Technological change and the challenges for regional development: building social capital in less-favoured regions

The relevance of regional policy for less favoured regions (LFRs) reveals itself when policy-makers must reconcile competitiveness with social cohesion through the adaptation of competition or innovation policies. The vast literature in this area generally builds on an overarching concept of ‘social capital’ as the necessary relational infrastructure for collective action diversification and policy integration, in a context much influenced by a dynamic of industrial change and a necessary balance between the creation and diffusion of ‘knowledge’ through learning. This relational infrastructure or ‘social capital’ is centred on people’s willingness to cooperate and ‘envision’ futures as a result of “social organization, such as networks, norms and trust that facilitate action and cooperation for mutual benefit” (Putnam, 1993: 35). Advocates of this interpretation of ‘social capital’ have adopted the ‘new growth’ thinking behind ‘systems of innovation’ and ‘competence building’, arguing that networks have the potential to make both public administration and markets more effective as well as ‘learning’ trajectories more inclusive of the development of society as a whole. This essay aims to better understand the role of ‘social capital’ in the production and reproduction of uneven regional development patterns, and to critically assess the limits of a ‘systems concept’ and an institution-centred approach to comparative studies of regional innovation. These aims are discussed in light of the following two assertions: i) learning behaviour, from an economic point of view, has its determinants, and ii) the positive economic outcomes of ‘social capital’ cannot be taken as a given. It is suggested that an agent-centred approach to comparative research best addresses the ‘learning’ determinants and the consequences of social networks on regional development patterns. A brief discussion of the current debate on innovation surveys has been provided to illustrate this point.

Innovation in construction: a sociology of technology approach

An alternative approach to understanding innovation is made using two intersecting ideas. The first is that successful innovation requires consideration of the social and organizational contexts in which it is located. The complex context of construction work is characterized by inter-organizational collaboration, a project-based approach and power distributed amongst collaborating organizations. The second is that innovations can be divided into two modes: ‘bounded’, where the implications of innovation are restricted within a single, coherent sphere of influence, and ‘unbounded’, where the effects of implementation spill over beyond this. Bounded innovations are adequately explained within the construction literature. However, less discussed are unbounded innovations, where many firms' collaboration is required for successful implementation, even though many innovations can be considered unbounded within construction's inter-organizational context. It is argued that unbounded innovations require an approach to understand and facilitate the interactions both within a range of actors and between the actors and technological artefacts. The insights from a sociology of technology approach can be applied to the multiplicity of negotiations and alignments that constitute the implementation of unbounded innovation. The utility of concepts from the sociology of technology, including ‘system building’ and ‘heterogeneous engineering’, is demonstrated by applying them to an empirical study of an unbounded innovation on a major construction project (the new terminal at Heathrow Airport, London, UK). This study suggests that ‘system building’ contains outcomes that are not only transformations of practices, processes and systems, but also the potential transformation of technologies themselves.

Understanding the early stages of the innovation diffusion process: awareness, influence and communication networks

The themes of awareness and influence within the innovation diffusion process are addressed. The innovation diffusion process is typically represented as stages, yet awareness and influence are somewhat under-represented in the literature. Awareness and influence are situated within the contextual setting of individual actors but also within the broader institutional forces. Understanding how actors become aware of an innovation and then how their opinion is influenced is important for creating a more innovation-active UK construction sector. Social network analysis is proposed as one technique for mapping how awareness and influence occur and what they look like as a network. Empirical data are gathered using two modes of enquiry. This is done through a pilot study consisting of chartered professionals and then through a case study organization as it attempted to diffuse an innovation. The analysis demonstrates significant variations across actors’ awareness and influence networks. It is argued that social network analysis can complement other research methods in order to present a richer picture of how actors become aware of innovations and where they draw their influences regarding adopting innovations. In summarizing the findings, a framework for understanding awareness and influence associated with innovation within the UK construction sector is presented. Finally, with the UK construction sector continually being encouraged to be innovative, understanding and managing an actor’s awareness and influence network will be beneficial. The overarching conclusion thus describes the need not only to build research capacity in this area but also to push the boundaries related to the research methods employed.

Innovation clusters: key concepts

Innovation is easier to describe than it is to systematically analyse, and easier to analyse than it is to effectively promote. Part of the problem, of course, is the imprecise way in which the activity of innovation itself is conceptualised. To achieve more precision, the logic of analysis suggests that innovation should be should be systematically analysed and then divided into rough categories to produce a working taxonomy based on a number of key dimensions. A major part of the purpose of this paper is to develop such a working taxonomy.

Horses in the countryside: conflict or cooperation?

Recognising the growing significance of sport and recreation in the countryside, this paper seeks to examine the changing demand for, and supply of, opportunities for horse riding in the countryside. It considers the physical problems associated with horse riding, together with the changing social context. The paper considers possible solutions to the issues raised, both within existing rights of way legislation and via new opportunities created by the revisions to agricultural support that have occurred in the last decade. The paper concludes that while the new opportunities have ameliorated some of the problems associated with the supply of land for horse riding, no new rights of access have been conferred. The ability of horse riders to guarantee continued provision will be governed partially by the market but also by future agricultural support policy.

Location and collocation advantages in international innovation

Purpose – This paper examines the role of location-specific (L) advantages in the spatial distribution of multinational enterprise (MNE) R&D activity. The meaning of L advantages is revisited. In addition to L advantages that are industry-specific, the paper emphasises that there is an important category of L advantages, referred to as collocation advantages. Design/methodology/approach – Using the OLI framework, this paper highlights that the innovation activities of MNEs are about interaction of these variables, and the essential process of internalising L advantages to enhance and create firm-specific advantages. Findings – Collocation advantages derive from spatial proximity to specific unaffiliated firms, which may be suppliers, competitors, or customers. It is also argued that L advantages are not always public goods, because they may not be available to all firms at a similar or marginal cost. These costs are associated with access and internalisation of L advantages, and – especially in the case of R&D – are attendant with the complexities of embeddedness. Originality/value – The centralisation/decentralisation, spatial separation/collocation debates in R&D location have been mistakenly viewed as a paradox facing firms, instead of as a trade-off that firms must make.

The evolution of innovation capability in multinational enterprise subsidiaries: dual network embeddedness and the divergence of subsidiary specialisation in Taiwan

This paper examines how innovation-related capabilities for production, design and marketing develop at the subsidiary level within multinational enterprises (MNEs). We focus on how subsidiary autonomy and changing opportunities to access internal (MNE) and external (host country) sources of capability contribute in a combined way to the accumulation of specialist capabilities in five Taiwan-based MNE subsidiaries in the semiconductor industry. Longitudinal analysis shows how the accumulation process is subject to discontinuities, as functional divisions are (re)opened and closed during the lifetime of the subsidiary. A composite set of innovation output measures also shows significant variations in within-function levels of capability across our sample. We conclude that subsidiary specialisation and unique subsidiary-specific advantages have evolved in a way that is strongly influenced by the above factors.