Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Cross-Border Cooperation Concept in Multifunctional Agriculture under RIS3 Cover

Cross-Border Cooperation Concept in Multifunctional Agriculture under RIS3

Environmental and Climate Technologies
Volume 25 (2021): Issue 1 (January 2021)
By:
Open Access
|Sep 2021

References

  1. [1] European Commission. Farm to Fork Strategy; For a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system. 2020.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  2. [2] Resolution A/70/L.1 adopted by the General Assembly of United Nations on 25 September 2015. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  3. [3] Larosse J., Corpakis D., Tuffs R. The Green Deal and Smart Specialization. Version 4, February 2020.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  4. [4] Foray D., Goenega X. The goal of smart specialization. JRC Scientific and Policy Report. EUR 26005 EN. 2013.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  5. [5] Gianelle C., Kyriakou D., McCann P., Morgan K. Smart Specialization on the move: reflections on six years of implementation and prospects for the future. Regional Studies 2020:54(10):1323–1327. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2020.181736410.1080/00343404.2020.1817364
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  6. [6] Ballas D., Kalogeresis T., Labrianidis L. A comparative study of typologies for rural areas in Europe. 2003.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  7. [7] Bychkova S., Zhidkova E., Eliashev D. Informational support as an element of state control of agriculture. Foods and Raw materials 2018:6(2). http://doi.org/10.21603/2308-4057-2018-2-467-47310.21603/2308-4057-2018-2-467-473
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  8. [8] OECD. Environment at a Glance 2020.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  9. [9] OECD. The New Rural Paradigm: Policies and Governance. OECD Publishing. 2006.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  10. [10] OECD. Innovation and Modernising the Rural Economy. OECD Publishing. 2014.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  11. [11] Dax T., Kahila, P. Policy perspective – The evolution of EU rural policy. The new rural Europe: towards Rural Cohesion Policy 2011:87–106.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  12. [12] Wilson G.A. Multifunctional Agriculture: A Transition Theory Perspective. Cambridge: CABI. 2007.10.1079/9781845932565.0000
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  13. [13] Holmes J. Cape York Peninsula, Australia: A frontier region undergoing a multifunctional transition with indigenous engagement. Journal of Rural Studies 2012:28(3):252–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.00410.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.004
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  14. [14] Larosse J. The discovery of smart specializations. REGLAB Smart Regions Seminar. 2013.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  15. [15] Cvijanović V., Griniece E., Gulyás O., Reid A., Varga H. Stakeholder engagement through entrepreneurial discovery? Lessons from countries and regions in Central and Eastern Europe. Cogent Social Sciences 2020:6(1):1794273. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2020.179427310.1080/23311886.2020.1794273
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  16. [16] Knickel K., Redman M., Darnhofer I., Ashkenazy A., Chebach T. C., Šūmane S., Tisenkopfs T., Zemeckis R., Atkociuniene V., Rivera M., Strauss A., Kristensen L. S., Schiller S., Koopmans M. E., Rogge E. Between aspirations and reality: Making farming, food systems and rural areas more resilient, sustainable and equitable. Journal of Rural Studies 2018:59:197–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.04.01210.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.04.012
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  17. [17] Grbić V. Regional disparities in the European Union: Policy objectives, the poorest regions and multifunctional agriculture. Economics of Agriculture 2010:57(2):147–152.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  18. [18] Labarthe P. Extension services and multifunctional agriculture. Lessons Learnt from the French and Dutch Contexts and Approaches. Journal of Environmental Management 2009:90:S193–S202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.11.02110.1016/j.jenvman.2008.11.02119203826
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  19. [19] Tohidyan Far S., Rezaei-Moghaddam K. Multifunctional agriculture: an approach for entrepreneurship development of agricultural sector. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research 2019:9(23).10.1186/s40497-019-0148-4
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  20. [20] Renting H., Rossing W. A. H., Groot J. C. J., Van der Ploeg J. D., Laurent C., Perraud D., Stobbelaar D. J., Van Ittersum M. K. Exploring multifunctional agriculture. A review of conceptual approaches and prospects for an integrative transitional framework. Journal of Environmental Management 2009:90:S112–S123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.11.01410.1016/j.jenvman.2008.11.01419121889
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  21. [21] Tiits M., Kalvet T., Mürk, I. Smart specialization in Cohesion Economies. Journal of the Knowledge Economy 2015:6(2):296–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-015-0239-610.1007/s13132-015-0239-6
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  22. [22] Lorenz U., Oleaga M. RIS3 Challenges: An analysis of the Nouvelle-Aquintaine, Euskadi, Navarre cross-border space. Cuadernos Orkestra. Technical Report.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  23. [23] Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. Regionale unternehmerische Bündnisse für Innovation (Regional entrepreneurial partnerships for innovation). 2019. [Online]. [Accessed: 02.03.2020]. Available: https://www.bmbf.de/bmbf/shareddocs/bekanntmachungen/de/2019/11/2695_bekanntmachung.html
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  24. [24] Landabaso M., McCann P., Ortega-Argilés, R. Smart specialization in European regions: Issues of strategy, institutions and implementation. European Journal of Innovation Management 2014:17(4):409–427 https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-05-2014-005210.1108/EJIM-05-2014-0052
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  25. [25] Asheim B. T. Smart specialization, innovation policy and regional innovation systems: what about new path development in less innovative regions? Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research 2019:32(1):8–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2018.149100110.1080/13511610.2018.1491001
