 Innovation technologique et développement territorial: L'expérience grenobloiseAméziane Ferguene ()
Post-Print from HAL Abstract: Between technological innovation and territorial dynamics, the relationship may be strong and mutually beneficial. From this point of view, Grenoble is an excellent illustration. Second pole of French scientific research (just after Paris), Grenoble has built, during decades, its socio-economic development on a tradition of close cooperation between universities and industry, coupled with a proven practice of industrial exploitation of the research's results. To such extent that, today, Grenoble is one of the world top leaders in its field of specialization (ICT, microelectronics and nanotechnologies). However, if in the past this type of development was consensual, nowadays the strategy of high specialization in nanotechnologies (with the ambition of turning Grenoble into the "Giant of the infinitely small") is not unanimously approved. In fact, this approach, which bases the future of the territory on the edge technologies, is subjected to several kinds of criticism. Specifically, it is subject to critics at three levels: - At the economic level, because of the territorial vulnerability that could result from the low diversification of the economic fabric of Grenoble and its region ; - At the societal level, because of the social, urban and spatial inequalities that may deepen in the future, due in particular to the increasing inadequacy on the local labor market, between a job offer increasingly demanding higher qualifications and a request for jobs with diversified profiles ; - At the environmental level, because of fears (rational or irrational) that are generated by nanotechnologies about the possible autonomous development of nano-particles that could mutate and spread uncontrollably in the natural environment and living organisms. Whether real or only potential, these risks should not be minimized. They should give rise to a public debate, open to all citizens. The reflection on nanotechnologies must get out from the circle of experts, and a broad public discussion has to be organized about the major choices concerning the future development of Grenoble. This is the only way to legitimize these choices and to ensure that the risks associated with this highly specialized field of innovation in nanotechnologies be fully borne by the local community as a whole. Keywords: Territory; Technological Innovation; Territorial Development; University-Research-Industry Cooperation; Coopération Université-Recherche-Industrie; Développement territorial; Nanotechnologies; Grenoble; Territoire; innovation technologique (search for similar items in EconPapers) Published in A. Silem, J. Fontanel, B. Pecqueur, L. Perrin. L'Economie territoriale en questions, l'Harmattan, pp.309, 2014, La Librairie des Humanités There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00959760 Access Statistics for this paper More papers in Post-Print from HAL |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.