The geographical dimension of interactive learning. Rune Dahl Fitjar, IRIS and UCLA Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, LSE and IMDEA

Transcription

1 The geographical dimension of interactive learning Rune Dahl Fitjar, IRIS and UCLA Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, LSE and IMDEA

2 Interaction and innovation Interaction as a central theme in wide range of theories on innovation: Industrial districts (Becattini 1987, Bellandi 1996) Learning regions (Morgan 1997) Regional innovation systems (Cooke and Morgan 1998, Cooke 2002) Triple helix (Leydesdorff 2000) Frequent and repeated contact with a multitude of actors contributes to Knowledge spillovers Interactive learning Innovation

3 The geography of interaction Studies of interaction are usually either theoretical e.g. triple helix approaches (Etzkowitz 2003) or focused on local interaction Within clusters, cities or regions (Storper and Venables 2004) Agglomeration and geographical proximity encourage and facilitate face-to-face encounters Less attention has been paid to interactions beyond reduced geographical spaces Exceptions include Dimensions of proximity (Boschma 2005, Torre and Rallet 2005) Global pipelines (Bathelt et al. 2004, Bathelt 2007)

4 Drivers of interaction Why do different firms collaborate with partners at different geographical scales? Do the same factors drive local collaboration and collaboration at a distance? Little previous research on this topic

5 Hypotheses The propensity to collaborate with nearby and faraway partners will be driven by three types of factors: Characteristics of the manager Socio-demographic characteristics Values and attitudes of the manager Characteristics of the firm Size, ownership and industry (Döring and Schnellenbach 2006, Malecki 2010) Characteristics of the region where the firm is located R&D intensity Human capital endowment (Chaminade and Vang 2008) Population size and density (Malecki 2010, Fritsch and Slavtchev 2011)

6 The case of Norway Small and relatively remote Firms invest little in intramural R&D and frequently pursue collaborative innovation strategies (Fagerberg et al. 2009) Insufficient agglomeration and the long distance between major cities is a drawback for interactive learning at local and national scale Innovation policy increasingly focused on regions International collaboration an important driver of innovation, while local and national interaction plays a marginal role (Fitjar and Rodríguez-Pose 2011) As in Sweden (Moodysson 2008), knowledge tends to be embedded in globally configured knowledge communities

7 Norwegian city regions (Tromsø) Trondheim Population (2009) Businesses > 10 empl Oslo Bergen Stavanger Trondheim Kristiansand Sample Total Bergen Stavanger Kristiansand Oslo (Fredrikstad) Map from the Norwegian Government s white paper no. 31, : The Metropolitan Region Report: On the development of policies for metropolitan regions.

8 Data on firms and managers Tailor-made survey of firms with more than 10 employees in Norway Targeting the managers of those firms Conducted by telephone In the five largest urban agglomerations in Norway In the spring of 2010 Examining The use of external partners in innovation processes The location of external partners used The managers values and attitudes towards other actors in the region and towards the outside world

9 Regional data Indicator Definition Year Source Unit R&D expenditure Total R&D expenditure per capita 2008 NIFU County in 1000 NOK Educated population No. of people with tertiary 2009 SSB City region education as percent of adult population (16+) Population 100,000s of people 2010 SSB City region Population density Population per km 2 of area 2010 SSB City region Industrial specialization Krugman index based on employment share of 17 NACE categories S&T personnel Total R&D personnel as percent of total no. of employed people Industrial R&D R&D personnel in industry as percent of total no. of employed people % young people Number of people aged as percent of total population Unemployment Total no. of registered unemployed people as percent of working-age population (18-67) 2009 SSB City region 2008 NIFU County 2008 NIFU County 2010 SSB City region 2010 SSB City region

10 No. of partner types used Regional National International Oslo Bergen Stavanger Trondheim Kristiansand

11 Dimensions of managers values Regional Openmindedn. Regional- Work-rel. Principal components, N=1604 Comp. trust 1 2 Comp. mindedn. Comp. 3 Comp. trust 4 Trust in other people in general Trust in regional business managers Trust in regional politicians Trust in regional bureaucrats Regional employment > company profits Easier cooperate with regional actors Include staff in decision-making Let staff get their way even when wrong Old and proven > newfangled ideas Impr. understanding of foreign cultures Wish Norw. more open to outside world More comfortable w ppl open to change Eigenvalue

