News from the IPL
INTRODUCTION
This newsletter is published by The Innovation Policy Lab at the Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto, and sponsored by the Ministry of Research and Innovation. The views and ideas expressed in this newsletter do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Ontario Government.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Government of Canada Invests $40 Million in CANARIE
CANARIE, Canada’s Advanced Research and Innovation Network, recently announces $40M in new funding for the next two years, following the presentation of the Government of Canada’s 2012 budget in the House of Commons. Canada’s previous investment in the CANARIE network and its funding programs has delivered tremendous economic rewards. An independent economic benefits study conducted in 2011 found that each dollar invested in CANARIE since its creation in 1993 has generated $2.84 in GDP growth. These investments also created 820 full-time equivalent jobs per year. These benefits are in addition to the very tangible results of world-class research discoveries enabled by CANARIE.
MaRS Launches Canada’s First Early Stage Clean Tech Venture Fund
MaRS is pleased to announce the launch of Canada’s first dedicated early-stage cleantech venture fund. The MaRS Cleantech Fund LP ushers in a new model in early-stage technology investing by leveraging the strength of a non-exclusive, but strategic relationship between MaRS Discovery District and the private sector. With the first close of the $30-million goal already secured solely from private investors, the Fund is pleased to announce its first two investments: GreenMantra, which has developed a proprietary technology platform to convert plastics into chemicals and other fuels; and Smart Energy Instruments (SEI), which is on track to create low-cost energy sensors that form the backbone of a smarter grid by providing real-time, highly granular data measurements. The Fund will draw from a strong portfolio of MaRS client companies that target the large and growing global cleantech market, and will co-invest with angels and other institutional funds, including the Investment Accelerator Fund (IAF), Ontario’s seed stage investment fund.
Hamilton, Ontario – Bringing Minds to Market: Canadian Government Invests in Auto Innovation
The Honourable Gary Goodyear, Minister of State for Science and Technology, recently announced six new projects supported by the Automotive Partnership Canada initiative. The projects advance research and development (R&D) in Canada’s automotive industry by supporting new technologies that will provide lighter material alternatives for cars and significantly enhance battery efficiency for vehicles. These university–industry partnerships will receive almost $34 million in total project support. This includes just under $19 million in funding through the Automotive Partnership Canada initiative and nearly $15 million from industry and other partners. These partnerships will be supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) and National Research Council Canada (NRC).
NY Budget Advances Regional Economic Development Agenda
Funding is inlcuded for Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s regional economic development initiatives under a FY13 budget agreement between the governor and legislative leaders announced recently. This includes a new round of funding for the state’s 10 regional councils and university challenge program initiated last year. The agreement also provides a down payment on the Buffalo Regional Innovation Cluster and funding to create a statewide energy initiative.
U.S. Announces Funding for Big Data
Aiming to make the most of the fast-growing volume of digital data, the Obama Administration recently announced a “Big Data Research and Development Initiative.” By improving the ability to extract knowledge and insights from large and complex collections of digital data, the initiative promises to help solve some of America’s most pressing challenges. To launch the initiative, six Federal departments and agencies announced more than $200 million in new commitments that, together, promise to greatly improve the tools and techniques needed to access, organize, and glean discoveries from huge volumes of digital data.
