Skip navigation
Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: http://rid.unrn.edu.ar/handle/20.500.12049/13785

Registro completo de metadatos
Campo DC Valor Lengua/Idioma
dc.contributor.authorNiembro, Andrés Alberto-
dc.contributor.authorLevin, Luciano Guillermo-
dc.date.accessioned2025-12-12T12:30:09Z-
dc.date.available2025-12-12T12:30:09Z-
dc.date.issued2025-11-14-
dc.identifier.citationNiembro, A., & Levin, L. (2025). A comprehensive review of regional innovation policy research: policy paradigms, evolution and underexplored topics. European Planning Studies, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2025.2591713es_ES
dc.identifier.issn0965-4313es_ES
dc.identifier.issn1469-5944es_ES
dc.identifier.otherhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09654313.2025.2591713es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttp://rid.unrn.edu.ar/handle/20.500.12049/13785-
dc.description.abstractAlthough regional innovation policy (RIP) has become increasingly relevant, the literature still lacks a specific and comprehensive review. Apart from addressing this gap, this article also challenges several limitations and interpretations of previous studies. For this purpose, we conduct a bibliometric analysis based on the bibliographic coupling technique, combined with a set of methodological and analytical novelties that allow us to explore the evolution of RIP topics and their framing across the different innovation policy paradigms. First, the results show that RIP research constitutes a substantial and coherent field, rather than a subtype of (national) innovation policies. Second, the RIP literature transcends the usual reviews on regional innovation systems (RIS) and smart specialization strategies (S3), encompassing other underexplored issues. Third, RIP topics are framed across the three policy paradigms, not just within the innovation systems tradition. Fourth, in addition to identifying long-term and emerging topics, our analysis reveals four phases in RIS evolution (including the latest challenge-oriented turn) and questions the notion that S3 is an extension from RIS. Fifth, while European authors (and journals) remain dominant, contributions from developing countries are slowly diversifying the field. Finally, the article highlights remaining gaps and outlines future research and policy agendas.es_ES
dc.format.extent1-26es_ES
dc.language.isoenes_ES
dc.publisherRoutledgees_ES
dc.relation.urihttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09654313.2025.2591713?src=es_ES
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/-
dc.titleA comprehensive review of regional innovation policy research: policy paradigms, evolution and underexplored topicses_ES
dc.typeArticuloes_ES
dc.rights.licenseCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)-
dc.description.filiationNiembro, Andrés Alberto. Universidad Nacional de Río Negro. Instituto de Estudios en Ciencia, Tecnología, Cultura y Desarrollo (UNRN-CITECDE). CONICET. Río Negro, Argentina.es_ES
dc.description.filiationLevin, Luciano Guillermo. Universidad Nacional de Río Negro. Instituto de Estudios en Ciencia, Tecnología, Cultura y Desarrollo. Río Negro; Argentina.es_ES
dc.subject.keywordRegional innovation systemses_ES
dc.subject.keywordsmart specializationes_ES
dc.subject.keywordtransformative policieses_ES
dc.subject.keywordmission-oriented innovation policieses_ES
dc.subject.keywordbibliographic couplinges_ES
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiones_ES
dc.subject.materiaEconomía y Gestiónes_ES
dc.subject.materiaSociología (general)es_ES
dc.origin.lugarDesarrolloUniversidad Nacional de Río Negro. CITECDE.CONICETes_ES
dc.description.reviewtruees_ES
dc.description.resumenAlthough regional innovation policy (RIP) has become increasingly relevant, the literature still lacks a specific and comprehensive review. Apart from addressing this gap, this article also challenges several limitations and interpretations of previous studies. For this purpose, we conduct a bibliometric analysis based on the bibliographic coupling technique, combined with a set of methodological and analytical novelties that allow us to explore the evolution of RIP topics and their framing across the different innovation policy paradigms. First, the results show that RIP research constitutes a substantial and coherent field, rather than a subtype of (national) innovation policies. Second, the RIP literature transcends the usual reviews on regional innovation systems (RIS) and smart specialization strategies (S3), encompassing other underexplored issues. Third, RIP topics are framed across the three policy paradigms, not just within the innovation systems tradition. Fourth, in addition to identifying long-term and emerging topics, our analysis reveals four phases in RIS evolution (including the latest challenge-oriented turn) and questions the notion that S3 is an extension from RIS. Fifth, while European authors (and journals) remain dominant, contributions from developing countries are slowly diversifying the field. Finally, the article highlights remaining gaps and outlines future research and policy agendas.es_ES
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2025.2591713-
dc.relation.journalTitleEuropean Planning Studieses_ES
Aparece en las colecciones: Artículos

Archivos en este ítem:
Archivo Descripción Tamaño Formato  
Final.pdf3,23 MBAdobe PDFVisualizar/Abrir

Este documento es resultado del financiamiento otorgado por el Estado Nacional, por lo tanto queda sujeto al cumplimiento de la Ley N° 26.899


Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons Creative Commons