Entrepreneurship and Innovation Systems: Towards a Development of the ERIS/IRIS Concept

Håkan Ylinenpää

European Planning Studies, 2009, vol. 17, issue 8, 1153-1170

Abstract: This contribution addresses two important streams of research—innovation system research basically addressing the system level and entrepreneurship research basically interested at the actor (firm or individual) level. Building on previous research in these fields (primarily on Cooke [(2001) Regional innovation systems, clusters and the knowledge economy, Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), pp. 945--974], Cooke and Leydesdorff [(2006) Regional development in the knowledge-based economy: The construction of advantage, Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(1), pp. 5--15], Sarasvathy [(2001) Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency, Academy of Management Review, 6(2), pp. 243--263], Johannisson [(2000) Modernising the industrial district: Rejuvenation or managerial colonisation? in: E. Vatne & M. Taylor (Eds) The Networked Firm in a Global World, pp. 283--308 (Aldershot, Hants: Ashgate Publishing)]), a typology developed depicting characteristics both at the system level and at the actor level of an institutional regional innovation system (IRIS) and an entrepreneurial regional innovation system (ERIS) as well as a “conceptual bridge” between innovation system research and entrepreneurship research is suggested. While the developed ERIS type of regional innovation systems due to its marked orientation towards individual actors and their behaviour leans more towards the main stream of entrepreneurship research, the IRIS type of regional innovation systems has more similarities with conventional innovation system research. It is argued that by also applying concepts depicting different management preferences and behaviour from entrepreneurship research, we should be able to better understand the different logics guiding these two types of regional innovation systems. The relevance of the extended typology thus developed is then illustrated by two empirical cases located in northern Sweden and form the base for policy implications derived from this study.

Date: 2009
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09654310902981011 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:eurpls:v:17:y:2009:i:8:p:1153-1170

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CEPS20

DOI: 10.1080/09654310902981011

Access Statistics for this article

European Planning Studies is currently edited by Philip Cooke and Louis Albrechts

More articles in European Planning Studies from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().