Abstract:The concept of cross-border regional innovation systems (CBRIS) surfaced in the literature on economic geography through discourses that highlighted the need of broadening innovation systems to cross-border contexts. Since these early discussions, the theoretical backgrounds of CBRIS have been elaborated through notions of geographical scale, proximity and related variety in a range of conceptual papers proposing CBRIS as a comprehensive framework for analysing regional crossborder integration. However, the empirical literature on CBRIS has failed to keep up with the advances in conceptualisation. This paper discusses the reasons behind this mismatch which means that the concept still rests upon and draws policy suggestions based on a thin evidence base. Directions for further research are pointed out by underlining the need for holistic empirical validations of the concept together with the need of understanding how suggested policy measures based on CBRIS reasoning have been implemented in border regions, and their effectiveness in promoting crossborder integration.

No abstract

No abstract

of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

No abstract