Editor's Pick
Worse than the Great Depression: What the Experts Are Missing about American Manufacturing Decline
Robert D. Atkinson, Luke A. Stewart, Scott M. Andes and Stephen Ezell, ITIF
In the 2000s, U.S. manufacturing suffered its worst performance in American history in terms of jobs. Not only did America lose 5.7 million manufacturing jobs, but the decline as a share of total manufacturing jobs (33 percent) exceeded the rate of loss in the Great Depression. Despite this unprecedented negative performance, most economists, pundits and elected officials argue manufacturing has simply become incredibly productive. All that might be needed are better programs to help laid-off production workers. And there is certainly no need for a determined national manufacturing competitiveness strategy. The alarm bells are largely silent for two reasons. First, most economists and pundits do not extend their analysis beyond one macro-level number—change in real manufacturing value-added relative to real GDP—which at first glance appears stable. But this number masks real decline in many industries. Second, and more fundamentally, U.S. government statistics significantly overstate the change in U.S. manufacturing output, and by definition productivity, in part because of massive overestimation of output growth in the computer and electronics sector and because of problems with how manufacturing imports are measured. As such, the conventional wisdom that U.S. manufacturing job loss is simply a result of productivity-driven restructuring (akin to how U.S. agriculture lost jobs but is still healthy) is fundamentally flawed. U.S. manufacturing lost jobs because manufacturing lost output, and it lost output because its ability to compete in global markets—some manipulated by egregious foreign mercantilist policies, others supported by better national competiveness policies, including much lower corporate tax rates—declined significantly.
Innovation Policy
Innovation Policy Trends in the EU and Beyond
PRO-INNO Europe
The objective of the ‘Innovation policy trends in the EU’ report is to identify trends in innovation policy and the most recent key challenges, to give an overview on recently introduced or planned innovation policy measures and to ascertain if there are any observable patterns, to provide insights into new implementation mechanisms; and to analyze governance practices both at national and trans-European level.
Innovation Systems and Socio-Economic Goals: An Analytical-Diagnostic Framework
Sami Mahroum, INSEAD
Quite often, innovation policy is called upon to bring about innovations that could provide solutions to socio-economic problems such as low productivity, regional economic regeneration, environmental, defence or health-related matters. Around the world, governments have outlined ambitious plans to drive innovation and move towards a knowledge driven economy. These strategic plans are comprised of distinct sub-goals related to ICT, education, infrastructure and many other intermediate goals. However, there are obstacles that may prevent policy makers from achieving these goals. Thus, innovation policies are often called upon to effectively solve two “problems”, firstly broad socioeconomic challenges, such economic growth, and secondly barriers and constraints associated with achieving socio-economic goals. In effect, these constraints are ‘intermediate problems’ that prevent achievement of socio-economic goals. Once the intermediate problems are identified, standard economic analysis is often deployed to design instruments of intervention such as subsidies, tax breaks or investments. While innovation policy makers have a plethora of tools to resolve these intermediate problems, they lack tools to link these intermediate problems with broader socio-economic problems. This paper introduces an analytic-diagnostic framework to equip policymakers and analysts with a tool that helps them develop innovation policies designed around socio-economic outcomes. This framework has been coined OCRIO- Outcomes, Constraints, Rationale, Intervention and Objectives.
Cities, Clusters & Regions
Research and Innovation Jobs: Opportunities and Challenges in the Toronto Region Labour Market
Toronto Region Research Alliance (TRRA)
The Toronto Region Research Alliance conducted a one-year project on Research & Innovation Jobs. They studied over 60 occupations in business and commerce, sciences, engineering, information technology and health. In 2006, these occupations employed more than 400,000 persons in the Toronto Region, accounting for 12 per cent of the region’s employed population. A supply/demand analysis was completed on these occupations. The demand was estimated in number of new jobs to be created in 2012, from the hiring intentions surveyed from local employers. The supply was estimated from the actual number of graduates from colleges and universities in the region in 2010, provided by the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities.
The Rise of Skills: Human Capital, the Creative Class and Regional Development
Chalotta Mellander and Richard Florida, CESIS
The past couple of decades have seen what amounts to skills revolution in urban and regional economic research. From industrial location theory and Alfred Marshall’s concern for agglomeration to more recent research on high-tech districts and industrial clusters firms and industries has been the dominant unit of analysis. But since the 1990s there has been a growing focus on skills. This broad research thrust includes studies of human capital; the creative class and occupational class more broadly; and physical, cognitive and social skills, among others. This research highlights the growing geographic divergence of skills across cities and metros and their effects on regional innovation, wages, incomes and development broadly. A growing literature notes the growing importance of place in organizing and mobilizing these skills. Studies have focused on the role of amenities, universities, diversity and other place-related factor in accounting for the growing divergence of skills across locations. This article summarizes the key lines of research that constitute the skills revolution in urban and regional research.
