 to reach fruition,
entrepreneurship within the larger socioeconomic context, especially research, education labour market and development policies Secondly, we also need to understand more about the growth of the spaces over time
For example, we know that economic downturn and political crises are a major catalyst for the creation of the Consensus space,
In the past, the venture capital model was created from such an analysis (Etzkowitz, 2002; what form would such analysis take in our days
See details at http://ec. europa. eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/files/ius-2011 en. pdf 21
university and one private sector organization that are usually business firms in manufacturing and services or
for-profit contract research organizations. See http://www. socialsciences. leiden. edu/cwts/research/uirc -scoreboard-2011. html
spin-offs graduated from university incubators could be a relevant indicator for the Innovation space, while the number of projects achieved with the involvement of Triple
†singleâ€-and †multi-sphere†(hybrid) institutions, in particular science parks, incubators business/technology incubators;
and (ii) promoting policies that support their formation and activity, creation of seed funds, increased participation of industry and other private
stakeholders in public research priority-setting, licensing and exploitation of intellectual property rights (IPR) resulting from publicly-funded research, IPR awareness and training
national and regional programmes to promote venture 35 capital funds and loans, improve access to debt
the dialogue and collaboration between national and regional innovation stakeholders and creating new platforms for communication,
promoting collaborative governance measures such as public consultation and feedback, collaborative leadership models and practices (e g
Invention and Diffusion of the Brazilian Cooperative Incubator. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation (in press
European commission, DG Enterprise, Brussels, March 31 Asheim, B.,Gertler M. 2004. Understanding regional innovation systems, in:
a Low Carbon Economy: Economic, Institutional and Management Approaches. Edward Elgar Cheltenham 37 Bergek, A s. Jacobsson, B. Carlsson, S. Lindmark,
Journal of Evolutionary Economics 1, 93†118 Carlsson, B.,Jacobsson, S.,Holmã N m.,Rickne, A. 2002.
Paper for The Elgar Companion to Neo-Schumpeterian Economics (downloaded on 9 april 2012 from http://faculty. weatherhead. case. edu/carlsson/documents/Innovationsystemssurveypaper6. pdf
Journal of Industrial Economics 35, 543†563 Cooke, P. 1996. Regional Innovation Systems. UCL Press, London
and the knowledge economy Industrial and Corporate Change, 10,945-974 Cooke, P.,Boekholt, P.,TÃ dtling, F. 2000.
The Warhol Economy. Princeton: Princeton university Press Cusumano, M. A.,Elenkov, D. 1994. Linking international technology transfer with strategy
Economics of Science: From Metaphors to Organizational Behaviours, in: Gambardella, A Malerba, F. Eds. The Organisation of Innovative Activities in Europe.
economic theory, Pinter Publishers, London Edquist, C. 1997) Systems of innovation approaches†their emergence and characteristics
Environment & Planning C Government and Policy. In Press Etzkowitz, H.,Klofsten, M. 2005. The Innovating Region:
evolution of the incubator and the emergence of a triple helix. Research Policy 34,411-424
Technology and economy theory. Pinter London Freeman, C. 1991. Networks of innovators: A synthesis of research issues.
From Innovation Emergency to Economic growth. Innovation Lecture, The hague, 26 march 2012 (downloaded on 8 april 2012 from
the Knowledge-based Economy. Leadership 5, 5-23 Godin, B. 2007. National Innovation System: The System Approach in Historical
Distributed economies †A new engine for innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production 13,971-979 Kaufmann, A.,Tà dtling, F. 2001.
Harnessing technology for economic growth, National Academy Press, WASHINGTON DC, pp. 275-305 Kuhlmann, S. 2001. Future governance of innovation policy in Europe†three scenarios
The new communication regime of university†industry†government relations, in: Etzkowitz, H.,Leydesdorff, L. Eds), Universities and the Global Knowledge
Economy: A Triple Helix of University†Industry†Government Relations. Cassell Academic London Leydesdorff, L. 2000.
The Knowledge-Based Economy: Modeled, Measured, Simulated Universal Publishers, Boca raton, FL Leydesdorff, L. 2008. Configurational Information as Potentially Negative Entropy:
economy in terms of triple-helix relations among'technology, organization, and territory Research Policy 35,181-199 Leydesdorff, L.,Meyer, M. 2006.
Dosi, G. Ed.)Technology and Economic theory Pinter Publishers: London Lundvall, B.-Ã. 1992 (Ed.)National Systems of Innovation.
Cambridge Journal of Economics 23,167-185 Mason, C. and Harrison, R. 1992. Strategy for closing the small firms finance gap, in
Small Enterprise Development. Paul Chapman London Massey, D.,Quintas, P. and Weild, D. 1992. High-tech fantasies:
Economy and Society. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London Pavitt, K. 1984. Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change:
challenges and opportunities. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 20,697-716 Rodrigues, C.,Melo, A. 2010.
A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal 27, 379†423 and 623†656, July and October 1948
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011