IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2020i1p62-d467021.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Place-Based Directionality of Innovation: Tasmanian Salmon Farming and Responsible Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Arnt Fløysand

    (The Mohn Centre for Innovation and Regional Development, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, NO 5063 Bergen, Norway)

  • Emil Tomson Lindfors

    (The Mohn Centre for Innovation and Regional Development, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, NO 5063 Bergen, Norway)

  • Stig-Erik Jakobsen

    (The Mohn Centre for Innovation and Regional Development, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, NO 5063 Bergen, Norway)

  • Lars Coenen

    (The Mohn Centre for Innovation and Regional Development, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, NO 5063 Bergen, Norway)

Abstract

The aim of this paper has been to explore, in depth, the place-based conditions enabling and constraining the directionality of responsible innovation in the Tasmanian salmon farming industry, and to discuss how this case can inform the broader literature on directionality of innovations. Theoretically, we argue that the combination of literature on responsible research and innovation (RRI), regional innovation system (RIS) and discourse theory is a useful starting point for addressing innovation as a territorial complex consisting of a material dimension in terms of technologies and resources, an organizational dimension in terms of innovation systems and regulations, and a discursive dimension in terms of narratives in play. When applying the complex to analyze how place-based conditions have enabled and constrained the directionality of responsible innovation in the Tasmanian salmon industry, the case discerns that the directionality of responsible innovation arises from a rather mature and well-organized regional innovation system, which allows multiple stakeholders to articulate their narratives. Under such circumstances, responsible innovation becomes a multidimensional, interactive, and co-created phenomenon consisting of several dilemmas. Still, although the contextualization of responsible innovation is highlighted, our case study acknowledges that certain “universal” characteristics shine through. By this we mean that context sensitivity must not supersede the fact that place-based responsible innovation is always subject to some generic dynamism: under all circumstances there will be a territorial innovation complex at play.