Prospering Together: Addressing Inequality and Poverty to Succeed in the Knowledge-Based Economy
The Action Canada Task Force
From the Occupy movement to debates at City Hall, there has been increasing media and academic attention surrounding the startling –and growing – levels of poverty and inequality in Canadian cities. In many publications, Canadian cities were displayed in relation to the change over time, while others explained the social costs of the rising rates of inequality in cities such as Toronto. This working paper describes levels of inequality both across the country as a whole and compared to other similar peer countries. The authors argue that the growing income inequality in Canada, especially compared to its peer countries is more than a social issue, but that it is negatively impacting the Canadian economy and innovation.
Statistics & Indicators
MetroMonitor: Tracking Economic Recession and Recovery in America’s Largest 100 Metropolitan Areas
Howard Wial and Siddharth Kulkarni, The Brookings Institution
National economic indicators suggest that the U.S. economic recovery, though still very slow, may be picking up speed. The national unemployment rate in February held steady at 8.3 percent. For the third consecutive month the economy gained more than 200,000 jobs in February; the last time the nation saw three straight months of jobs gains of this magnitude was in 2006. During the last quarter of 2011, inflation-adjusted GDP grew at an annual rate of 3 percent, well above its growth rates for the previous three quarters of the year. Data for the nation’s 100 largest metropolitan areas do not fully reflect the most recent national trends because most metropolitan economic indicators are available only through the fourth quarter of 2011 (ending in December). The metropolitan data through the fourth quarter show widespread but generally very slow growth in both jobs and economic output.
OECD Regional Innovation Mapper
OECD
International patents and patent applications in this data tool refer to patent applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), an international agreement which grants innovators temporary protection for their invention while pursuing patent protection abroad. With their common standard and procedure, international patent applications provide a stronger basis for cross-country comparisons than applications that are filed within single national patent offices. However, it is difficult to assess if international applications are systematically of a higher quality or more valuable than patents granted by a single patent office. This innovation mapper situates comparative patent and innovation data on an interactive map. It also highlights some key findings through five “stories” visualized on the mapping system.
2011 Index of the Massachusetts Innovation Economy
Massachusetts Technology Collaborative
This report is an annual review of the Commonwealth’s high-tech economy through 25 indicators. Each year, the index tracks Massachusetts’ progress in these indicators, along with comparisons to other U.S. states and national economies. In addition to Massachusetts, the 2011 edition provides indicator data for comparison from seven leading technology states, including California, Connecticut, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Highlights from the 25 indicators include Industry cluster employment and wages, patenting activity, R&D performed, business formation, funding for R&D, and talent flow and attraction. Massachusetts’ innovation once again ranks impressively next to its benchmark state and national economies, though the report notes that several indicators have had a downward trend over the past few years. The state leads the U.S. in per capita venture capital and SBIR awards, but that lead has shrunk since 2000. Employment in the state increasingly has become concentrated in key innovation sectors, and maintained its high rate of entrepreneurship activity throughout the recession. Massachusetts must now find ways to better fund higher education and get its students interested in STEM fields.
Maine Department of Economic and Community Development
Maine’s economy has expanded from its traditional bases of forestry, fishing, agriculture, tourism and manufacturing to include an increasing influence from business, financial and health services; information technologies; biomedical technologies; advanced materials; aquaculture; and advanced manufacturing. Furthermore, Maine’s economy, like the global economy, is becoming increasingly driven by entities and individuals that operate at innovative crossroads of these sectors. Maine’s future success in growing its economic base and increasing the standard of living of its people lies in the ability of its companies, workers, and citizens to foster this innovation. This report is a compilation of 24 indicators measuring Maine’s economic capacity and progress toward competing in an innovation-driven economy. The indicators are organized into five categories representing key components of an innovation-based economy.
