IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijitmx/v14y2017i02ns0219877017400077.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multiple Context of Innovation: Insights from Literature

Author

Listed:
  • Anna D’Auria

    (Department of Economics, Management, Institutions, University of Naples Federico II, Campus Monte Sant’Angelo, 80126 Naples, Italy)

  • Marco Tregua

    (Department of Economics, Management, Institutions, University of Naples Federico II, Campus Monte Sant’Angelo, 80126 Naples, Italy)

  • Tiziana Russo Spena

    (Department of Economics, Management, Institutions, University of Naples Federico II, Campus Monte Sant’Angelo, 80126 Naples, Italy)

  • Francesco Bifulco

    (Department of Economics, Management, Institutions, University of Naples Federico II, Campus Monte Sant’Angelo, 80126 Naples, Italy)

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to investigate the most relevant conceptualizations of innovation taken into account by scholars, and the linkages among them. Over time, the increasing interest in this area has involved a great variety of actors and contexts in establishing the definition of different innovation labels; we chose to focus the analysis on “system innovation”, “network innovation” and “ecosystem innovation”. In order to observe the most relevant elements of each research stream and common aspects, a two-step analysis of literature contributions has been performed through a bibliometric analysis comparing the evidence emerging from one survey of keywords provided by authors and a second of keywords provided by editors. Through this kind of investigation the editors’ keywords emerged as more objective, but nevertheless, by considering some of the different evidences obtained from the keywords provided by authors, the two-step analysis is useful to provide more complete results.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna D’Auria & Marco Tregua & Tiziana Russo Spena & Francesco Bifulco, 2017. "Multiple Context of Innovation: Insights from Literature," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(02), pages 1-15, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijitmx:v:14:y:2017:i:02:n:s0219877017400077
    DOI: 10.1142/S0219877017400077
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0219877017400077
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S0219877017400077?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    2. Peter van den Besselaar & Gaston Heimeriks, 2006. "Mapping research topics using word-reference co-occurrences: A method and an exploratory case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(3), pages 377-393, September.
    3. Clarysse, Bart & Wright, Mike & Bruneel, Johan & Mahajan, Aarti, 2014. "Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1164-1176.
    4. Bengt-Åke Lundvall, 2007. "National Innovation Systems—Analytical Concept and Development Tool," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 95-119.
    5. Luz M. Romo-Fernández & Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2013. "Co-word based thematic analysis of renewable energy (1990–2010)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(3), pages 743-765, December.
    6. Freeman, Chris, 1995. "The 'National System of Innovation' in Historical Perspective," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 5-24, February.
    7. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    8. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2010. "Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 523-538, August.
    9. Mark William Neff & Elizabeth A. Corley, 2009. "35 years and 160,000 articles: A bibliometric exploration of the evolution of ecology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(3), pages 657-682, September.
    10. Ritter, Thomas & Gemunden, Hans Georg, 2003. "Network competence: Its impact on innovation success and its antecedents," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 56(9), pages 745-755, September.
    11. Gita Ghiasi & Vincent Larivière, 2015. "Sectoral systems of innovation: the case of robotics research activities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 407-424, August.
    12. Chiara Franzoni & Christopher L. Simpkins & Baoli Li & Ashwin Ram, 2010. "Using content analysis to investigate the research paths chosen by scientists over time," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(1), pages 321-335, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Santarsiero, Francesco & Schiuma, Giovanni & Carlucci, Daniela & Helander, Nina, 2023. "Digital transformation in healthcare organisations: The role of innovation labs," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    2. Schiuma, Giovanni & Santarsiero, Francesco, 2023. "Innovation labs as organisational catalysts for innovation capacity development: A systematic literature review," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).

    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. Igors Skute, 2019. "Opening the black box of academic entrepreneurship: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(1), pages 237-265, July.
    2. Zhigao Liu & Yimei Yin & Weidong Liu & Michael Dunford, 2015. "Visualizing the intellectual structure and evolution of innovation systems research: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(1), pages 135-158, April.
    3. Rhiannon Pugh & Jana Schmutzler & Alexandra Tsvetkova, 2021. "Taking the systems approaches out of their comfort zones: Perspectives from under explored contexts," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 608-620, June.
    4. Chulok Alexander, 2021. "Applying blended foresight methods for revealing incentives and future strategies of key national innovation system players," Engineering Management in Production and Services, Sciendo, vol. 13(4), pages 160-173, December.
    5. Gaviria-Marin, Magaly & Merigó, José M. & Baier-Fuentes, Hugo, 2019. "Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 194-220.
    6. Christopher S. Hayter, 2016. "A trajectory of early-stage spinoff success: the role of knowledge intermediaries within an entrepreneurial university ecosystem," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 633-656, October.
    7. Swati Mehta, 2018. "National Innovation System of India: An Empirical Analysis," Millennial Asia, , vol. 9(2), pages 203-224, August.
    8. Fan, Di & Li, Yi & Chen, Liang, 2017. "Configuring innovative societies: The crossvergent role of cultural and institutional varieties," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 66, pages 43-56.
    9. Baraldi, Enrico & Gressetvold, Espen & Harrison, Debbie, 2012. "Resource interaction in inter-organizational networks: Foundations, comparison, and a research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 266-276.
    10. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    11. Shi, Xing & Wu, Yanrui & Fu, Dahai, 2020. "Does University-Industry collaboration improve innovation efficiency? Evidence from Chinese Firms⋄," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 39-53.
    12. Franz Tödtling & Markus Grillitsch, 2015. "Does Combinatorial Knowledge Lead to a Better Innovation Performance of Firms?," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(9), pages 1741-1758, September.
    13. Blanca De-Miguel-Molina & Scott W. Cunningham & Fernando Palop, 2017. "Analyzing Funding Patterns and Their Evolution in Two Medical Research Topics," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(02), pages 1-39, April.
    14. Ivan Jarić & Jelena Knežević-Jarić & Mirjana Lenhardt, 2014. "Relative age of references as a tool to identify emerging research fields with an application to the field of ecology and environmental sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(2), pages 519-529, August.
    15. SLUYTS, Kim & MARTENS, Rudy & MATTHYSSENS, Paul, 2008. "Towards a dynamic concept of alliance capability," Working Papers 2008019, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    16. Peng Wang & Fang-Wei Zhu & Hao-Yang Song & Jian-Hua Hou & Jin-Lan Zhang, 2018. "Visualizing the Academic Discipline of Knowledge Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-28, March.
    17. Ciarli, Tommaso & Ràfols, Ismael, 2019. "The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 949-967.
    18. Ben R. Martin, 2016. "Twenty challenges for innovation studies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(3), pages 432-450.
    19. Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado & Juan-José Nájera-Sánchez & Eva-María Mora-Valentín, 2018. "A Research Agenda on Open Innovation and Entrepreneurship: A Co-Word Analysis," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-17, July.
    20. Hanane Rhomad & Karima Khalil & Khalid Elkalay, 2023. "Water Quality Modeling in Atlantic Region: Review, Science Mapping and Future Research Directions," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 37(1), pages 451-499, January.

    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:wsi:ijitmx:v:14:y:2017:i:02:n:s0219877017400077. 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijitm/ijitm.shtml .

    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.