Taking into Account the Human Factor in Regional Innovation Systems and Policies

Abstract

Innovation is considered a key driver for economic growth and is usually studied in the form of systems, with the regional level being arguably the most important. Despite constantly improving technological infrastructure, the human-related aspects of innovation are still the most important part of the innovation process. The human factor in innovation essentially consists of three components: (1) human capital, which refers to education, knowledge, and skills; (2) social capital, which refers to the strength of social links and social coherence; and (3) psychological capital, which refers to peoples’ values, attitudes, and behaviors. The research findings confirmed this view and showed which specific indicators of the three types of capital had a significant impact on innovation output. A new, extended regional innovation scoreboard emphasizing the human factor, is proposed. Also, based on the findings, and bearing in mind current EU innovation policies, a number of measures are proposed in order to suggest “more human” smart specialization policies in order to increase innovation in European regions and coherence between them.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Adèr, H. J., & Adèr, M. (2008). Advising on research methods: a consultant’s companion. Huizen, the Netherlands: Johannes van Kessel Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Agiomirgianakis, G., Asteriou, D., & Monastiriotis, V. (2002). Human capital and economic growth revisited: a dynamic panel data study. International Advances in Economic Research, 8(3), 177–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Akcomak, I. S., & Ter Weel, B. (2009). Social capital, innovation and growth: evidence from Europe. European Economic Review, 53(5), 544–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Albury, D. (2005). Fostering innovation in public services. Public Money and Management, 25(1), 51–56.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Angelidou, M., & Psaltoglou, A. (2017). An empirical investigation of social innovation initiatives for sustainable urban development. Sustainable Cities and Society, 33, 113–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Angelopoulos, S., Kitsios, F., & Papadopoulos, T. (2010). New service development in e-government: identifying critical success factors. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 4(1), 95–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Antonelli, G., & Cappiello, G. (2016). Smart development in smart communities. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Asteriou, D., & Agiomirgianakis, G. M. (2001). Human capital and economic growth: time series evidence from Greece. Journal of Policy Modeling, 23(5), 481–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Babyak, M. A. (2004). What you see may not be what you get: a brief, nontechnical introduction to overfitting in regression-type models. Psychosomatic Medicine, 66(3), 411–421.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bachtler, J., & Turok, I. (2013). The coherence of EU regional policy: contrasting perspectives on the structural funds. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bakx, N. (2007). Which personality traits do innovative people possess? Amsterdam, Netherlands: Universiteit van Amsterdam, Master Thesis.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Barrutia, J. M., & Echebarria, C. (2010). Social capital, research and development, and innovation: an empirical analysis of Spanish and Italian regions. European Urban and Regional Studies, 17(4), 371–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Basulto, D. (2015). Patents are a terrible way to measure innovation. The Washington Post. Retrieved August 12, 2017 from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2015/07/14/patents-are-a-terrible-way-to-measure-innovation/?utm_term=.db502c8c2a82

