Guidelines for Territorial Impact Assessment Applied to Regional Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation

Neto, Paulo; Santos, Anabela

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-54502-4_12

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Besides, MA should channel their funding towards less developed regions since these present a better performance when they employ their funding both in eligible costs decided (−11%) and eligible spending (−12%) against more developed regions (−63%)-see Table 9 and Figure 6. These findings are consistent with the European Commission's Smart Specialisation Strategies for 2021-2027, which identify the major obstacles and next measures required to promote innovation-led growth, particularly in less developed and industrial transition regions [43].…”

Section: Potential Improvementssupporting

confidence: 86%

“…R&I often occurs in SMEs as a result of a variety of partnerships, including with scientific R&D institutions, along with those based on DUI [24]. As a result, [89] highlight the need to create improved interactions between regional innovation and development policies and funding programmes at both strategic and implementation levels.…”

Section: Analysis and Discussion Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, in the case of R&I policies, the evaluation procedure assumes a prominent role in helping countries and/or regions in the improvement of future policy instruments by recognizing the accomplishments and failures in the preceding policy stage [43].…”

Section: A Paradigm Shift In How Innovation Might Be Viewed Consists ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How Efficiently Does the EU Support Research and Innovation in SMEs?

Henriques

Viseu

Neves

et al. 2022

Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Regional Development Fund devoted around 66 billion Euros to the financial support of innovation and productivity in European enterprises over the 2014–2020 programming period. In this framework, we assessed the implementation of the Operational Programmes dedicated to fostering research and innovation, particularly in small and medium-sized enterprises. With this aim, we used a network slack-based data envelopment analysis model paired with cluster analysis that encompasses a multitude of performance framework indicators to assess 53 Operational Programmes from 19 countries. Our findings suggest that compared to transition and less developed regions, more developed regions present a higher room for improvement. Also, less developed regions present a better performance when they employ their funding against more developed regions, suggesting that further funding should be channelled for leveraging research and innovation in the former regions. Finally, Operational Programme managers should focus on solving the problems both inherent to the poor outcomes in terms of enhancing the number of researchers working in improved research infrastructures and promoting the technology transfer between research institutions and enterprises.

show abstract

Section: Potential Improvementssupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Analysis and Discussion Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How Efficiently Does the EU Support Research and Innovation in SMEs?

Henriques

Viseu

Neves

et al. 2022

Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is the case, among others, of Partridge, Rickman, Rose Olfert and Tan (2013), Varga (2017), Magro and Wilson (2019), Blomi and Erlich (2020). Finally, studies that analyze the particular case of the application of specific public policy instruments aimed at the implementation of place-based policies -such as the regional smart specialisation strategies -and where the work of, among others, Neto, Serrano and Santos (2018), Gianelle, Guzzo and Mieszkowski (2020), Gianelle, Kyriakou, McCann and Morgan (2020), Neto and Santos (2020), Trippl, Zukauskaite and Healy (2020), Veldhuizen (2020), is contained.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

EU Cohesion Policy post-2020, European Green Deal and Territorial Agenda 2030. The future of the place-based approach in the new EU policy framework in the context of COVID-19

Neto

2020

Eur. XXI

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Union’s strategic priorities for the post-2020 period – focused on areas such as globalization, demography, migration, climate change, security and defense, employment and digitalization of the economy and society – pose relevant challenges as to the feasibility of its territorialization conditions and how to ensure operationalization at regional and local levels. As the EU prepares to implement the Cohesion Policy 2021-2027 and draw up the Territorial Agenda 2030, it also seeks to relaunch the EU policy framework in areas such as sustainable development, artificial intelligence and reindustrialization, examples of which are: European Green Deal, EU Circular Economy Action Plan and EU Digital Strategy. The current context of the COVID-19 pandemic has, however, forced a refocusing of the intervention priorities, at least in the short term, in the need to respond to the urgent economic, social and public health challenges caused by the pandemic. This article seeks to analyse, on the one hand, how the European policy cycle has adapted to respond to the pandemic, and on the other, the extent to which the place-based approach, one of the central operating rationales of the 2014-2020 financial perspective, may see its role strengthened and its performance extended as a consequence of the changes introduced in the current phase of the policy cycle due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis carried out led to concluding that the current context of COVID-19 is implying the redesign of many of the Union’s public policy instruments and reordering some of the current strategic priorities. It is also changing the conditions of resilience and competitiveness of territories, whereby the place-based approach seems to be a public policy instrument especially suited to the process of economic and social recovery at the local and regional level.

show abstract

“…Moreover, evaluation mechanisms during the 2014-2020 programmatic cycle focused heavily on evaluating procedure results, with hardly any data on the criteria to measure the immediate benefits of the initiatives funded (Ortiz & Fernandez, 2022). Furthermore, in the case of R&I policies, the assessment technique plays an important role in assisting the national/regional authorities in the enhancement of upcoming policy tools by identifying the strengths and weaknesses of previous policy stages (Neto & Santos, 2020). In this context, there are numerous techniques for appraising cohesion policy (Lopez-Rodríguez & Faíña, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the Reasons Behind the Inefficient Implementation of ERDF Devoted to R&I in SMEs

Henriques

Viseu

2022

Springer Proceedings in Political Science and International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work is mainly aimed at evaluating the reasons behind the inefficient execution of Operational Programs (OPs) aimed at promoting research and innovation (R&I), especially in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). To achieve this goal, we employed a three-stage slack-based measure (SBM) data envelopment analysis (DEA) model combined with Stochastic Frontier analysis (SFA), which includes a multiplicity of achievement metrics and environmental factors, to evaluate 53 OPs from 19 countries. Our findings suggest that more developed regions (proxied by a higher Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita) do not make an efficient application of European Regional Development Funds (ERDF) aimed at fostering R&I in SMEs. Also, a greater proportion of the population with a university degree does not imply an appropriate use of ERDF devoted to R&I in SMEs. Lifelong learning is positively linked with the performance of the outcomes “Researchers Working in Improved Infrastructures” and “Enterprises Supported”. Research and development (R&D) expenditures in the public sector contribute favorably to the needed improvements in “Researchers Working in Improved Infrastructures” but have the reverse effect on the number of “Enterprises Supported” and “Enterprises Working with Research Institutions”. Furthermore, because R&D expenditures in the business sector have a positive impact on the necessary development of “Enterprises Working with Research Institutions”, these results appear to demonstrate that public R&D has a weaker influence on SME innovation than private R&D. Finally, innovative SMEs collaborating with other sources of knowledge show a positive effect on both the number of “Enterprises” and “Enterprises Working with Research Institutions” supported.

show abstract

Guidelines for Territorial Impact Assessment Applied to Regional Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation

Cited by 5 publications

References 6 publications

How Efficiently Does the EU Support Research and Innovation in SMEs?

How Efficiently Does the EU Support Research and Innovation in SMEs?

EU Cohesion Policy post-2020, European Green Deal and Territorial Agenda 2030. The future of the place-based approach in the new EU policy framework in the context of COVID-19

Evaluating the Reasons Behind the Inefficient Implementation of ERDF Devoted to R&I in SMEs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About