As the first order of business in the RIGHT project, each region produced and published its own regional report, using an underlying format developed in work package 3 in this project (Manickam & van Lieshout, 2018). The format and the regional work consisted of three parts. Part 1 is the Regional Innovation Ecosystems (RIE) mapping to provide a qualitative understanding of the region’s innovation ecosystem with regards to its Smart Specialisation Strategies (S3). This part is divided into a socio-economic and R&D profile mapping and a SWOT analysis. The RIE is an adaptation of a methodology and tool used by the eDIGIREGION Project. This part is to be filled in by desk research and consulting regional experts (through interviews and/or focus groups). This part is used for mapping the own regional ecosystems, information for the partners to get to know the other regions and to be able to identify relevant similarities and differences across the regions, which in turn, will be reported in part 1 of this trans-regional report. Regions themselves chose their own sector focus. One could focus on either energy of the blue sector, or both. Part 2 focuses on the innovation capacity and needs of SMEs from the chosen sector(s). The questions are adapted from a systemic study on cluster developments, in which an analysis model was developed (Manickam, 2018). It is based on (on average) six face-to-face interviews with SMEs from the sector. The outputs of these interviews were summarised into one template, in English, by each partner region to allow for joint analysis and comparison that is in turn reported in part 2 of this report Part 3 introduced the Job Forecasting and Skills Gaps mapping using the JOES templates as developed by van Lieshout et al. (2017). To gain an appreciation of the extent and nature of skills gap, each region was asked to analyse current and potential future labour demand, workforce, and discrepancies between the two, in up to 2 businesses. For obvious reasons (confidentiality and privacy), the JOEs will not be published separately, nor will their information be used in the report in a way that would be traceable to specific businesses. We will use exemplary information from them for illustrative purposes in Parts 1 and 2 of this report where relevant.
LINK
Part I consists of an inventory of the current and upcoming policy, where we zoom in from European to national and from regional to local level. Additionally, we look at a number of quantitative accomplishments of the Hanze University of Applied Sciences. This preparatory research is performed as part of the European collaborative project Interreg Europe TraCS3.
DOCUMENT
The Regional Development Effects Module (RDEM) will map the impact of migration on regional development seen on different variables. To construct the RDEM we have to:1. develop a typology of regions, based on the impact that mobility has on its economic, social and cultural development; and2. detect the causal linkages between regional mobility on the one hand and regional development on the other.In our presentation we will focus on the process to determine relevant regional development indicators that will help in the collection and analysis of relevant data for the period 2010-2022 on NUTS 2 and 3 level. Partners in our project will additionally focus on:1. Analysis of regional networks estimated from Facebook2. Building typology regional development3. Longitudinal causal analysis of mobility4. Integration of case studiesFinally, this will result in:• Online atlas of mobility & development typologies• Report Causal Analysis of mobility development
DOCUMENT
Within PREMIUM_EU we have co-responsibility for developing the Regional Development Effects Module (RDEM). This module will map the impact of migration on regional development seen on different variables. To construct the RDEM we have to:1. develop a typology of regions, based on the impact that mobility has on its economic, social and cultural development; and2. detect the causal linkages between regional mobility on the one hand and regional development on the other.In our presentation we will focus on the process to determine relevant regional development indicators that will help in the collection and analysis of relevant data for the period 2010-2022 on NUTS 2 and 3 level. Partners in our project will additionally focus on:1. Analysis of regional networks estimated from Facebook2. Building typology regional development3. Longitudinal causal analysis of mobility4. Integration of case studiesFinally, this will result in:• Online atlas of mobility & development typologies• Report Causal Analysis of mobility development
DOCUMENT
Regional development has often been described in economic terms, using economic indicators such as growth in GDP or demographic indicators such as net migration or employment. Some researchers argued that regional development should be understood broader, by including for example social indicators and living environment indicators . Recently, researchers have shown that policies directed towards regional development have broadened as well , but are also still evaluated within specific narratives or frameworks that often constitute the goals of the policy, for example the Keynesian framework favours increasing demand and favours the evaluation of policies aimed at exactly this. This self-constituting practice of an amalgam of related policies has also been referred to by Hall as a policy paradigm. Because policies are often evaluated within these policy paradigms it becomes difficult to decontextualise them, disentangle them and compare policies with each other.In this paper we propose to use a different, more quantitative and comparative method. By applying the above mentioned work from Andy Pike on numerous data sources from EUROSTAT and OECD, researchers from the PREMIUM_EU project developed a new framework that is measuring Regional Development (dubbed “R”) using economic, social and living environment indicators.MethodBy regarding this “R” (and individual indicators) as an outcome of public policies on the local, regional, national and international level and by analysing regional development policies on different levels from 2010 and onwards we believe it is possible to understand the impact of these policies in a more evidenced based sense, regardless of the above mentioned different types of narratives or frameworks.We started our research with an analysis from the OECD on the different types of regional development policies and the relations between different levels of government within countries. Based on this and literature research, we developed a framework with relevant topics for regional development policies and different levels of government.Based on the work of Moritz Schütz presented during the ERSA 2024 conference, we developed and employed a webcrawler to automatically download and summarise policies from municipalities, regional and national authorities and analyse the results of this exercise.Findings/resultsThe webcrawling and -mining exercise in combination with the new set of indicators will offer a much broader and more comprehensive view of the use and necessity of regional development policies. The findings will be discussed in dedicated policy labs with policymakers and researchers from the respective regions.Discussion/conclusionsBoth the new set of indicators and the analysis of the policies are not only innovative, but will also be viewed as speculative. Although we believe that a direct causal relationship between policies and the regional development will be hard to uncover, we do believe that this research will move the field of policy analysis forward, because it is more focused on evidence-based indicators and is based on larger sets of policies.