  14. Baty, P. (Ed.). (2016). Times Higher Education World University Rankings. The Times in partnership with Elsevier. London: The Times.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Belke, A., Christodoulakis, N., & Gros, D. (2015). Lessons from the Strukturwandel in the Ruhrgebiet: turning Northern Greece into an industrial champion? Study conducted and published by the Stiftung Mercator Foundation. Essen: Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bilbao-Osorio, B., & Rodriguez-Pose, A. (2004). From R&D to innovation and economic growth in the EU. Growth and Change, 35(4), 434–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Brons, L. L. (2006). Indirect measurement of regional culture in the Netherlands. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 97(5), 547–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Capello, R. (2014). Smart Specialisation Strategy and the New EU Cohesion Policy Reform: Introductory Remarks. Scienze Regionali, 13(1), 5–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Carayannis, E. G. (2008). Knowledge-driven creative destruction, or leveraging knowledge for competitive advantage: strategic knowledge arbitrage and serendipity as real options drivers triggered by co-opetition, co-evolution and co-specialization. Industry and Higher Education, 22(6), 343–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Carayannis, E. G. (2014). Strategic knowledge arbitrage and serendipity (SKARSE™) in action. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5(2), 203–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. (2009). ‘Mode 3’ and ‘quadruple helix’: toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46(3–4), 201–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. (2014). Developed democracies versus emerging autocracies: arts, democracy, and innovation in quadruple helix innovation systems. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 3(1), 12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Carayannis, E. G., & Grigoroudis, E. (2016). Using multi-objective mathematical programming to link national competitiveness, productivity and innovation. Annals of Operations Research, 247(2), 635–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Carayannis, E. G., & Provance, M. (2008). Measuring firm innovativeness: towards a composite innovation index built on firm innovative posture, propensity and performance attributes. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, 1(1), 90–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Carayannis, E. G., & Rakhmatullin, R. (2014). The quadruple/quintuple innovation helixes and smart specialisation strategies for sustainable and inclusive growth in Europe and beyond. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5(2), 212–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Carayannis, E. G., Provance, M., & Givens, N. (2011). Knowledge arbitrage, serendipity, and acquisition formality: their effects on sustainable entrepreneurial activity in regions. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 58(3), 564–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Carayannis, E. G., Barth, T. D., & Campbell, D. F. (2012). The quintuple helix innovation model: global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Carayannis, E. G., Goletsis, Y., & Grigoroudis, E. (2015a). Multi-level multi-stage efficiency measurement: the case of innovation systems. Operational Research: an International Journal, 15(2), 253–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Carayannis, E. G., Sindakis, S., & Walter, C. (2015b). Business model innovation as lever of organizational sustainability. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(1), 85–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Carayannis, E. G., Grigoroudis, E., & Goletsis, Y. (2016). A multi-level and multi-stage efficiency evaluation of innovation systems: a multi-objective DEA approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 62, 63–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Carayannis, E. G., Ferreira, J., Jalali, M., & Ferreira, F. (2018a). MCDA in knowledge-based economies: methodological developments and real-world applications. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 131, 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Carayannis, E. G., Goletsis, Y., & Grigoroudis, E. (2018b). Composite innovation metrics: MCDA and the quadruple innovation helix framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 131, 4–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Carayannis, E. G., Grigoroudis, E., Campbell, D. F., Meissner, D., & Stamati, D. (2018c). The ecosystem as helix: an exploratory theory-building study of regional co-opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as quadruple/quintuple helix innovation models. R&D Management, 48(1), 148–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Carbaugh, R. J. (2013). Contemporary economics: an applications approach. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Carneiro, P. M., & Heckman, J. J. (2003). Human Capital Policy. In IZA (Institute for the Study of Labor) Discussion Paper No.821. Bonn, Germany: IZA.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Cavallini, S., Soldi, R., Friedl, J. & Volpe, M. (2016). Using the quadruple helix approach to accelerate the transfer of research and innovation results to regional growth. Brussels: European Union Committee of the Regions.

  37. Coffano, M., & Foray, D. (2014). The Centrality of Entrepreneurial Discovery in Building and Implementing a Smart Specialisation Strategy. Scienze Regionali, 13(1), 33–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Cornell University, INSEAD, & WIPO. (2014). The Global Innovation Index 2014: the human factor in innovation. Fontainebleau, Ithaca, and Geneva.

  40. Cornell University, INSEAD, & WIPO. (2016). The Global Innovation Index 2016: winning with global innovation. Fontainebleau, Ithaca, and Geneva.

  41. Costa Jr., P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Dakhli, M., & De Clercq, D. (2004). Human capital, social capital, and innovation: a multi-country study. Entrepreneurship &Regional Development, 16(2), 107–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. De Dominicis, L., Florax, R. J., & De Groot, H. L. (2013). Regional clusters of innovative activity in Europe: are social capital and geographical proximity key determinants? Applied Economics, 45(17), 2325–2335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Didero, M., Gareis, K., Marques, P., & Ratzke, M. (2008). Differences in innovation culture across Europe. Transform, discussion paper, 022780.

  45. Dillahunt, T. R. (2014, April). Fostering social capital in economically distressed communities. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 531–540). ACM.

  46. Do Carmo Costa, P. (2015). Measuring innovation. A framework for getting it done. Lisbon, Portugal: Exago.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Doh, S., & Acs, Z. J. (2010). Innovation and social capital: a cross-country investigation. Industry and Innovation, 17(3), 241–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Edquist, C. (2005). Systems of innovation: perspectives and challenges. In J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation. Norfolk: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Edquist, C., & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J. M. (2015). The Innovation Union Scoreboard is flawed: the case of Sweden–not being the innovation leader of the EU. In Lund University, CIRCLE-Center for Innovation, Research and Competences in the Learning Economy.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Ekman, J., & Amnå, E. (2012). Political participation and civic engagement: towards a new typology. Human Affairs, 22(3), 283–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Elliot, L. (2016). Huge increase in number of graduates ‘bad for UK economy’. The Guardian. Retrieved August 16, 2017 from: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/oct/11/huge-increase-in-number-of-graduates-bad-for-uk-economy

