Addressing inclusion, innovation, and sustainability challenges through the lens of economic geography: Introducing the hierarchical regional innovation system

Abstract

The world is facing dramatic challenges related to environmental sustainability at an accelerating pace. In this context, the field of economic geography (EG) has been playing an important role in understanding both the socioeconomic and technological dimensions of these challenges, as it deals with a variety of complementary notions and perspectives. Departing from this lens, our aim is to explore a conceptual framework that can help us to understand environmental changes relating to multi-dimensional territorial development, notably in economic contexts where inequality is high, and stratification based on hierarchies regulate social and economic life. Based on the territory concept, we propose the original notion of a hierarchical regional innovation system (HRIS) that emphasises the pervasive role of hierarchies (powers) in regional innovation systems and illustrate its value with evidence and case studies from extant literature on sustainability transitions. The HRIS can help us understand and promote development paths considering the contribution of inclusive eco-innovations (another original conceptual amalgam). Through some empirical cases from other studies in low-carbon transitions, we show the application of the HRIS (and inclusive eco-innovation) framework. In conclusion, we provide incentives to explore new regional innovation systems, alongside the HRIS, adapted to different regions worldwide and centred on the inclusiveness of people and places.

Keywords

Inclusive eco-innovation / Inclusive innovation / Hierarchical regional innovation system (HRIS) / Territorial development / Sustainable development / Sustainability transitions

Declaration of Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

This research received support from the Centre of Studies in Geography and Spatial Planning (CEGOT), funded by national funds through the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) under the reference UIDB/04084/2020.

The authors would like to thank the editor and reviewers for their valuable input and constructive feedback during the finalization of this manuscript. Their comments proved to be extremely helpful.

References

[1] Antonioli, D, Borghesi, S, Mazzanti, M., 2016. Are regional systems greening the economy? Local spillovers, green innovations and firms’ economic performances. Econ. Innov. New Technol., 25(7), 692-713.

[2] Aoyama, Y, Murphy, J. T., Hanson, S., 2011. Key Concepts in Economic Geography. SAGE Publications, London, UK

[3] Arnstein, S. R., 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. J. Am. Plann. Assoc., 35 (40), pp. 216-224. doi: 10.1080/01944366908977225.

[4] Asheim, B., 2007. Differentiated knowledge bases and varieties of regional innovation systems. Innovation: Eur. J. Soc. Sci. Res., 20(3), 223-241.

[5] Asheim, B, Gertler, M. 2005. The Geography of Innovation: regional innovation systems. J. Fagerberg, D.C. Mowery, R.R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp.291-317.

[6] Barbieri, N, Ghisetti, C, Gilli, M, Marin, G, Nicolli, F., 2016. A survey of the literature on environmental innovation based on main path analysis. J. Econ. Surv., 30(3), 596-623.

[7] Bathelt, H, Malmberg, A, Maskell, P., 2004. Clusters and knowledge: local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Prog. Hum. Geogr., 28(1), 31-56.

[8] Beise, M, Rennings, K., 2005. Lead markets and regulation: a framework for analyzing the international diffusion of environmental innovations. Ecol. Econ., 52(1), 5-17.

[9] Binz, C, Coenen, L, Murphy, J. T., Truffer, B., 2020. Geographies of transition—from topical concerns to theoretical engagement: a comment on the transitions research agenda. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit., 34, 1-3.

[10] Bohle, D, Greskovits, B., 2007. The state, internationalization, and capitalist diversity in Eastern Europe. Compet. Chang., 11(2), 89-115.

[11] Bossle, M, Barcellos, M, Vieira, L, Sauvée, L., 2016. The drivers for adoption of eco-innovation. J. Clean. Prod., 113(1), 861-872.

[12] Boyer, R., 2005. How and why capitalisms differ. Econ. Society 34(4), 509-557.

[13] Carrillo-Hermosilla, J., del Río, P., Könnölä, T., 2009. Eco-innovation: When Sustainability and Competitiveness Shake Hands. Palgrave Macmillan, London doi: 10.1057/9780230244856.

[14] Coenen, L, Benneworth, P, Truffer, B., 2012. Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions. Res. Policy 41(6), 968-979.

[15] Cooke, P., 1992. Regional innovation systems: competitive regulation in the New Europe. Geoforum 23(3), 365-382.

[16] Cooke, P., 2001. Regional innovation systems, clusters, and the knowledge economy. Ind. Corp. Change 10(4), 945-974.

[17] Cozzens, S, Sutz, J., 2012. Innovation in Informal Settings: A Research Agenda. International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada

[18] Dijkstra, L, Poelman, H, Rodríguez-Pose, A. 2018. The geography of EU discontent. Working Papers – Regional and Urban Policy, 12/2018, pp.1-31.