12 Regional management cultures? Oslo Bergen Stavanger Trondheim Kr.sand Regional trust -0.09* ** 0.04 (0.06) 0.14 (0.10) Work-related trust (0.06) 0.08 (0.09) Open-mindedness 0.08* (0.06) 0.03 (0.10) Regionalmindedness -0.37*** 0.09* 0.19*** 0.09* (0.06) 0.07 (0.10) Note: * = P < 0.10 ** = P < 0.05 *** = P < 0.01 of the mean component score being equal to zero.

13 Manager-related effects Regional collaboration Regional trust 0.07*** Work-related trust 0.02 Open-mindedness 0.02 Regional-mindedness 0.00 Education Age -0.01*** Directorships 0.01 Note: * = P < 0.10 ** = P < 0.05 *** = P < 0.01 Controlling for firm- and regional-level variables National collaboration 0.06** *** 0.03** (0.04) International collaboration *** (0.04) -0.20*** (0.04) 0.07*** -0.01* -0.01

14 Firm-related effects Regional collaboration Log size 0.06*** Foreign owners -0.15** (0.07) Industry Ctr.*** (Highest: El./gas/water, mining. Lowest: Trade, transp./comms. National collaboration 0.15*** (0.09) Ctr.*** (Highest: Mining, services. Lowest: Constructions, hotels/rest. International collaboration 0.15*** 0.82*** (0.09) Ctr.*** Highest: Mining, manufacturing. Lowest: Constructions, hotels/rest. Note: * = P < 0.10 ** = P < 0.05 *** = P < 0.01 Controlling for manager- and regional-level variables

15 Regional effects on regional collaboration R&D expenditure 0.02*** ** 0.01* 0.02*** *** Educated population -0.08*** ** -0.05** -0.07*** -0.06*** *** Population -0.02*** -0.03*** Pop. density -0.00*** -0.00*** Industrial specializ * (0.29) S&T personnel 0.08*** Industrial R&D -0.25** (0.12) % young people 0.16*** 0.19*** (0.04) Unempl (0.12) Note: * = P < 0.10 ** = P < 0.05 *** = P < 0.01 Controlling for manager- and firm-level variables

16 Regional effects on national collaboration R&D expenditure 0.02** ** 0.01* Educated population -0.05** * -0.04* -0.06** *** Population Pop. density -0.00** -0.00** Industrial specializ (0.43) S&T personnel 0.06** Industrial R&D 0.14 (0.18) % young people 0.07* (0.04) 0.10 (0.06) Unempl. 0.31* (0.18) Note: * = P < 0.10 ** = P < 0.05 *** = P < 0.01 Controlling for manager- and firm-level variables

17 Regional effects on international collaboration R&D expenditure -0.02* ** * Educated population 0.05* (0.04) 0.05** * Population 0.02** 0.02** Pop. density 0.00** 0.00** Industrial specializ (0.53) S&T personnel -0.08** (0.04) Industrial R&D 0.28 (0.22) % young people -0.10** -0.17** (0.08) Unempl (0.23) Note: * = P < 0.10 ** = P < 0.05 *** = P < 0.01 Controlling for manager- and firm-level variables

18 Conclusion Interacting with partners influenced by combination of manager-related, firm-related and region-related factors But the effects of these factors are often different for local interaction and interaction at a distance: Trust is important for local interaction, whereas openmindedness is a key driver of international collaboration and excessive regional-mindedness can be detrimental to interaction at a distance High levels of R&D investments in the region drives local collaboration, whereas high levels of education is important for international collaboration Policies aimed at supporting local social capital formation and increasing R&D expenditure may therefore have done little to promote innovation in Norway Future policy should aim to improve education levels and the construction of global pipelines