• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.46-61
• /
• 2015

There is an implicit assumption in most regional innovation policy studies that once a policy has been made the policy will be implemented. This assumption is not valid for regional innovation policies formulated in many countries. This assumption rests upon certain political and organization conditions. It is frequently said that regional innovation system in Korea is one of the successful cases because of properly established institution for the implementation of innovation policies. The components of institution for innovation are defined in this article. For the analysis of institution for regional innovation system in Korea, three aspects such as organization, policies & programs, and governance structure were taken into account. Institution for regional innovation system in Korea is analyzed with three aspects: (1) organization for policy implementation, (2) innovation policy, and (3) governance structure. Firstly, organizations for innovation in Korea are composed of three categories such as organizations for policy formulation, organizations for policy implementation and agencies for coordination. Secondly, there are two categories of policies for innovation: (1) policies for the enhancement of national competitiveness and policies for the regional innovation capacity building, and (2) policies for fostering manpower and policy for regulatory reform. Thirdly, innovation governance in Korea is composed of three layer structure: (1) top level governance which is composed of two committee, three ministries and two agencies, (2) local level governance such as one innovation related offices and one center for regulatory reform, and (3) one category of agency for coordination as a regional platform.

• Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea
• /
• v.12 no.4
• /
• pp.477-493
• /
• 2009

This research aims to examine Korean regional innovation governance, find structural problems, and explore alternative strategies of regional innovation governance. Especially the alternative governance was searched through the case study of Daegu-Kyungbuk mobile cluster, of which formulation Samsung is the anchor institution. Regional innovation governance in this research is defined as a policy system to link knowledge generation & diffusion subsystem and knowledge application & exploitation subsystem, and institutional conditions to steer the system. "Social Capital Assessment Tool (SOCAT)" of the World Bank was utilized for the appreciation of cluster governance. The regional innovation governance of Daegu-Kyungbuk mobile cluster is characterized as production networks dominated by one-to-one relationship between Samsung and hardware/software developers, decentralized R&D networks and policy networks with multiple hubs. Major policy agents have not developed networks with local companies, and rare are interactions between the policy agents. Local companies, especially software developers, responded they have had experiences to cooperate for local problem solving and shared their community goal, however, the degree of trust in major local project leaders is not high. Local hardware/software developers with core technologies need to be cooperative to develop similar technologies or products in Daegu-Kyungbuk mobile cluster. Regional administrative actors, such as the City of Daegu and Kyungsangbuk-do, and diverse innovation-related institutes should build cooperative environment where diverse project-based cooperation units are incessantly created, taken apart, and recreated.

• Korean Journal of Organic Agriculture
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.45-61
• /
• 2023

The subject of this study is whether the relevant ordinances of Chungcheongnam-do's five local governments, operating intermediary support organizations for contracted-out community building, comply with the regional innovation and cooperative governance-based perspective. The examination results are summarized as follows. About the normative system: first, village building does not present that it is a participation- and cooperation-based collective activity of various related actors; second, the cooperative governance-based implementation system was not presented as a key term; third, "numerous relevant subjects' participation" and "democratic decision-making and cooperative promotion" are not presented as basic principles; fourth, the subjects are limited to residents and the administration, and only their responsibilities are presented. About the effectiveness system: first, the establishment of a master plan, a primary means, and the establishment of an in-charge department and collaboration system in the administration are presented as optional provisions; second, the nature of the relevant committees and intermediary support organizations is not presented as "public-private cooperation-based system"; third, the area of the function and authority of the relevant committees is limited to review and consultation. Fourth, the related information about the intermediary support organization structure and system, the establishment and operation of the secretariat, and the practical operation of the center is not presented. In sum, to make related ordinances become institutional grounds with stronger effectiveness, reconstructing them by strictly applying the perspectives of regional innovation and cooperative governance is necessary.

• Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.81-96
• /
• 2006

The Lorraine region of France is one of the regions in the core of Europe that suffered most from the decline of its traditional industries. Since the 1970s, various levels of governments have attempted to solve the economic and social problems originating from de-industrialization with policies of regional innovation, e.g., establishing technopole, the creation of the technology transfer network, the launch of the RTP project, and business incubators to promote start-ups, technology transfers, and networks between governments, businesses, universities, public research institutes, and the public. In this context, this paper attempts to analyse governance of regional innovation policies of the Lorraine region, based on an analytical framework developed by a groups of researchers, i.e.. Bae et at (2006). The paper concludes that the roles of governments are important in creating and implementing regional innovation policies of the Lorraine region; the policies heavily rely on the R&D capacity of universities and public research institutes; and various levels of governments have different roles to play.

• Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.167-180
• /
• 2006

The Ruhr region used to be a large industrial area, working as an engine of economic growth of the Germany. However, the region has been suffering from economic and social problems originating from de-industrialization. Since the 1970s, various levels of governments have attempted to solve the problems with policies of regional innovation, e.g., establishing technology parks, competence centers, and business incubators to promote start-ups, technology transfers, and networks between governments, businesses, universities, public research institutes, and the public. In this context, this paper attempts to analyse governance of regional innovation policies of the Ruhr area, based on an analytical framework developed by a groups of researchers, i.e.. Bae et al (2006), The paper concludes that the roles of governments are important in creating and implementing regional innovation policies of the Ruhr area, the policies heavily rely on the R&D capacity of local universities and public research institutes; and various levels of governments have different roles to play.