[19] Ekins, P., 2010. Eco-innovation for environmental sustainability: concepts, progress and policies. Int. Econ. Econ. Policy 7(2), 267-290.

[20] El Bilali, H., 2019. Research on agro-food sustainability transitions: a systematic review of research themes and an analysis of research gaps. J. Clean. Prod., 221, 353-364.

[21] FAO, 2019. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2019. Safeguarding against Economic Slowdowns and Downturns. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy (accessed 19 July 2019).

[22] Fligstein, N, Zhang, J., 2011. A new agenda for research on the trajectory of Chinese capitalism. Manage. Organ. Rev., 7(1), 39-62.

[23] Foster, C, Heeks, R., 2013. Analysing policy for inclusive innovation: the mobile sector and base-of-the-pyramid markets in Kenya. Innov. Dev., 3(1), 103-109.

[24] Foster, C, Heeks, R., 2013. Conceptualising inclusive innovation: modifying systems of innovation frameworks to understand diffusion of new technology to low-income consumers. Eur. J. Dev. Res., 25(3), 333-355.

[25] Fussler, C, James, P., 1996. Eco-innovation: A Breakthrough Discipline for Innovation and Sustainability. Pitman Publishing, London

[26] Geels, F, Schot, J., 2007. Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Res. Policy 36(3), 399-417.

[27] Glaeser, E., 2011. Triumph of the City: How Our Greatest Invention Makes Us Richer, Smarter, Greener, Healthier and Happier. The Penguin Press, New York

[28] Gong, H, Hassink, R., 2020. Context sensitivity and economic-geographic (re)theorizing. Cambridge J. Reg. Econ. Soc., 13(3), 475-490.

[29] Gong, H, Hassink, R., 2021. Varieties of capitalism and local industrial development. DRUID Conference 2021, Copenhagen, Denmark

[30] Gorayeb, A, Brannstrom, C, Meireles, A. J. A., Mendes, J. S., 2018. Wind power gone bad: critiquing wind power planning processes in northeastern Brazil. Energy Res. Soc. Sci., 40, 82-88.

[31] Hall, P, Soskice, D. 2001. Introduction. P. Hall, D. Soskice (Eds.), Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage, Oxford University Press, New York, pp.1-68.

[32] Hazarika, N, Zhang, X., 2019. Evolving theories of eco-innovation: a systematic review. Sustain. Prod. Consump., 19, 64-78.

[33] Hayter, R., 2008. Environmental economic geography. Geogr. Compass., 2(3), 831-850.

[34] He, C, He, S, Mu, E, Peng, J., 2022. Environmental economic geography: recent advances and innovative development. Geogr. Sustain., 3(2), 152-163.

[35] Heeks, R, Amalia, M, Kintu, R, Shah, N., 2013. Inclusive innovation: definition, conceptualisation and future research priorities. Development Informatics Working Paper Series, di-wp53

[36] Heeks, R, Foster, C, Nugroho, Y., 2014. Introduction: new models of inclusive innovation for development. Innov. Dev., 4(2), 175-185.

[37] Heiberg, J, Truffer, B, Binz, C., 2022. Assessing transitions through socio-technical configuration analysis – a methodological framework and a case study in the water sector. Res. Policy., 51(1), 104363.

[38] Hojnik, J, Ruzzier, M., 2016. What drives eco-innovation? A review of an emerging literature. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit., 19, 31-41.

[39] Horbach, J., 2008. Determinants of environmental innovation—new evidence from German panel data sources. Res. Policy 37(1), 163-173.

[40] Horbach, J., 2014. Do eco-innovations need specific regional characteristics? An econometric analysis for Germany. Rev. Reg. Res., 34(1), 23-38.

[41] Horbach, J, Rammer, C, Rennings, K., 2012. Determinants of eco-innovations by type of environmental impact. The role of regulatory push/pull, technology push and market pull. Ecol. Econ., 78, 112-122.

[42] IPCC, 2019. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change, desertification, Land degradation, Sustainable Land management, Food Security, and Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Terrestrial ecosystems: Summary for Policymakers. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, London (accessed 8 August 2020).

[43] Johnston, R, Gregory, D, Smith, D. M., 2000. The dictionary of human geography. Ediciones Akal, Madrid

[44] Köhler, J, Geels, F. W., Kern, F, Markard, J, Wieczorek, A, Alkemade, F, Avelino, F, Bergek, A, Boons, F, Fünfschilling, L, Hess, D, Holtz, G, Hyysalo, S, Jenkins, K, Kivimaa, P, Martiskainen, M, McMeekin, A, Mühlemeier, M, Nykvist, B, Onsongo, E, Pel, B, Raven, R, Rohracher, H, Sandén, B, Schot, J, Sovacool, B, Turnheim, B, Welch, D, Wells, P., 2019. An agenda for sustainability transitions research: state of the art and future directions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit., 31, 1-32.

