Click here to download

Constructing Regional Advantage and Smart Specialisation: Comparison of Two European Policy Concepts
Author/s: Ron Boschma 
Year:  2014 Issue: Language: English 
Pages:  18 Pg. 51-68 FullText PDF:  632 KB
DOI:  10.3280/SCRE2014-001004
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 

This paper discusses two influential policy concepts at the European level that aim to promote economic diversification of regions, that is the Constructing Regional Advantage concept (CRA) and the Smart Specialisation concept (SS). Both policy frameworks identify and prioritise ‘promising’ targets for policy intervention, but they do so differently. The SS concept organizes this identification process through entrepreneurial discovery in which entrepreneurs select the domains of future specialisation. The CRA concept focuses on identifying related variety and bottlenecks that prevent related industries in regions to connect and interact. The paper argues that the two policy concepts can provide useful inputs to develop a smart and comprehensive policy design that focuses on true economic renewal in regions.
Keywords: Smart specialisation, constructing regional advantage, regional cohesion policy.
Jel Code: O25, O38, R11.

  1. Asheim B. T., Boschma R., Cooke P. (2011), Constructing Regional Advantage: Platform Policies Based on Related Variety and Differentiated Knowledge Bases. Regional Studies, 45, 7: 893-904., DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2010.543126
  2. Asheim B., Coenen L., Moodysson J., Vang J. (2007), Constructing Knowledge-based Regional Advantage: Implications for Regional Innovation Policy. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 7, 2/3/4/5: 140-155.
  3. Barca F. (2009), An Agenda for a Reformed Cohesion Policy. A Place-based Approach to Meeting European Union Challenges and Expectations. Independent report, pp. 1-219. (Last access October 2013 -
  4. Boschma R. (2009), Evolutionary Economic Geography and its Implications for Regional Innovation Policy. Paris: OECD.
  5. Boschma R. (2011), Regional Branching and Regional Innovation Policy. In: Kourtit K., Nijkamp P., Stough R. R. (eds.), Drivers of Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Regional Dynamics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 359-368., DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-17940-2_17
  6. Boschma R., Frenken K. (2011), Technological Relatedness and Regional Branching. In: Bathelt H., Feldman M. P., Kogler D. F. (eds.), Beyond Territory, Dynamic Geographies of Knowledge Creation and Innovation. London: Routledge. 64-81.
  7. Boschma R., Heimeriks G., Balland P.A. (2014), Scientific Knowledge Dynamics and Relatedness in Biotech Cities. Research Policy, 43, 1: 107-114., DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.07.009
  8. Boschma R., Minondo A., Navarro M. (2012), Related Variety and Regional Growth in Spain. Papers in Regional Science, 91, 2: 241-256., DOI: 10.1111/j.1435-5957-.2011.00387.
  9. Boschma R., Minondo A., Navarro M. (2013), The Emergence of New Industries at the Regional Level in Spain. A Proximity Approach Based on Product-relatedness. Economic Geography, 89, 1: 29-51., DOI: 10.1111/j.1944-8287.2012.01170.x
  10. Boschma R.A. (2004), Competitiveness of Regions from an Evolutionary Perspective. Regional Studies, 38, 9: 1001-1014., DOI: 10.1080/0034340042000292601
  11. Boschma R.A., Iammarino S. (2009), Related Variety, Trade Linkages and Regional Growth in Italy. Economic Geography, 85, 3: 289-311., DOI: 10.1111/j.1944-8287-.2009.01034.x
  12. Charron N., Lapuente V., Rothstein B., Varraish A., Hernandez M., Kazemi Veisari L., Dinescu M., Popovski D., Håkanssson J., Jonsson S., Morgado T., Borcan O. (2010), Measuring the Quality of Government and Subnational Variation. Report prepared for European Commission, DG Regional Policy and Directorate Policy Development by the research team at the Quality of Government Institute, Department of Political Science, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
  13. Colombelli A., Krafft J., Quatraro F. (2012), The Emergence of New Technology-based Sectors at the Regional Level: A Proximity-based Analysis of Nanotechnology. Utrecht: Utrecht University, Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography n. 12.11.
  14. Cooke P. (2007), To Construct Regional Advantage from Innovation Systems First Build Policy Platforms, European Planning Studies 15, 2: 179-194., DOI: 10.1080/09654310601078671
  15. Essleztbichler J. (2013), Relatedness, Industrial Branching and Technological Cohesion in US Metropolitan Areas. Regional Studies., DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2013.806793
  16. European Commission (2006), Constructing Regional Advantage. Principles, Perspectives, Policies. Final report for DG Research. Brussels: European Commission. (Last access October 2013 -
  17. Feldman J. (2007), The Managerial Equation and Innovation Platforms: The Case of Linköping and Berzelius Science Park. European Planning Studies, 15, 8: 1027-1045., DOI: 10.1080/09654310701448162
  18. Foray D., David P., Hall B. (2009), Smart Specialisation – The Concept. Knowledge Economists Policy Brief n. 9, June 2009. Brussels: European Commission.
  19. Foray D., David P., Hall B. H. (2011), Smart Specialisation: From Academic Idea to Political Instrument, the Surprising Career of a Concept and the Difficulties Involved in its Implementation. Lausanne: École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, MTEI Working Paper n. 2011.001.
  20. Frenken K., van Oort F. G., Verburg T. (2007), Related Variety, Unrelated Variety and Regional Economic Growth. Regional Studies, 41, 5: 685-697., DOI: 10.1080/00343400601120296