Illinois Innovation Index – Monthly Releases
The Illinois Innovation Index is a new information resource that provides analysis and insights on business development and economic activity in the state. The purpose of the Innovation Index is to engage and educate a broad community of businesses, investors, researchers, policymakers, and educators through the analysis, benchmarking, and promotion of innovation and entrepreneurial activity metrics throughout Chicago and Illinois. The Innovation Index is a highly visual tool that will provide immediate perspective on regional economic conditions and an ongoing data archive for public use. Each month, the index will feature related innovation metrics along with news and statistical insights. These metrics will eventually be aggregated into a comprehensive Illinois Innovation Index report on a periodic basis.
Policy Digest
The Role of Universities in Regional Innovation Strategies
Henning Kroll, Elisabeth Baier and Thomas Stahlecker, Technopolis
This paper discusses the potential of universities for regional innovation policy. In a conceptual section it illustrates that universities are gradually gaining managerial and budgetary autonomy so that the process of engaging them in regional innovation policy is about consensus building and convincing their managers rather than about direct regulation. The paper argues, however, that this increases rather than decreases the potential of building a strong basis for joint undertakings as all attempts to micromanage the regional activities of independent scientists would not constitute a convincing alternative. Second, it emphasizes that in many regions a large array of locally oriented activities is already being performed by individual scientists although internal incentive systems at universities often do not yet provide strong support for these activities.
A Multilayer Approach to Differentiate the “Third Role” of Universities
To understand the extent of the potential for the development of regional innovative capacities that comes with the establishment of universities or the extension of their activities it is necessary to realize that their “third role” is not homogeneous but based on different functions that universities (can) fulfil. While these can be fulfilled in parallel, they constitute different layers of opportunities for action ordered around a self-evident core. Each of the layers offers specific, additional potentials to enhance regional innovative capacities.
- Economic Effects
First, some economic effects are in all cases passively caused by universities, even without any corresponding strategy. These “core” effects, based on employment, demand and procurement. These passive effects, however, do not necessarily cause any innovation-relevant impacts. They play a minor role regarding the development of new options to integrate universities into strategies aimed at boosting regional innovation. - Traditional Roles
Second, universities fulfil their traditional roles as generators of knowledge (research) and providers of human capital (teaching). Inevitably, innovators in the region will profit from the positive image of the university as a ‘knowledge factory’
even if that knowledge does in practice not (yet) benefit many regional actors. As well, some undefined knowledge-spill overs may occur. Additionally, the region will benefit from graduates that are attracted into the region to study and
will, at least to an extent, remain there after they have completed their studies. While these effects come just as naturally with the establishment of a university as the aforementioned economic effects, they are, from a policy point of view, more
interesting. Contrary to employment and procurement effects, they result from tasks that are specific to universities. Moreover, they harbour a higher potential: A university’s image can be changed from ‘ivory tower’ to ‘source of knowledge’ and the regional suitability of curricula can be expanded. In any case they will have an indirect effect on the innovative capabilities of the region. It is important to note that this effect is not necessarily minor or even less relevant than the more direct effects to be discussed below. - Entrepreneurialism
Since the 1990s, a number of researchers have first postulated and later documented that an increasing number of universities not only act entrepreneurially but also directly support entrepreneurialism among their faculty and graduates. A number of them also nurture a culture of innovation by adapting their graduate courses. Additionally, many universities have substantially invested in technology transfer agencies that do not only to transfer existing results, but also to bring together partners from science and industry to set up application oriented projects. Arguably, the structure of some disciplines and many degree courses have been adapted to the needs of industry. Contrary to the effects mentioned above, such activities require a clear strategic commitment of universities, professors and other faculty willing to invest time in such endeavours. Quite often, therefore, these strategies tend to be considered as “the basis” of the third role of university. While the decision about adopting entrepreneurial strategies increasingly rests with the university management directly, governments can seek to reward universities to develop such strategies – either by coupling evaluation schemes relevant for their basic funding (new public management) to licensing income or by designing programs that explicitly offer additional third party funding for either the development of such strategies or the participation in projects implicitly assuming their existence. Thus it is this “obvious third role” that has so far attracted most attention from both academics and policy makers – many of which have sought to publicly support technology transfer wherever possible - Joint Strategic Undertakings