[45] Larsen, K, Gunnarsson-Östling, U, Westholm, E., 2011. Environmental scenarios and local-global level of community engagement: environmental justice, jams, institutions and innovation. Futures 43(4), 413-423.

[46] Loewen, B., 2022. Revitalizing varieties of capitalism for sustainability transitions research: review, critique and way forward. Renew. Sustain. Energ. Rev., 162, 112432.

[47] Losacker, S, Hansmeier, H, Horbach, J, Liefner, I., 2023. The geography of environmental innovation: a critical review and agenda for future research. Rev. Reg. Res., 43 (2), pp. 291-316. doi: 10.1007/s10037-023-00193-6.

[48] Malecki, E. J., 1997. Technology and Economic Development: The Dynamics of Local, Regional and National Competitiveness. (2nd ed.), Longman, London

[49] Markard, J, Raven, R, Truffer, B., 2012. Sustainability transitions: an emerging field of research and its prospects. Res. Policy 41(6), 955-967.

[50] Martiskainen, M, Jenkins, K. E., Bouzarovski, S, Hopkins, D, Mattioli, G, Lacey-Barnacle, M., 2021. A spatial whole systems justice approach to sustainability transitions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit., 41, 110-112.

[51] McNally, C., 2018. Theorizing Sino-capitalism: implications for the study of comparative capitalisms. Contemp. Polit., 25(3), 313-333.

[52] Méndez, R., 2023. Tiempos Críticos Para El Capitalismo Global. Una Perspectiva Geoeconómica. REVIVES, Madrid, España

[53] Morgan, K, Marsden, T, Murdoch, J., 2006. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK

[54] Murphy, J. T., 2015. Human geography and socio-technical transition studies: promising intersections. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit., 17, 73-91.

[55] Napolitano, L, Sbardella, A, Consoli, D, Barbieri, N, Perruchas, F., 2022. Green innovation and income inequality: a complex system analysis. Struct. Chang. Econ. Dyn., 63, 224-240.

[56] Onsongo, E. K., Schot, J., 2017. Inclusive innovation and rapid sociotechnical transitions: the case of mobile money in Kenya. SPRU Working Paper Series, 2017-07, pp. 1-28. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2940184.

[57] OECD, 2018. Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data On Innovation, 4th ed. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development doi: 10.1787/24132764 (accessed 24 April 2019).

[58] Patchell, J, Hayter, R., 2013. Environmental and evolutionary economic geography: time for EEG?. Geogr. Ann.: Ser. B., 95(2), 111-130.

[59] Peck, J, Zhang, J., 2013. A variety of capitalism … with Chinese characteristics?. J. Econ. Geogr., 13(3), 357-396.

[60] Penrose, E., 1995. The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, 3rd ed. Oxford University Press.

[61] Pichlak, M, Szromek, A. R., 2021. Eco-innovation, sustainability and business model innovation by open innovation dynamics. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complexity., 7(2), 149.

[62] Porter, M. E., van der Linde, C., 1995. Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. J. Econ. Perspect., 9(4), 97-118.

[63] Porter, M. E., van der Linde, C., 1995. Green and competitive: ending the stalemate. Harv. Bus. Rev., 73, 120-134.

[64] Raffestin, C., 1993. For a geography of power. São Paulo, Ática (in Portuguese).

[65] Rennings, K., 2000. Redefining innovation—ECO-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics. Ecol. Econ., 32(2), 319-332.

[66] Rinscheid, A, Rosenbloom, D, Markard, J, Turnheim, B., 2021. From terminating to transforming: the role of phase-out in sustainability transitions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit., 41, 27-31.

[67] Rodríguez-Pose, A., 2018. The revenge of the places that don't matter (and what to do about it). Cambridge J. Reg. Econ. Soc., 11(1), 189-209.

[68] Saunders, D., 2010. Arrival City: How the Largest Migration in History is Reshaping Our World. Pantheon Books, New York

[69] Schiederig, T, Tietze, F, Herstatt, C., 2012. Green innovation in technology and innovation managementean exploratory literature review. R. D. Manag., 42(2), 180-192.

[70] Schneider, B., 2009. Hierarchical market economies and varieties of capitalism in Latin America. J. Lat. Am. Stud., 41 (3), pp. 553-575. doi: 10.1017/S0022216X09990186.