  52. Eurostat. (2017). Migration and migrant population statistics. Retrieved February 15, 2018 from: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Migration_and_migrant_population_statistics

  53. Feldhusen, J. F. (1995). Creativity: a knowledge base, metacognitive skills, and personality factors. Journal of Creative Behavior, 29(4), 255–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Foray, D., & Hollanders, H. (2015). An assessment of the Innovation Union Scoreboard as a tool to analyse national innovation capacities: the case of Switzerland. Research Evaluation, rvu036.

  55. Foray, D., Goddard, J., Goenaga, X., Landabaso Belderrain, M., McCann, P., Morgan, K., Nauwelaers, C., Ortega-Argiles, R., & Mulatero, F. (2011). RIS3 guide. Seville: European Commission/Joint Research Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Foray, D., Goddard, J., Goenaga, X., Landabaso Belderrain, M., McCann, P., Morgan, K., Nauwelaers, C., & Ortega-Argiles, R. (2012). Guide to Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS 3). Brussels: European Union Regional Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2006). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Gerometta, J., Haussermann, H., & Longo, G. (2005). Social innovation and civil society in urban governance: strategies for an inclusive city. Urban Studies, 42(11), 2007–2021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Glaeser, E. L., Laibson, D., & Sacerdote, B. (2002). An economic approach to social capital. The Economic Journal, 112(483), F437–F458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Godin, B. (2008). Innovation: the history of a category. Project on the Intellectual History of Innovation Working Paper, (1).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Hasso, R. (2013). The impact of CEO’s personality traits (Big 5) and human resources management practices on the innovation performance in SMEs. Twente, Netherlands: The University of Twente, Thesis.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Herbig, P. A., & Dunphy, S. (1998). Culture and innovation. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 5(4), 13–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences – comparing values, behaviours, institutions and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: the Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1) Retrieved, October 23 2016, from. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014.

  65. Hofstede Insights. (2018). Country comparison. Retrieved, February 15, 2018 from: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/

  66. Hofstede, G., & McCrae, R. R. (2004). Culture and personality revisited: linking traits and dimensions of culture. Cross-Cultural Research, 38, 52–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Hollanders, H. (2003). 2003 European Innovation Scoreboard: Technical Paper No 3 Regional Innovation Performances.Maastricht, Netherlands: Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (UNU-MERIT).

  68. Hollanders, H., & Es-Sadki, N. (2014). Regional Innovation Scoreboard (RIS) 2014. Maastricht, Netherlands: Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (UNU-MERIT).

    Google Scholar 

  69. Hollanders, H., Es-Sadki, N., & Kanerva, M. (2015). Innovation Union Scoreboard 2015. Maastricht, Netherlands: Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (UNU-MERIT).

    Google Scholar 

  70. Hollanders, H., Es-Sadki, N., & Kanerva, M. (2016). Regional Innovation Scoreboard (RIS) 2016. Maastricht, Netherlands: Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (UNU-MERIT).

    Google Scholar 

  71. Howaldt, J., & Schwarz, M. (2010). Social innovation: concepts, research fields and international trends. Aachen, Germany: RWTH Aachen University.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Howard, M. M. (2002). The weakness of postcommunist civil society. Journal of Democracy, 13(1), 157–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Investopedia. (2016). Human capital. Retrieved, May 3, 2016 from: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/humancapital.asp

  75. Jimenez-Jimenez, D., Sanz Valle, R., & Hernandez-Espallardo, M. (2008). Fostering innovation: the role of market orientation and organizational learning. European Journal of Innovation Management, 11(3), 389–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Kaasa, A. (2013). Culture as a possible factor of innovation: evidence from the European Union and neighboring countries. In Re-thinking diversity (pp. 83–107). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.

  77. Kaasa, A., & Vadi, M. (2010). How does culture contribute to innovation? Evidence from European countries. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 19(7), 583–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Kakderi, C., Psaltoglou, A., & Fellnhofer, K. (2018). Online platforms for collaborative innovation. In 20th conference of the Greek regional scientists (pp. 112–118).