Finally, regional governments can try to engage universities in joint strategic undertakings with the industry, the science and the public sectors in a region. In practice, such initiatives can relate to the initiation of large-scale cluster projects as much as to addressing pressing needs of urban development. As long as issues of economic development are concerned, in
market economies the main momentum of such initiatives will have to be generated by private enterprise. Nonetheless, an entrepreneurial university can be an important catalyst or even play an initiating role. Additionally, there are a number of possible joint activities in the social field, such as studies on regional issues of social security or education. In such initiatives, the lead role will more likely be played by the public sector with the private sector providing complementary
assistance. In any case, the term ‘regional leadership’ does not imply that universities should or could take on a position as
‘paramount leaders’ of economic development in their region. What is does imply, however, is that university representatives can and should be part of those circles and fora of decision making that decide about the development of regional strategies and the launching of large scale projects relevant to the region’s economic future.The role of policy - Engagement: The scope of options for direct policy intervention in higher education institutions has anything but risen in recent years. In many member states, universities have assumed budgetary and strategic autonomy and remain accountable only to a previously agreed system of evaluation and incentives that cannot easily be changed at short notice. As a result, the ministries responsible for funding universities no longer have the authority to directly ‘command’ the launch of any regional projects. Paradoxically, however, this apparent loss of control can in fact become a strong asset when it comes to truly engaging universities in regional projects. While, on the one hand, universities have now theoretically acquired the right not to care about their environment at all, they have on the other hand become free to react to the needs expressed by both public and private regional stakeholders. If they engage, they will now do so out of own considerations, with higher commitment and determination.
- Universities as one piece of the regional development puzzle: In market economies, universities cannot sensibly be considered as ‘developers’ of regional innovation systems or leading agents of regional change on their own. Inevitably, the development of any regional innovation system will have to depend on private sector participation and private sector initiative. Against this background, the role of universities should neither be overstated nor misunderstood.The role of the university and the point of leverage that it offers to policy makers is that of a catalyst. With all else equal, a region with a qualified labour force and a number of at least related research activities is more likely to attract private investment than one without.
- Fostering a culture of collaboration: Additionally, a culture of collaboration between the private and the public research sector is needed to turn potential into action.Consequently, a central aim of any political strategy must be to convince the university
management to make their organization more relevant for its regional environment and to engage with regional partners.In practice, this implies that public policy makers, industrial stakeholders and university managers will have to establish common ground in areas of joint interest. - Emphasize joint interests: The development of relevant courses for and the retention of graduates in the region, for example, may become such a joint undertaking. It is in the interest of the university to demonstrate to potential students how easily its courses enable them to find jobs, while the local industry is interested in access to well-trained graduates. In a situation, where they depend on both industrial and scientific stakeholders’ goodwill and intrinsic motivation, it must be the strategic objective of policy makers to identify as many areas as possible in which such common ground can be found.
Events
Markham, Canada, 24 April, 2012
The YTA is hosting the national reveal of the Branham300, sponsored by KPMG, giving YTA members and guests the opportunity to be the first to find out which companies made the list, stayed on the list, and are making an impact in Canada’s ICT sector. The event features the Branham300 reveal and overview by Wayne Gudbranson, President and CEO of the Branham Group, where he will provide trusted insight into Canada’s ICT sector, including highlighting the GTA companies and YTA members that made the list. The Branham300 Reveal will be followed by a panel discussion featuring leaders who have embraced the challenge of Go Big (or go home) in an economy that has had significant ups and downs.