[71] Schneider, S, Tartaruga, I., 2004. Territory and territorial approach: from congnitive references to approaches applied to the rural social process analysis. Raízes, 23 (1, 2), pp. 99-116. doi: 10.37370/raizes.2004.v23.237.

[72] Schot, J, Boni, A, Ramirez, M, Steward, F., 2018. Addressing the SDGs through Transformative Innovation Policy. TIPC Research Briefing, 2018-01

[73] Schot, J, Kanger, L., 2018. Deep transitions: emergence, acceleration, stabilization and directionality. Res. Policy 47(6), 1045-1059.

[74] Schulz, C, Bailey, I., 2014. The green economy and post-growth regimes: opportunities and challenges for economic geography. Geogr. Ann: Ser. B., 96(3), 277-291.

[75] Schumpeter, J., 2012. The Theory of Economic Development. Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian, Lisbon

[76] Sen, A., 1999. Development As Freedom. Anchor Books, New York

[77] Sen, A., 2000. Social Development Papers No.1. Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines

[78] Sovacool, B. K., Hess, D. J., 2017. Ordering theories: typologies and conceptual frameworks for sociotechnical change. Soc. Stud. Sci., 47(5), 703-750.

[79] Sovacool, B. K., Turnheim, B, Hook, A, Brock, A, Martiskainen, M., 2021. Dispossessed by decarbonisation: reducing vulnerability, injustice, and inequality in the lived experience of low-carbon pathways. World Dev., 137, 105116.

[80] Soyez, D, Schulz, C., 2008. Facets of an emerging Environmental Economic Geography (EEG). Geoforum 39(1), 17-19.

[81] Steffen, W, Richardson, K, Rockström, J, Cornell, S, Fetzer, I, Bennett, E, Biggs, R, Carpenter, S, De Vries, W, de Wit, C, Folke, C, Gerten, D, Heinke, J, Mace, G. M., Persson, L. M., Ramanathan, V, Reyers, B, Sörlin, S., 2015. Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347(6223), 1259855.

[82] Storper, M., 1997. The Regional World: Territorial Development in a Global Economy. The Guilford Press, New York.

[83] Tartaruga, I., 2021. Tradition, inclusive innovation, and development in rural territories: exploring the case of Amiais Village (Portugal). In: Oliveira, L., Amaro, A., Melro, A. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Cultural Heritage and Its Impact on Territory Innovation and Development. IGI Global, Hershey. doi: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6701-2.ch004.

[84] Tartaruga, I., Sperotto, F., 2021. Rethinking clusters in the sense of innovation, inclusion and green growth. In: Sedita, S.R., Blasi, S. (Eds.), Rethinking Clusters: Place-based Value Creation in Sustainability Transitions. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 101– 110. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-61923-7_8.

[85] Tödtling, F, Trippl, M, Desch, V., 2022. New directions for RIS studies and policies in the face of grand societal challenges. Eur. Plan. Stud., 30(11), 2139-2156.

[86] Truffer, B, Coenen, L., 2012. Environmental innovation and sustainability transitions in regional studies. Reg. Stud., 46(1), 1-21.

[87] Truffer, B, Murphy, J. T., Raven, R., 2015. The geography of sustainability transitions: contours of an emerging theme. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit., 17, 63-72.

[88] Türkeli, S., Kemp, K., 2018. Changing patterns in eco-innovation research: a bibliometric analysis. In: Horbach, J., Reif, C. (Eds.), New Developments in Eco-Innovation Research. Springer, Cham, pp. 13–54. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-93019-0_2.

[89] van den Bergh, J. C. J. M., Truffer, B, Kallis, G., 2011. Environmental innovation and societal transitions: introduction and overview. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit., 1(1), 1-23.

[90] van Es, J, Pampel, F., 1976. Environmental practices: new strategies needed. J. Ext., 19(May–June), 10-15.

[91] von Hippel, E., 2016. Free Innovation. MIT Press, Cambridge

[92] Vona, F, Patriarca, F., 2011. Income inequality and the development of environmental technologies. Ecol. Econ., 70(11), 2201-2213.

[93] Walz, R., 2018. 277-295. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-93019-0_13.

[94] Williams, S, Doyon, A., 2019. Justice in energy transitions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit., 31, 144-153.

[95] Witt, M, Redding, G., 2013. Asian business systems: institutional comparison, clusters and implications for varieties of capitalism and business systems theory. Socioecon. Rev., 11(2), 265-300.

[96] Xavier, A, Naveiro, R, Aoussat, A, Reyes, T., 2017. Systematic literature review of eco-innovation models: opportunities and recommendations for future research. J. Clean. Prod., 149, 1278-1302.