    Google Scholar 

  79. Kleis Nielsen, R., & Sambrook, R. (2016). What is happening to television news? Report. Oxford: Reuters Institute & University of Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Komninos, N. (2008). Intelligent cities and globalisation of innovation networks. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Komninos, N., & Tsamis, A. (2008). The system of innovation in Greece: structural asymmetries and policy failure. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, 1(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Komninos N., Panori A., Kakderi C., Reid A., Cvijanovićv V., Roman M., Deakin M., Mora L., Tiemann M. & Badii L. (2018a) Online S3 mechanism for knowledge-based policy advice. Report produced in the framework of Horizon 2020 project Online S3: ONLINE Platform for Smart Specialisation Policy Advice.

  83. Komninos, N., Kakderi, C., Panori, A., Garcia, E., Fellnhofer, E., Reid, A., Cvijanović, V., Roman, M., Deakin, M., Mora, L., and Reid, A. (2018b). Intelligence and co-creation in smart specialisation strategies: towards the next stage of RIS3. Online S3 white paper. https://www.onlines3.eu/wp-content/onlines3-files/22%20Intelligence%20and%20co-creation%20in%20Smart%20Spec.pdf

  84. Landabaso, M. (2014). Guest editorial on research and innovation strategies for smart specialisation in Europe: theory and practice of new innovation policy approaches. European Journal of Innovation Management, 17(4), 378–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Laznjak, J. (2011). Dimensions of national innovation culture in Croatia: content validity of Hofstede’s dimensions. Drustvena Istrazivanja, 20(4), 1015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Lee, N., & Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2013). Innovation and spatial inequality in Europe and USA. Journal of Economic Geography, 13(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Leydesdorff, L. (2012). The triple helix, quadruple helix,…, and an N-tuple of helices: explanatory models for analyzing the knowledge-based economy? Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3(1), 25–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Luthans, F., Luthans, K. W., & Luthans, B. C. (2004). Positive psychological capital: beyond human and social capital. Business Horizons, 47(1), 45–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Luthans, F., Youssef, C. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2007). Psychological capital. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Martinez-Conesa, I., Soto-Acosta, P., & Carayannis, E. G. (2017). On the path towards open innovation: assessing the role of knowledge management capability and environmental dynamism in SMEs. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(3), 553–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Martinidis, G. (2017). The importance of man within the system: defining and measuring the human factor in innovation, a review. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 8(2), 638–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Maskell, P. (2001). Knowledge creation and diffusion in geographic clusters. International Journal of Innovation Management, 5(02), 213–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. McCann, P., & Ortega-Argilés, R. (2013). Modern regional innovation policy. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 6(2), 187–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Meissner, D., & Carayannis, E. G. (2017). Value generation from industry-science linkages in light of targeted open innovation. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(2), 295–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Monks, J., & Schmidt, R. (2010). The impact of class size and number of students on outcomes in higher education. [Electronic version]. Retrieved, November 8, 2017, from Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor Relations site: www.digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/workingpapers/114

  96. Myers, M., & Tan, F. (2002). Beyond models of national culture in information systems research. Journal of Global Information Management, 10(2), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Nakata, C., & Sivakumar, K. (1996). National culture and new product development: an integrative review. The Journal of Marketing, 60, 61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Nicholas, T. (2014). Are patents creative or destructive? Antitrust Law Journal, 79(2), 405.

    Google Scholar 

  99. OECD. (2017). Population with tertiary education. Retrieved August 16, 2017 from: https://data.oecd.org/eduatt/population-with-tertiary-education.htm

  100. Oskam, J., & Boswijk, A. (2016). Airbnb: the future of networked hospitality businesses. Journal of Tourism Futures, 2(1), 22–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Panori, A., Angelidou, M., Mora, L., Reid, A., & Sefertzi, E. (2018). Online platforms for smart specialisation strategies and smart growth. In 20th Conference of the Greek Regional Scientists (pp. 96–103).

    Google Scholar 

  102. Papapanagos, H., & Sanfey, P. (2003). Emigration and the optimal speed of transition. Review of International Economics, 11(3), 541–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Papapanagos, H., & Vickerman, R. W. (2000). Borders, migration, and labour-market dynamics in a changing Europe. In M. van der Velde & H. van Houtum (Eds.), Borders, regions, and people (Vol. 10, pp. 32–46). European Research in Regional Science.

  104. Patterson, F. (2002). Great minds don’t think alike? Person-level predictors of innovation at work. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 17, 115–144.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Peiró-Palomino, J. (2017). The geography of social capital and innovation in the European Union. Papers in Regional Science.