  21. Fritsch M., Stephan A. (2005), Regionalization of Innovation Policy. Introduction to the Special Issue. Research Policy 34, 8: 1123-1127., DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.05.013
  22. Grabher G. (1993), The Wekness of Strong Ties. The Lock-in of Regional Development in the Ruhr-area. In: Grabher G. (ed.), The Embedded Firm. On the Socioeconomics of Industrial Networks. London: Routledge. 255-277.
  23. Harmaakorpi V. (2006), Regional Development Platform Method (RDPM) as a Tool for Regional Innovation Policy. European Planning Studies, 14, 8: 1085-1114., DOI: 10.1080/09654310600852399
  24. Harmaakorpi V., Tura T., Melkas H. (2011), Regional Innovation Platforms. In: Cooke P., Asheim B., Boschma R., Martin R., Schwartz D., Todtling F. (eds.), Handbook of Regional Innovation and Growth. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 556-572., DOI: 10.4337/9780857931504.00063
  25. Hassink R., Lagendijk A. (2001), The Dilemmas for Interregional Institutional Learning. Environment and Planning C. Government and Policy, 19, 1: 65-84., DOI: 10.1068/c9943
  26. Hausmann R., Rodrik D. (2003), Economic Development as Self-discovery. Journal of Development Economics, 72, 2: 603-633., DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3878(03)00124-X
  27. Howells J. (2005), Inno vation and Regional Economic Development. A Matter of Perspective?. Research Policy, 34, 8: 1220-1234., DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.03.014
  28. Iammarino S., McCann P. (2006), The Structure and Evolution of Industrial Clusters. Transactions, Technology and Knowledge Spillovers. Research Policy, 35, 7: 1018-1036., DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.05.004
  29. Lagendijk A. (2011), Regional Innovation Policy between Theory and Practice. In: Cooke P., Asheim B., Boschma R., Martin R., Schwartz D., Todtling F. (eds.), Handbook of Regional Innovation and Growth. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 597-608., DOI: 10.4337/9780857931504.00066
  30. Lambooy J., Boschma R. A. (2001), Evolutionary Economics and Regional Policy. Annals of Regional Science, 35, 1: 113-133., DOI: 10.1007/s001680000033
  31. McCann P., Barca F. (2011), Outcome Indicators and Targets. Towards a New System of Monitoring and Evaluation in EU Cohesion Policy, mimeo. (Last access October 2013 -
  32. McCann P., Ortega-Argilés R. (2011), Smart Specialisation, Regional Growth and Applications to EU Cohesion Policy. Groningen: University of Groningen, Faculty of Spatial Sciences, Economic Geography Working Paper 2011.
  33. McCann P., Ortega-Argilés R. (2013), Smart Specialisation, Regional Growth and Applications to EU Cohesion Policy. Regional Studies, forthcoming., DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2013.799769
  34. Metcalfe J. S. (2003), Equilibrium and Evolutionary Foundations of Competition and Technology Policy. New Perspectives on the Division of Labour and the Innovation Process. In: Pelikan P., Wegner G. (eds.), The Evolutionary Analysis of Economic Policy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 162-190.
  35. Metcalfe S. (1994), The Economic Foundations of Technology Policy: Equilibrium and Evolutionary Perspectives. In: Dodgson M., Rothwell R. (eds.), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 409-512.
  36. Morgan K. (2013), The Regional State in the Era of Smart Specialisation. Ekonomiaz 83: 103-126. (Last access October 2013 -
  37. Neffke F., Henning M., Boschma R. (2011), How Do Regions Diversify Over Time? Industry Relatedness and the Development of New Growth Paths in Regions. Economic Geography, 87, 3: 237-265., DOI: 10.1111/j.1944-8287.2011.01121.x
  38. Nelson R. R., Winter S. G. (1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA, London: The Belknap Press.
  39. OECD (2010), Regional Innovation Strategies. Paris: Oecd.
  40. OECD (2011), Regions and Innovation Policy, OECD Reviews of Regional Innovation. Paris: Oecd.
  41. Oughton C., Landabaso M., Morgan K. (2002), The Regional Innovation Paradox. Innovation Policy and Industrial Policy. Journal of Technology Transfer, 27, 1: 97-110., DOI: 10.1023/A:1013104805703
  42. Pack H., Saggi K. (2006), The Case for Industrial Policy. A Critical Survey. Washington: World Bank, Policy Research Working Paper n. 3839.
  43. Rigby D. (2012), The Geography of Knowledge Relatedness and Technological Diversification in U.S. Cities. Utrecht: Utrecht University, Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography n.12.18.
  44. Rigby D. L. (2013), Technological Relatedness and Knowledge Space: Entry and Exit of U.S. Cities from Patent Classes. Regional Studies., DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2013.854878
  45. Rodrik D. (2004), Industrial Policy for the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge MA: Harvard University, Kennedy School of Management Working paper n. rwp04-047.
  46. Tanner A. N. (2011), The Place of New Industries: The Case of Fuel Cell Technology and Its Technological Relatedness to Regional Knowledge Bases. Utrecht: Utrecht University, Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography, n. 11.13.
  47. Tödtling F., Trippl M. (2005), One Size Fits All? Towards a Differentiated Regional Innovation Policy Approach. Research Policy 34, 8: 1203-1219., DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.01.018
  48. van Oort F., de Geus S., Dogaru T. (2013), Related Variety and Regional Economic Growth in a Cross-Section of European Urban Regions. Utrecht: Utrecht University, Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography n. 13.12.
  49. Wegner G. (1997), Economic Policy from an Evolutionary Perspective: A New Approach. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 153, 3: 463-509.

Ron Boschma, in "SCIENZE REGIONALI " 1/2014, pp. 51-68, DOI:10.3280/SCRE2014-001004


FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content