Suggested Citation

  • Arnt Fløysand & Emil Tomson Lindfors & Stig-Erik Jakobsen & Lars Coenen, 2020. "Place-Based Directionality of Innovation: Tasmanian Salmon Farming and Responsible Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2020:i:1:p:62-:d:467021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/1/62/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/1/62/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. K. Matthias Weber & Bernhard Truffer, 2017. "Moving innovation systems research to the next level: towards an integrative agenda," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(1), pages 101-121.
    2. Bjørn Asheim & Lars Coenen, 2006. "Contextualising Regional Innovation Systems in a Globalising Learning Economy: On Knowledge Bases and Institutional Frameworks," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 163-173, January.
    3. Jérôme Stuck & Tom Broekel & Javier Revilla Diez, 2016. "Network Structures in Regional Innovation Systems," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 423-442, March.
    4. Rune Dahl Fitjar & Paul Benneworth & Bjørn Terje Asheim, 2019. "Towards regional responsible research and innovation? Integrating RRI and RIS3 in European innovation policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(5), pages 772-783.
    5. Kerr, Anne & Hill, Rosemary L. & Till, Christopher, 2018. "The limits of responsible innovation: Exploring care, vulnerability and precision medicine," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 24-31.
    6. Michael P. Schlaile & Sophie Urmetzer & Vincent Blok & Allan Dahl Andersen & Job Timmermans & Matthias Mueller & Jan Fagerberg & Andreas Pyka, 2017. "Innovation Systems for Transformations towards Sustainability? Taking the Normative Dimension Seriously," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-20, December.
    7. Raj Kumar Thapa & Tatiana Iakovleva & Lene Foss, 2019. "Responsible research and innovation: a systematic review of the literature and its applications to regional studies," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(12), pages 2470-2490, December.
    8. Benjamin Saunders & Julius Sim & Tom Kingstone & Shula Baker & Jackie Waterfield & Bernadette Bartlam & Heather Burroughs & Clare Jinks, 2018. "Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1893-1907, July.
    9. Schot, Johan & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2018. "Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1554-1567.
    10. Rune Njøs & Svein Gunnar Sjøtun & Stig-Erik Jakobsen & Arnt Fløysand, 2020. "Expanding Analyses of Path Creation: Interconnections between Territory and Technology," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 96(3), pages 266-288, July.
    11. Roe, Emery M., 1991. "Development narratives, or making the best of blueprint development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 287-300, April.
    12. Rune Njøs & Stig-Erik Jakobsen, 2018. "Policy for Evolution of Regional Innovation Systems: The Role of Social Capital and Regional Particularities," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(2), pages 257-268.
    13. Elvira Uyarra & Barbara Ribeiro & Lisa Dale-Clough, 2019. "Exploring the normative turn in regional innovation policy: responsibility and the quest for public value," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(12), pages 2359-2375, December.
    14. Isaksen , Arne & Trippl , Michaela, 2014. "Regional industrial path development in different regional innovation systems: A conceptual analysis," Papers in Innovation Studies 2014/17, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    15. Ron A. Boschma & Koen Frenken, 2006. "Why is economic geography not an evolutionary science? Towards an evolutionary economic geography," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 273-302, June.
    16. Markus Steen, 2016. "Reconsidering path creation in economic geography: aspects of agency, temporality and methods," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(9), pages 1605-1622, September.
    17. Meric Gertler, 2010. "Rules of the Game: The Place of Institutions in Regional Economic Change," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(1), pages 1-15.
    18. Lars Coenen & Bjørn Asheim & Markus M Bugge & Sverre J Herstad, 2017. "Advancing regional innovation systems: What does evolutionary economic geography bring to the policy table?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(4), pages 600-620, June.
    19. Franz Tödtling & Michaela Trippl, 2018. "Regional innovation policies for new path development – beyond neo-liberal and traditional systemic views," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(9), pages 1779-1795, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hansmeier Hendrik & Kroll Henning, 2024. "The geography of eco-innovations and sustainability transitions: A systematic comparison," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 68(2), pages 125-143.
    2. Sebastian Rohe & Jannika Mattes, 2021. "What about the regional level? Regional configurations of Technological Innovation Systems," PEGIS geo-disc-2021_01, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    3. Uyarra, Elvira & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, Jon Mikel & Flanagan, Kieron & Magro, Edurne, 2020. "Public procurement, innovation and industrial policy: Rationales, roles, capabilities and implementation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    4. Han Chu & Robert Hassink, 2023. "Advancing spatial ontology in evolutionary economic geography," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 16(3), pages 391-404.
    5. Janssen, Matthijs J. & Abbasiharofteh, Milad, 2022. "Boundary spanning R&D collaboration: Key enabling technologies and missions as alleviators of proximity effects?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    6. Salas Gironés, Edgar & van Est, Rinie & Verbong, Geert, 2020. "The role of policy entrepreneurs in defining directions of innovation policy: A case study of automated driving in the Netherlands," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    7. Trippl, Michaela & Asheim, Björn & Miorner, Johan, 2015. "Identification of regions with less developed research and innovation systems," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/1, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    8. Bernhard Truffer, 2024. "New methodological inroads to regional path development - Epistemological reflections on the contribution of semantic network analysis," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2024(05), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    9. Janssen, Matthijs J. & Abbasiharofteh, Milad, 2022. "Boundary spanning R&D collaboration: Key enabling technologies and missions as alleviators of proximity effects?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 180.
    10. Robert Hassink & Arne Isaksen & Michaela Trippl, 2019. "Towards a comprehensive understanding of new regional industrial path development," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(11), pages 1636-1645, November.
    11. Franz Tödtling & Michaela Trippl & Veronika Desch, 2022. "New directions for RIS studies and policies in the face of grand societal challenges," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(11), pages 2139-2156, November.
    12. Jason Deegan & Marte C. W. Solheim & Stig‐Erik Jakobsen & Arne Isaksen, 2022. "One coast, two systems: Regional innovation systems and entrepreneurial discovery in Western Norway," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 490-514, June.
    13. Grillitsch, Markus & Sotarauta, Markku, 2018. "Regional Growth Paths: From Structure to Agency and Back," Papers in Innovation Studies 2018/1, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    14. Markus Grillitsch & Bjørn T. Asheim, 2017. "Cluster policy: Renewal through the integration of institutional variety," Chapters, in: Dirk Fornahl & Robert Hassink (ed.), The Life Cycle of Clusters, chapter 4, pages 76-94, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Michaela Trippl & Simon Baumgartinger-Seiringer & Alexandra Frangenheim & Arne Isaksen & Jan Ole Rypestøl, 2019. "Green path development, asset modification and agency: towards a systemic integrative approach," PEGIS geo-disc-2019_01, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    16. Simone Strambach, 2013. "Micro-dynamics of knowledge: actors, processes and territorial organization," Working Papers on Innovation and Space 2013-01, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
    17. Janssen, Matthijs & Wanzenböck, Iris & Fünfschilling, Lea & Pontinakis, Dimitris, 2023. "Governance arrangements for the implementation of transformative innovation policy: Insights from a comparative case study," Papers in Innovation Studies 2023/13, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    18. Maximilian Benner, 2023. "Making spatial evolution work for all? A framework for inclusive path development," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 16(3), pages 445-462.
    19. Johan Miörner, 2019. "Contextualizing system agency in new path development: What factors shape regional reconfiguration capacity?," PEGIS geo-disc-2019_13, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    20. Kieron Flanagan & Elvira Uyarra & Iris Wanzenböck, 2021. "Towards a problem-oriented regional industrial policy: possibilities for public intervention in framing, valuation and market creation," Working Papers 52, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Apr 2021.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2020:i:1:p:62-:d:467021. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.