  106. Pinto, H. (2009). The diversity of innovation in the European Union: mapping latent dimensions and regional profiles. European Planning Studies, 17(2), 303–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Prior, M. (2007). Post-broadcast democracy: How media choice increases inequality in political involvement and polarizes elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Putnam, R. D., Leonardi, R., Nanetti, R. Y., & Pavoncello, F. (1983). Explaining institutional success: the case of Italian regional government. American Political Science Review, 77(01), 55–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Wilkie, C. (2017). Institutions and the entrepreneurial discovery process for smart specialization. Governing Smart Specialisation, 34–48.

  111. Romer, P. M. (1990). Human capital and growth: theory and evidence. In Carnegie-Rochester Conference series on public policy (Vol. 32, pp. 251–286). North-Holland.

  112. Sartori, R., Favretto, G., & Ceschi, A. (2013). The relationships between innovation and human and psychological capital in organizations: a review. The Innovation Journal, 18(3), 2.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Saughet, A. (2015). Digital tools for participatory democracy. GovLab – Tandon School of Engineering – NYU. Retrieved, January 12, 2018, from: http://thegovlab.org/digital-tools-for-participatory-democracy/

  114. Scheepers, P., Grotenhuis, M. T., & Gelissen, J. (2002). Welfare states and dimensions of social capital: cross-national comparisons of social contacts in European countries. European Societies, 4(2), 185–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  115. Schoonmaker, M. G., & Carayannis, E. G. (2010). Assessing the value of regional innovation networks. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1(1), 48–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Schwab, K. (Ed.). (2017). The global human capital report 2017. Cologny, Switzerland: World Economic Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  117. Scuotto, V., Del Giudice, M., & Carayannis, E. G. (2017). The effect of social networking sites and absorptive capacity on SMES’ innovation performance. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(2), 409–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. Severijns, J. (2017). Solving contradictions by connectivity: reflections on regional innovation and research policy. A Limburg initiative. Limburg, Netherlands: The Province of Limburg.

    Google Scholar 

  119. Shane, S. (1993). Cultural influences on national rates of innovation. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 59–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Sleuwaegen, L., & Boiardi, P. (2014). Creativity and regional innovation: evidence from EU regions. Research Policy, 43(9), 1508–1522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  121. Spady, W. G. (1994). Outcome-Based Education: Critical Issues and Answers. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.

    Google Scholar 

  122. Stone, W. (2001). Measuring social capital. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Institute of Family Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  123. Strychalska-Rudzewicz, A. (2015). Cultural dimensions and innovation. Socio-Economic Problems and the State., 13(2), 59–67.

    Google Scholar 

  124. Taylor, M. Z., & Wilson, S. (2012). Does culture still matter? The effects of individualism on national innovation rates. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(2), 234–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  125. The European Commission. (2018). Equal opportunities and access to the labour market. Retrieved, January 12, 2018 from: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/equal-opportunities-and-access-labour-market_en

  126. Theodora, Y. C. (2008). An approach to the effects of Greek regional universities on the development of the country regions. In Regional analysis and policy (pp. 249–270). Heidelberg, Germany: Physica-Verlag, a Springer Company.

    Google Scholar 

  127. Thomas, M. (2017). Regional innovation strategies. KnowHub article. Retrieved, December 18, 2017, from: http://www.know-hub.eu/knowledge-base/encyclopaedia/regional-innovation-strategies.html

  128. Waldman, P. (2013). Just how bad is television news? Article on the American Prospect. Retrieved August 16, 2017 from: http://prospect.org/article/just-how-bad-television-news

  129. Weeks, D. (2016). Climate for creativity and innovation. Retrieved January 21, 2016 from http://www.m1creativity.co.uk/innovationclimate.htm

  130. World Bank. (2010). Innovation policy: a guide for developing countries. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  131. Varsakelis, N. C. (2006). Education, political institutions and innovative activity: A cross-country empirical investigation. Research policy, 35(7), 1083–1090.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Martinidis.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 6 Extended Regional Innovation Scoreboard rankings and the difference in ranking from the original RIS

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Martinidis, G., Komninos, N. & Carayannis, E. Taking into Account the Human Factor in Regional Innovation Systems and Policies. J Knowl Econ (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00722-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Innovation
  • Regional development
  • Innovation policy
  • Human capital
  • Human resources
  • Social capital
  • Psychological capital