DOCUMENT
A year later, in 2013, the Westerkwartier Area Cooperative was established – a new form of cooperation at the regional level, involving hundreds of dairy farmers, other SMEs, Terra MBO as the representative of the knowledge institutions in the region, the National Forest Service in the Netherlands (‘Staatsbosbeheer’), the Groningen Countryside Association (‘Landschapsbeheer Groningen’) and, later on, the De Zijlen healthcare institution. A year later, this initiative was followed by the establishment of the Southwest Drenthe Area Cooperative, another formalised multi-stakeholder cooperative on a large scale, bound together by a shared agenda. The members of these two new cooperatives sought to bring together and strengthen local and sectoral initiatives at the regional level. Because of their close cooperation with knowledge institutions, they hoped that practice-based research would yield a lot of results. At the many evening meetings and during workshops, spirited debates were held about new concepts such as bio-based economy, new concepts in food and health, alternative methods of energy production, but also ways of improving the quality of life in the region, strengthening the tourism industry and creating jobs for young people. Those involved were all too aware that the existing educational and research institutes and government agencies, and the organisational structures used by businesses, tend to do more harm than good, which led to the call for Next Education, Next Governance and Next Business. It became apparent from these discussions that there were many knowledge questions to be explored, and the need arose for a permanent link with the knowledge institutions through the establishment of a separate professorship focused on sustainable and cooperative entrepreneurship for the benefit of the entrepreneurs involved as well as for the education sector, the government and the general public. This is how the Sustainable Cooperative Entrepreneurship professorship came about, as part of the Sustainable Financial Management professorship chaired by Dr Margreet Boersma at Hanze University of Applied Sciences Groningen’s School of Financial and Economic Management. I am honoured to be giving this new professorship shape, and I would like to point out that I will not be doing this on my own – I am only the figurehead of a very substantial group of innovative and ambitious entrepreneurs, students, lecturers, public servants, citizens and colleagues. The Innovation Army is marching. And if you are not a part of it yet, now is the time to get involved!
DOCUMENT
Little is known about innovation in the non-profit sport sector. The current research addresses this gap by questioning whether and to what extent sport federations innovate. It aims to identify types of innovation implemented by sport federations and their attitude and preferences towards innovation. An online questionnaire was administered to a sample of key representatives (i.e. Chair, Secretary General or Directors) of regional sport federations in Belgium (n = 101; 70% response rate). Directed content analysis of the service innovations described by respondents reveals ten different types of sport and non-sport service innovations. Results suggest that membership size and categories of sport influence preferences in knowledge creation/appropriation, and ultimately the type of innovation developed. This paper also suggests that sport federations are driven by demands by members in meeting their expectations of new services and are not risk averse. On average, the sport federations surveyed have a positive attitude towards newness that favours innovativeness. The current study would help researchers to advance further into the knowledge of service innovation in non-profit organisations. It should act as a foundation for research and practice on specific types of service innovation in sport. Managers should realise the importance of attitude for innovation and use the suggested typology to provide new services in different categories and meet members’ expectations.
LINK
Animation series explaining protocol and approach of the Innovation Workplace (fieldlab) powerful SME's
MULTIFILE
Between 2009 and 2013 a project has been executed in the Utrecht region to strengthen the workplace innovation capacity of SMEs (My Company 2.0). The participating companies were asked to fill in a questionnaire on the workplace innovation capacity of the company at two moments: at the beginning (T0) and at the end of the project (T1). The workplace innovation capacity was measured with questions about the organization (responds on changing demands in the environment), labor (employee flexibility), strategy (innovation with other companies) and market (improvement or renewal of products/services). We divided the companies (n=103) into two groups, namely companies that implemented an intervention an companies that did not. We found that the companies that received an intervention during the project had a significantly higher score with regard to the workplace innovation capacity at T1 compared to T0. The companies in which no intervention took place had a small (not significant) decrease in workplace innovation capacity between the baseline- (T0) and the post- test (T1). We also compared the data with data from a national reference population. It appeared that the companies in our study scored higher in workplace innovation capacity at both measurements (T0 and T1) than the reference population
DOCUMENT
This report is a deliverable of the ESTRAC “Case Studies Regional Energy Transition” project, commissioned and funded by the research institute Energy Systems Transition Centre (ESTRAC). ESTRAC is a joint initiative of knowledge and research institutes in the Netherlands – including TNO, ECN (since April 2018 part of TNO), University of Groningen, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, the New Energy Coalition (NEC) and, more recently, PBL – as well as associated partners including Gasunie, Gasterra, EBN and NAM. In addition to funding from the ESTRAC partners, the Case Studies Regional Energy Transition project has benefitted from funding by the Green Deal program of the Dutch government.
DOCUMENT
