This paper analyses a number of European regions which, in the last two decades, have exhibited a significant shift towards knowledge-intensive industrial sectors coupled with a considerable increase in competitiveness and growth. The analysis identifies the main factors of territorial development behind each regional renewal process and captures a number of common trajectories of regional competitiveness. Interestingly, all the regional ‘success stories' are strongly dependent on the presence of a tri-polar regional innovation system that glues together firms, government institutions and academia.
AminA.ThriftN. (1995), ‘Globalization, institutional “thickness” and the local economy’, in HealeyP.CameronS.DavoudiS.GrahamS.Madani-PourA., eds, Managing Cities: The New Urban Context, John Wiley, Chichester.
2.
AsheimB. (1996), ‘Industrial districts as “learning regions”: A condition for prosperity?’, European Planning Studies, Vol 4, pp 379–400.
3.
AthreyeS. (2001), ‘Agglomeration and growth: A study of the Cambridge hi-tech cluster’, SIEPR Discussion Paper 00–42, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, Stanford, CA.
4.
AydalotP., ed (1986), Milieux Innovateurs en Europe, GREMI, Paris.
5.
AydalotP.KeebleD., eds (1988), High-Technology Industry and Innovative Environments: The European Experience, Routledge, London.
6.
BecattiniG. (1979), ‘Dal“settore” industriale al “distretto” industriale: Alcune considerazioni sull'unità di indagine dell'economia industriale’, Rivista di Economia e Politica Industriale, Vol 5, No 1, pp 7–21.
7.
BerggrenC.LaestadiusS. (2003), ‘Co-development and composite clusters? The secular strength of Nordic telecommunications’, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol 12, No 1, pp 91–114.
8.
de SigoyerM. BernardyBoisgontierP. (1988), Grains de Technopole, PUG, Grenoble.
9.
BlomströmM.KokkoA. (2002), ‘From natural resources to high-tech production: The evolution of industrial competitiveness in Sweden and Finland’, Working Paper, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm.
10.
BlomströmM.KokkoA.SjöholmF. (2002), ‘Growth and innovation policies for a knowledge economy: Experiences from Finland, Sweden and Singapore’, Working Paper 156, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm.
BrioschiM.S.CassiaL.ColombelliA. (2005), ‘Common frameworks for regional competitiveness: Insights from a number of local knowledge economies’, paper presented at the 45th Annual Conference of the European Regional Science Association (ERSA), Amsterdam, 23–27 August.
13.
BruscoS. (1982), ‘The Emilian model: Production decentralization and social integration’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol 2, pp 167–184.
14.
CamagniR. (1991), ‘Local “milieux”, uncertainty and innovation networks: Towards a new dynamic theory of economic space’, in CamagniR., ed, Innovation Networks: Spatial Perspectives, Belhaven, London, pp 121–142.
15.
CastellsM.HallP. (1994), Technopoles of the World: The Making of the Twenty-First Century Industrial Complex, Routledge, London.
16.
CollinsonS. (2000), ‘Knowledge networks for innovation in small Scottish software firms’, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Vol 12, pp 217–244.
17.
CookeP. (1992), ‘Regional innovation systems, competitive regulation in the new Europe’, Geoforum, Vol 23, pp 365–382.
18.
CookeP.UrangaM.ExtebarriaG. (1997), ‘Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organizational dimensions’, Research Policy, Vol 26, pp 475–491.
19.
CookeP.BoekholtP.TödlingF. (1998), Regional Innovation Systems: Designing for the Future, Final Report to DG12 of the REGIS TSER Project, Centre for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences, University of Wales, Cardiff.
20.
CookeP.RoperS.WylieP. (2003), ‘The golden thread of innovation and Northern Ireland's evolving regional innovation system’, Regional Studies, Vol 37, No 4, pp 365–379.
DoloreuxD. (2002), ‘What we should know about regional systems of innovation’, Technology in Society, Vol 24, pp 243–263.
23.
DosiG. (1988), ‘Sources, procedures and microeconomic effects of innovation’, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol 26, pp 1120–1171.
24.
DruilheC.GarnseyE. (2000), ‘Emergence and growth of high-tech activity in Cambridge and Grenoble’, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Vol 12, pp 163–177.
25.
EdquistC. (2005), ‘Systems of innovation: Perspectives and challenges’, in FagerbergJ.MoweryD.NelsonR., eds, The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
26.
ESRI (1997), Medium-Term Reviews 1997–2003, Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin.
27.