2012 Conference on Entrepreneurial Universities
Muenster, German, 25-27 April, 2012
The conference will be a European discussion forum for researchers and practitioners on Entrepreneurial Universities, where theory and practice are equally emphasised in the programme. We are now calling for presentation papers, workshops and posters on the themes of the conference. We would like to encourage you to submit abstracts of conceptually or empirically focused proposals. All papers will be double-blind reviewed and published in the conference proceedings.
Delft, Netherlands, 13-16 May, 2012
Regions and cities are increasingly interdependent; economically, socially and environmentally. They are, for example, becoming more reliant on interregional flows of trade, labour and resources. Patterns of interactions between regions are experiencing rapid changes as a result of dramatic shifts in production and consumption patterns, advances in communication technologies and the development of transport infrastructure. These changes pose many challenges for the analysis and management of regions. They are also leading to new patterns of activities and relationships and new forms of clustering and networking between regions. At the same time, regions are becoming increasingly fragmented in many ways; economically, socially, environmentally and also politically. Classic forms of government based on clear cut arrangements between administrative levels, policy sectors and the public and private domain are no longer sufficient. The governance of regions faces multi-level, multi-actor and multi-sectoral challenges. New spatial interactions at new scales demand new approaches for consultation and coordination. More flexible (‘softer’) forms of governance are beginning to emerge which seek to work around traditional governmental arrangements.The result is a complex pattern of overlapping governance and fuzzy boundaries, not just in a territorial sense but also in terms of the role of both public and private actors. These new arrangements pose many as yet unresolved dilemmas concerning the transparency, accountability and legitimacy of decision-making. The 2012 RSA conference in Delft provides a timely opportunity for participants to come together and reflect on the various strengths, weaknesses, challenges and opportunities of networked cities and regions within these different contexts of fragmentation.
Towards Transformative Governance? Responses to Mission-Oriented Innovation Policy Paradigms
Karlsruhe, Germany, 12-13 June, 2012
The Lund Declaration, which was handed to the Swedish Presidency of the Council of the European Union by 400 prominent researchers and politicians in 2009, states that “European research must focus on the Grand Challenges of our time moving beyond current rigid thematic approaches. This calls for a new deal among European institutions and Member States, in which European and national instruments are well aligned and cooperation builds on transparency and trust.” The declaration thus asks EU institutions to play a crucial role in bringing the relevant public and private actors together, and helping to build more cooperation and trust in order to address the overarching policy objectives.This declaration has taken up and reinforced a development in the past few years in which governments and the European Union have adopted a new strategic rhetoric for their research and innovation policy priorities which addresses the major societal challenges of our time. This is evolving into the third major policy rationale besides economic growth and competitiveness. It is not yet clear whether and how any transformative effects from this new mission-oriented approach can already be identified. The conference aims to attract papers that discuss possible transformative effects at different levels, i.e. on the actors performing research, innovation processes, scientific fields and technological sectors, the institutional funding and research landscape, society, the demand and user/beneficiary side, research and innovation policy and financing, and national and European political framework conditions. It also invites contributions that critically discuss methodological issues, conceptual developments and novel normative challenges around innovation and R&D policy triggered by the – alleged – mission oriented turn.
