Download - Knowledge Economy 2.0 by Roel Rutten
SPACE AND LEARNING INKNOWLEDGE ECONOMY 2.0
Dr. Roel RuttenTilburg University
ICID Conference, The Hague, The Netherlands, 12-14 September 2013
MAPPING KNOWLEDGE AND LEARNING
Innovation Scoreboard 2012© Eurostat
R&D expenditure as % of GDP (2011); EU 27 = 2.01< 0.50
0.50 – 1.00
1.00 – 2.00
2.00 – 3.00
> 3.00
not available© Eurostat
SPACE AND LEARNING• Main question
– Why are some regions better at innovation than others?– Differences in regional economic development
• Territorial Innovation Models (TIM) literature– Dominant since early 1990s– Endogenous regional development
• Regional knowledge base• Regional innovation networks• Regional social capital• Regional labour market• Regional supply of venture capital• Regional innovation policy
• However, since early 1990s– Economy has changed– Conceptual understanding of economy has changed
• Objective of SDIN– Develop more sophisticated understanding of relation space and learning
NOORD BRABANT EXAMPLE
CHANGES IN ECONOMY
Knowledge Economy 1.0 Knowledge Economy 2.0
Mobile phones, Email, Internet Connected divices
Global firms Global individuals
Emerging markets Global economy, various economic ‘blocs’
Technological innovation CreativityMorphing of manufacturing and servicesDigitization production of goods, services
Production systems of flexible regional networks
Global value chains
Welfare state Knowledge haves – Knowledge have nots
EVOLUTIONAND
INSTITUTIONS
EMBEDDEDNESSAND
SOCIAL CAPITAL
THE LEARNINGORGANIZATION
NETWORKS ANDRESOURCE
DEPENDENCY
INDUSTRIALDISTRICTS
tacitness of knowledge
organizational characteristics affect learning
social interaction,customs, routines
mobilizing internal and external
resources
knowledge as critical resource
learning as organized process
agglomeration economies
shared norms and values; strong and
weak ties
institutions facilitating innovation
social and institutional
proximity
overlapping regional social and
professional networks
regional institutions
path dependent development
regional knowledge base
premium on localized learning
localbuzz
INNOVATION AND LEARNING IN INTER-FIRM NETWORKS
governancechoices
CONCEPTUAL PROGRESS (I)
• Tacitness of knowledge– Knowledge is context dependent rather than tacit/ codified– Tacit knowledge conflates contextuality and complexity
• Learning organization– Learning as bottom-up process in communities of individuals
rather than formally organized in organizations– From firm to individual as principal agent of learning
• Networks and resource dependence– From dependency on regional knowledge base to spatially
much more complex network configurations– Local buzz and global pipelines (Bathelt et al. 2004)
CONCEPTUAL PROGRESS (II)
• Institutions and evolution– Institutions affect innovation in networks– Whose institutions? Why are they local?
• Embeddedness and social capital– Different social capital in different networks, no regional social
capital (Malecki 2012)• Industrial districts
– From regions as bounded territory to places as spaces of opportunity
• Recent developments– Relational turn: agents and their relations rather than regions
as bounded territory with particular attributes as object of analysis
CHANGED CONCEPTUALIZATION
Knowledge Economy 1.0 Knowledge Economy 2.0
Knowledge Tacit and codified Contextual
Agent of learning Firms Individuals
Process of learning Hierarchically organized in firms
Bottom-up in communities of individuals
Proximity Spatial proximity, co-location of firms
Relational and cognitive proximity of indivuduals
Social context Regional-based social capital
Community-based social capital, places host multiple communities
Space Bounded territory, regional production systems
Places of opportunity in global space
IMPORTANT QUESTIONS
• Who are the agents that are referred to in the observation that agents and their relations are the object of analysis?
• How are these agents and their relations connected to space?
• How are the institutions, social capital and norms and values shaping these relations connected to space?
AN INDIVIDUAL PERSPECTIVE
• Individuals as agents of innovation– Innovation (KE 2.0) a function of the number of ‘conversations’ that are
going on– Conversation: exchange of ideas and knowledge creation within and
between professional and social communities of individuals
• Individuals are spatially sticky to where they live and work– Spatially sticky: connected but not confined to a particular place– Most professional and social interactions in ‘home region’
• Spatially sticky individuals– Have spatially sticky relations– Are shaped by spatially sticky institutions, social capital, norms and
values– Are part of multiple and overlapping professional and social
communities– Communities on various spatial scales
FUNCTION OF PLACE (I)
• Space of opportunities– Enable individuals to engage in multiple ‘conversations’– Attract, bind and connect people, offer diversity
• ‘Traditional’ amenities– (Digital) infrastructure for global connection– Host knowledge centres as entry points of ‘global
pipelines’– Offer interesting job/ career opportunities
FUNCTION OF PLACE (II)
• Jacobs/Florida amenities– Cultural amenities: meeting point of professional and social
communities– Environmental amenities: quality of life– Architectural amenities: draw in a diversity of people, invite them
to meet– Socio-cultural diversity: contributes to the number of
‘conversations’ and encourages openness for new ideas
• Host diverse professional and social communities– More opportunities for ‘conversations’– Exposure to diverse institutions, social capital and norms and
values of different communities equips individuals with ‘social language’ and ‘relational skills’ to engage in ‘conversations’ within and beyond home region.
IMPLICATIONS• Why are some places (rather than regions) better at innovation
than others?
• Combination of traditional (R&D) and social factors
• Different combinations of amenities may attract and bind people– No “one size fits all”– Uniqueness, authentic experience
• Global mosaic of places rather than hierarchy of regions
• Connectedness matters– Physical, digital, social– Increasing overlap