No abstract

Over the past two decades there has been a growing interest in the topic of governance in the context of several domains of the social sciences. More recently, the growing attention given by investigators to governance and its implication for tourism development has raised several core questions. However, research is still fragmented and different interpretations of the governance concept might lead to multiple reflections. This paper aims to present and discuss some fundamental theoretical issues related to governance within the context of tourism, tourism destinations and sustainable development. Conceptualisation, dimension and scale of governance are presented based on a literature review. This approach will also be used to do a synthesis of the main methodologies that have been used so far for data collection and analysis in scientific studies within these fields. The paper argues that the concept of governance is multidimensional and that there are no standardized solutions to ensure success through a universal approach to governance. Private and public sector and other actors are being forced to promote synergies within the same geographical area of intervention in order to face global competition and governance arrangements can facilitate this. The review also reveals that there is still only limited systematic and comparable empirical evidence of the role of governance in sustainable tourism destinations. Finally, because governance might represent a new pattern of interaction between government, private sector and society to cope with old and new problems or to create new opportunities to develop a sustainable tourism, some pathways for future research on this topic are also identified.

This exploratory study seeks to promote investigation about knowledge sharing between enterprises of the same enterprise group and is motivated by the growing importance of knowledge management (KM) to businesses. The data was collected from Community Innovation Survey (CIS) 2012 and three linear regressions were performed (one to all enterprises, one to SME and one to large enterprises). The results show that cooperation for product or process innovation and service innovation influence knowledge sharing between enterprises of the same enterprise group, contributing to learning organizations. The present paper clarifies the importance of innovation and cooperation for innovation in KM practices between enterprises of the same enterprise group. The results are only valid to SME, since large enterprises have different practices of KM.

This exploratory study seeks to promote investigation about knowledge sharing between enterprises of the same enterprise group and is motivated by the growing importance of knowledge management (KM) to businesses. The data was collected from Community Innovation Survey (CIS) 2012 and three linear regressions were performed (one to all enterprises, one to SME and one to large enterprises). The results show that cooperation for product or process innovation and service innovation influence knowledge sharing between enterprises of the same enterprise group, contributing to learning organizations. The present paper clarifies the importance of innovation and cooperation for innovation in KM practices between enterprises of the same enterprise group. The results are only valid to SME, since large enterprises have different practices of KM.

This paper aims at presenting the results from a research on the reasons why more than 50% of the small and medium size enterprises (SMEs) in European Union (EU) are non-innovative. The paper intends to find out which are the specific factors that influence the percentage of non-innovative industrial SMEs, considering that SMEs are the main stakeholders and target group of EU funds and policies, and industry is the main direction for economic development.The study employs a cross-sectional study and linear regressions. The findings after applying the research methodology show some already known factors that obstruct SMEs innovation performance like lack of internal finance and little market competition. However, the main contribution of the research is the finding that a low market demand does not contribute to an increase in the percentage of non-innovative enterprises.As a conclusion, all the measures and EU programs for boosting market demand for the purposes of increasing the number of innovative enterprises would be useless.Recently and during the last 20 years, EU has implied many mechanisms, policies, funding opportunities and monitoring so to achieve an increase in enterprises' innovativeness. European Union has spent a lot of money and efforts on that initiative (Chobanova 2016) and has transformed its identity by pursuing that goal and the metrics for innovation development that it sets all the time (Fougère, Segercrantz, and Seeck 2017).At the end, between 2014 and 2020, more than 190 billion euros will have been spent for enterprises' innovations via Horizon 2020 and European Structural and Investment Funds, but still almost 50% of EU enterprises are non-innovative (Eurostat 2017).