Entrepreneurship and Innovation Networks
Faro, Portugal, 14-16 June, 2012
Following the tradition established by the previous symposia, starting in 1998, the symposium is designed to bring together leading-edge views of senior academic scholars and mix them with the critical and creative views of postdocs and PhD students engaged in their thesis work. We welcome researchers from various fields, such as economic geography, economic history, entrepreneurship,
international business, management, political science, regional economics, small business economics, sociology and urban and regional planning. The objectives of the fifteenth Uddevalla Symposium 2012 are: i) to provide a unique opportunity for scholars including senior and junior researchers to discuss path-breaking concepts, ideas, frameworks and theories in plenary key-note sessions and parallel competitive paper sessions, and ii) to facilitate the development and synthesis of important contributions into cohesive and integrated collections for potential publication. Therefore, unpublished complete papers are invited for presentation and feedback from other scholars. A selected list of these papers will be subjected to review and development for publication in scholarly venue.
CALL FOR PAPERS – XXIII ISPIM Conference: Action for Innovation: Innovating from Experience
Barcelona, Spain, 17- 20 June, 2012
The plea for innovation is universal. Managers and politicians have understood that innovation is needed on an everyday-basis to strengthen the competitiveness of organisations, regions and countries. Innovation, however, requires more than good ideas and intentions. Leadership, foresight, courage, investment, inspiration and perspiration are needed to turn intentions and ideas into effective action. Even with these elements in place, not every initiative is successful. However, every action and each experience provide new insights into the causes of failed and successful innovation. Successful innovators, be they individuals, organisations, intermediaries or policy makers, must therefore overcome the paradox of building on experience, and yet breaking away from the status quo, with a permanent innovation mindset. These challenges of “Action for Innovation” are the core focus of this conference.
CALL FOR PAPERS – Sustaining Regional Futures
Beijing, China, 24-26 June, 2012
The Conference will address some of the biggest issues facing regions and sub-national areas around the world, gateways are being organised on the causes and implications of different patterns of regional development. The gateways are dedicated to assessing the forms and successes of regional policies in managing regional disparities; establishing basic public services; supporting endogenous growth and the comparative advantages of regions; promoting regional competitiveness and sustaining harmony between the economy, society and the environment. Papers on each of these themes are encouraged – on different countries’ and regions’ experiences, and on comparative studies.
13th International CINet Conference: Continuous Innovation Across Boundaries 
Rome, Italy, 16-18 September, 2012
The Continuous Innovation Network (CINet) is a global network set up to bring together researchers and industrialists working in the field of Continuous Innovation. The mission of CINet is to develop into a school of thought on Continuous Innovation. Consistent with this mission, CINet organises an annual conference. This announcement concerns the 13th CINet conference, which will take place in Rome, Italy, on 16-18 September 2012. Furthermore, CINet promotes a PhD Network to foster research collaboration among PhD students and their institutions on innovation in the widest sense of the word. As part of that initiative, a PhD workshop is organised just prior to the 13th CINet conference, on 14-15 September. Besides that a CIYA Workshop will be organized, aimed at young academics working in the field of continuous innovation.
The Governance of a Complex World
Nice, France, 1-3 November, 2012
In a period of crisis – according to many commentators the most important one since the Great Depression – the governance of an ever increasingly complex world is a major challenge to economics and social sciences, especially in the current stage where no clear consensus has emerged so far in our scientific communities. The aim of the 2012 International Conference on “The Governance of a Complex World” is the identification of major propositions of political economy for a new society, grounded on structural, technological and institutional change. We encourage submissions dealing with different levels of governance (countries, industries, firms, individuals), where innovation is viewed as a key driver to stir our complex world out of the crisis. We especially welcome analyses in the field of knowledge dynamics, industrial evolution and economic development, dealing with key issues of the emergence and persistence of innovation, entrepreneurship, growth of firms, corporate governance and performance, agglomeration/dispersion of industrial activities, skills dynamics, economics of science and innovation, environment as a driver of innovation.
Subscriptions & Comments
Please forward this newsletter to anyone you think will find it of value. We look forward to collaborating with you on this initiative. If you would like to comment on, or contribute to, the content, subscribe or unsubscribe, please contact us at ipl.munkschool@utoronto.ca.
This newsletter is prepared by Jen Nelles.
Project manager is David A. Wolfe.