EtzkowitzH.LeydesdorffL. (1997), Universities in the Global Economy: A Triple Helix of University–Industry–Government Relations, Cassell, London.
28.
EtzkowitzH.LeydesdorffL. (2000), ‘The dynamics of innovation: From “National Systems” and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations, Research Policy, Vol 29, pp 109–123.
29.
FarrellM. (2004), ‘Regional integration and cohesion – lessons from Spain and Ireland in the EU’, Journal of Asian Economics, Vol 14, pp 927–946.
30.
FreemanC. (1987), Technology, Policy, and Economic Performance - Lessons from Japan, Frances Pinter, London.
31.
FridlundM. (1999), Den gemensamma utvecklingen – Staten, storföretaget och samarbetet kring den svenska elkrafttekniken, Brutus Östlings Bokförlag Symposion, Stockholm.
32.
GerszewskiS.KriegerF. (2002), ‘The city and University of Dortmund: From coexistence to partnership’, Industry and Higher Education, Vol 16, No 2, pp 105–112.
33.
HerronL.RobinsonR. (1993), ‘A structural model of the effects of entrepreneurial characteristics on venture performance’, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol 8, pp 281–294.
34.
KeebleD.LawsonC.MooreB.WilkinsonF. (1999), ‘Collective learning processes, networking and “institutional thickness” in the Cambridge region’, Regional Studies, Vol 33, No 4, pp 319–332.
35.
IMF (2001), Finland: Selected Issues, IMF Country Report No 01/215, International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC.
36.
LawsonC. (1997), ‘Territorial clustering and high technology innovation: From industrial districts to innovative milieux’, Working Paper 54, ESRC Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
37.
LawsonC.LorenzE. (1997), ‘Collective learning, tacit knowledge and regional innovative capacity’, Regional Studies, Vol 33, No 4, pp 305–317.
38.
LeontiefW. (1953), Studies in the Structure of the American Economy, Oxford University Press, New York.
39.
LorenzE. (1992), ‘Trust, community and co-operation: Towards a theory of industrial districts’, in StorperM.ScottA., eds, Pathways to Industrialization and Regional Development, Routledge, London, pp 195–204.
40.
LundvallB. (1992), National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, Frances Pinter, London.
41.
MarkusenA. (1996), ‘Sticky places in a slippery space: A typology of industrial districts’, Economic Geography, Vol 72, pp 293–313.
42.
MarshallA. (1890), Principles of Economics, Macmillan, London.
43.
MarshallA. (1919), Industry and Trade, Macmillan, London.
44.
MorganK. (1997a), ‘The learning region: Institutions, innovation and regional renewal’, Regional Studies, Vol 31, No 5, pp 491–503.
45.
MorganK. (1997b), ‘The regional animateur: Taking stock of the Welsh Development Agency’, Regional & Federal Sudies, Vol 7, No 2, pp 70–94.
46.
NelsonR., ed (1993), National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
47.
O'ConnorT.P. (2001), ‘Foreign direct investment and indigenous industry in Ireland: Review of evidence’, Working Paper 22/01, ESRC, London.
48.
OECD (1981), The Future of University Research, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris.
49.
OECD (2001), Communications Outlook, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris.
50.
O'GormanC.KautonenM. (2004), ‘Policies to promote new knowledge-intensive industrial agglomerations’, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Vol 16, pp 459–479.
51.
PaciR.UsaiS. (2003), ‘Spatial externalities and local employment dynamics’, paper presented at conference on ‘Reinventing Space: The Geography of Globalization’, Bergamo, 19–20 December.
52.
PerrouxF. (1950a), ‘Economic space: Theory and applications’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol 64, pp 89–104.
SegalQuinceWicksteed (1985), The Cambridge Phenomenon: The Growth of High Technology Industry in a University Town, Segal, Quince and Wicksteed, Cambridge.
60.
SegalQuinceWicksteed (2000), The Cambridge Phenomenon Revisited, Segal, Quince and Wicksteed, Cambridge.
61.
SimmieJ., ed (1997), Innovation, Networks and Learning Regions, Jessica Kingsley, London.
62.
SweeneyP. (1998), The Celtic Tiger: Ireland's Economic Miracle Explained, Oak Tree Press, Dublin.
63.
Tewdwr-JonesM.PhelpsN. (2000), ‘Levelling the uneven playing field: Inward investments, interregional rivalry and the planning system’, Regional Studies, Vol 34, No 5, pp 429–440.
64.
TurpeinenO. (1997), Telecommunications Since 1796, Telecom Finland, Helsinki.