• Journal of Science and Technology Studies
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.135-162
• /
• 2015

The purpose of this article is to reinterpret the existing innovation policy with 'the societal innovation policy' framework. It is looking into characteristics of societal innovation policy and the prospects for socio-technical systems transition and citizen participation are discussed. After the discussion, new interpretation of innovation policy elements will be dealt with lenses of societal innovation policy. It sheds new light on the key elements of innovation policy, such as Innovation policy governance, industrial innovation policy, regional innovation policy, and infrastructure policy and suggests direction of policy improvements from societal innovation policy perspectives. This will be an opportunity to reinterpret the existing innovation policy measures and to approach to science technology innovation policy for system transition with participatory perspective.

• Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea
• /
• v.10 no.4
• /
• pp.377-393
• /
• 2007

National balanced development and regional innovation have been one of the most important national agendas under the Participatory Government. National balanced development gives a central focus on realizing self-sustaining localization which is based on regional innovation. The core policy goal is to build competitive regional innovation system and innovative clusters in the regions of the country. In this vein, this paper aims to evaluate the present government's policies of regional innovation and innovative cluster. It needs to point out that the regional innovation and cluster policies show some critical problems. Firstly, the policy-making process is based on the top-down approach rather than the bottom-up one. Secondly, regional innovation policies, in many cases, expose the redundancy of similar policies and a lack of linkages between similar policies. Thirdly, the regional innovation policies are too much social infrastructure building-centered, even though the basic principle of regional innovation policy should be based on building superstructure such as networking and social capital.

• Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.61-80
• /
• 2006

The Cambridge Technopole has been recognised as one of the leading clusters in the world, and as such it has been benchmarked by other countries and other regions within the UK. This paper aims to analyse the governance of regional policies in the UK, with particular reference to the relationships between stakeholders operating within the Cambridge Technopole. Major findings of the research are as follows: The central government in the UK has been playing important roles as a customer, regulator and supporter of knowledge sources; Regional innovation policies across central departments have been co-ordinated by the DTI, so that overlapping of policies can be prevented; The policies of individual departments relating to regional innovation are co-ordinated by Government Offices for the Region(GOs) in each region, so that departmental sectionalism can be avoided. At the regional level, the EEDA established in the eastern region of England to which the Cambridge Technopole belongs is in charge of implementing all innovation policies within the region in a consolidated way. Networking organisations such as Cambridge Networks (CN) facilitate knowledge exchange between stakeholders, contributing to the building of mutual trust and creating a high level of social capital essential for regional innovation; The system for commercialising university technology and knowledge has been well institutionalised.

• Korean Journal of Organic Agriculture
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.505-534
• /
• 2020

The purpose of this study is to explore the key elements of the regional innovative milieu by analyzing the role of regional innovative elements and case organizations that promoted the emergence of 'Songakdongnesaramdeul (the people of the Songak town),' and to present pertinent policy implications. For the purpose, this study set the "Songakdongnesaramdeul," a residential community organization founded for regional innovation to revitalize the village community, as a case organization from the perspective of regional innovation system theory. The result of the study showed that creating an innovative milieu through the creation of various innovation elements to revitalize the village community is crucial. Especially, this study confirmed that the existence of regional development organizations is the key element of the innovative milieu. such as case organization that contributes to regional development while promoting interaction between actors, common learning and systemization, and new value creation activities. The implications derived through the study can be summarized in four points. First, a variety of means to promote the formation of subjects in response to the public debate of the village agenda is needed. Second, it is highly important to create innovative elements, for example, organizations and programs, resources, and spaces that promote regional innovation. Third, forming a close network between various innovative resources existing in the region and establishing regional capabilities that allow to mobilize and utilize such innovative resources are important. Fourth, the establishment of a promotion mechanism such as a case organization is suggested as a major task, to revitalize the village community. Specifically, forming and revitalizing numerous private-based community organizations with regional developmental capabilities to establish local governance also has significant importance. In this vein, based on the point of view of the regional innovation system theory, the establishment of regional policies to construct a regional innovation milieu, such as creating innovative elements that can actively promote the regeneration of the village community and establishing a promotion system, can be presented as major tasks.

• Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea
• /
• v.11 no.4
• /
• pp.647-660
• /
• 2008

The main thrusts of Canadian regional innovation policy lies in the two tract system. Federal government decides only the strategic research and development sectors and priorities, and then researchers and stockholders in the regions decide and implement the specific networking relationships and appropriate governance system. This paper reviewed the decentralized and market-friendly Canadian regional innovation support system and the characteristics of Canadian innovation clusters: Learning, Labour, Location, Leadership, Legislation/ Labs. finally, policy implications for Korean regional innovation system such as networking, formation of social capital, and business support systems are offered.