Prior research has emphasized the importance of bringing together quadruple helix (QH) actors (academia, industry, government and civil society) to strengthen regional innovation. The QH model forms an integral part of European innovation policy, which aims to create sustainable and inclusive growth in Europe. As part of this policy, European Union (EU) regions are to design and implement research and innovation strategies for smart specialization (RIS3) through the participatory entrepreneurial discovery process (EDP). Despite the strong emphasis on the QH model, the model is still far from a well-established concept in innovation research and policy, and civil society participation in RIS3 has remained low. Our paper aims to support regional governments to engage with and facilitate the participation of civil society in a territorial EDP based on two case studies from Finland and Sweden. It contributes to the literature on regional innovation systems through identifying mechanisms to foster the QH model and suggests lessons learnt for the operationalization of the QH model as part of RIS3.

PurposeIn order to explain change and growth at the aggregate levels, three levels: macro, meso and micro must be taken into account. Applying the theories from Keynesian and post‐Keynesian economics (PKE) best explains the macro level and applying those from Schumpeterian and neo‐Schumpeterian economics (NSE) best explains the micro level. Besides this, the meso level can be further explained by merging both post‐Keynesian and neo‐Schumpeterian theories. Such a unifying approach has been missing from the literature so far. Bringing these schools of thought together is important for mutual learning and further development of innovation theory. This paper aims to effect this.Design/methodology/approachThe paper presents a survey of the relevant secondary literature of the aforementioned schools of thought, identifying their methodological practice and key contributions to innovation theory.FindingsA combination of these schools of thought offers a richer approach to studying innovation. It is found to exist in particular in the evolutionary, institutional and long‐run perspectives, in combination with emphasis on the role of finance in production.Research limitations/implicationsOne is invited to develop one's own theoretical and empirical approach that combines the advantages of all the schools of thought presented.Originality/valueThe paper is exploratory, as it reconsiders how a comprehensive approach to studying innovations can be built. It examines the existing literature. It will be of value to researchers in innovation.

Ideje rasta i razvoja u doba krize fosilne energije i kapitalizma Mladen Domazet Grupa 22, ZagrebCilj ovoga rada jest postaviti temelje za holističko poimanje ekonomskih nada i geo zičkih pokretača u pozadini zelene ekonomije i od-rasta (eng. degrowth) te potaknuti druge da ih iskopaju. Rad ponajprije nastoji oblikovati okvir koji bi ujedinio upozorenja o slomu globalne civilizacije, njegovim zičkim i povijesnim pokretačima i iskustvenim otjelotvorenjima. Baveći se idejom da globalnoj civilizaciji kakvu poznajemo prijeti slom ljudskih društava i praksi koje ih održavaju, rad donosi pregled stavova znanstvenika iz područja znanosti o okolišu, biologije, povijesti, ljevičarske društvene teorije i ekonomije.1 Iako postoje historijski narativi koji pobuđuju nadu u tehnologiju kao sredstvo prevladavanja ovoga problema, u ovome ću tekstu nastojati pokazati da se ta vrsta rizika temelji na ontološkoj zabuni oko temeljnih elemenata suvremenog razvojnog uspjeha. Rad pojašnjava da ključni model za ublažavanje sloma ne počiva na malim promjenama u životnom stilu koje, pak, ovise o tehnološkom nadilaženju zičkih ograničenja, već na ozbiljnom društvenom restrukturiranju koje bi zamijenilo tehnološko rješenje koje nedostaje. No da bi takvo što postalo demokratski prihvatljivo, društva moraju iznova otvoriti pitanje indikatora i de nicija komponenata blagostanja; na čovječanstvu je, pak, da napusti nadu u čudo zelene ekonomije i umjesto toga propita u čemu leži njegova održivost.

The article compares the process of designing and implementing EU research and innovation (R&I) strategies for smart specialisation (RIS3) in eight less developed European Union (EU) member states: Croatia,

No abstract