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  26. [26] Ranga M. Smart Specialization as a strategy to develop early-stage regional innovation systems. European Planning Studies 2018:26(11):2125–2146. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2018.153014910.1080/09654313.2018.1530149
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  27. [27] Gianelle C., Guzzo F., Mieszkowski K. Smart Specialization: what gets lost in translation from concept to practice? Regional Studies 2019:54(10):1377–1388. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2019.160797010.1080/00343404.2019.1607970
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  28. [28] Mariussen Å., Rakhmatullin R., Stanionyte, L. Smart Specialization: Creating Growth through Transnational cooperation and Value Chains. Thematic Work on the Understanding of Transnational cooperation and Value Chains in the context of Smart Specialization. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. 2016.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  29. [29] Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. Gebietsabgrenzung (Area Boundary) [Online]. [Accessed 09.03.2021]. Available: https://www.innovation-strukturwandel.de/de/gebietsabgrenzung-2531.php
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  30. [30] Kirchherr J., Piscicelli L., Bour R., Kostense-Smit E., Muller J., Huibrechtse-Truijens A., Hekkert M. Barriers to the circular economy: evidence from the European Union (EU). Ecological Economics 2018:150:264–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.02810.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.028
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  31. [31] Borrego M., Douglas E., Amelink C. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-research methods in engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education 2007:98(1):53–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2009.tb01005.x10.1002/j.2168-9830.2009.tb01005.x
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  32. [32] Björk P., Johansson C. Knowledge for innovations – resources for smart specialization. Final Report. Hanken School of Economics. 2017.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  33. [33] Kroll H., Böke I., Schiller D., Stahlecker T. Bringing Owls to Athens? The Transformative Potential of RIS3 for Innovation Policy in Germany’s Federal States. European Planning Studies 2016:24(8):1459–1477. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2016.1159666.10.1080/09654313.2016.1159666
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  34. [34] Fereday J., Muir-Cochrane E. Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2006:5(1):80–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069060050010710.1177/160940690600500107
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  35. [35] Huang H. B. What is good action research? Why the resurgent interest? Action Research 2010:8(1):93–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/147675031036243510.1177/1476750310362435
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  36. [36] Marques P., Morgan K. The heroic assumptions of smart specialization: A sympathetic critique of regional innovation policy. In Isaksen A., Martin R., Trippl M. (eds) New Avenues for Regional Innovation Systems- Theoretical Advances, Empirical Cases and Policy Lessons. Springer, 2018, pp. 275–293. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71661-9_1410.1007/978-3-319-71661-9_14
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  37. [37] European Commission. S3 Platform. Registered countries and regions in the S3 Platform [Online]. [Accessed: 10.03.2021]. Available: https://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/s3-platform-registered-regionsRegistered
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  38. [38] Yin R. K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. London: Sage Publications, 2009.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  39. [39] Braun V., Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 2006:3(2):77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  40. [40] Krippendorff K. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage publications, 2018.10.4135/9781071878781
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  41. [41] Arbnor I., Bjerke B. Methodology for creating business knowledge. Sage, 2008.10.4135/9780857024473
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  42. [42] Creswell J. W. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Third edition, Sage Publications, 2012.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  43. [43] Mertens D. M. Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, 2014:3.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  44. [44] Koschatzky K., Kroll H. Innovationsbasierter regionaler Strukturwandel: Strukturschwache Regionen in Deutschland (Innovation based economic transition: less developed regions in Germany). Arbeitspapiere Unternehmen und Region. 2019. (In German).
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  45. [45] Hassink J., Grin J., Hulsink, W. Multifunctional Agriculture Meets Health Care: Applying the Multi-Level Transition Sciences Perspective to Care Farming in the Netherlands. Sociologia Ruralis 2013:53(2):223–245. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9523.2012.00579.x10.1111/j.1467-9523.2012.00579.x
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  46. [46] Hassink, J. Grin, J., Hulsink, W. Enriching the multi-level perspective by better understanding agency and challenges associated with interactions across system boundaries. The case of care farming in the Netherlands: Multifunctional agriculture meets health care. Journal of Rural Studies 2018:57:186–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.12.01810.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.12.018
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  47. [47] Todorova S., Ikova, J. Multifunctional Agriculture: Social and Ecological impacts on the organic farms in Bulgaria. Procedia Economics and Finance 2014:9:310–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00032-X10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00032-X
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  48. [48] Kristensen D. K., Kjeldsen C., Thorsøe M. H. Enabling sustainable agro-food futures: exploring fault lines and synergies between the integrated territorial paradigm, rural eco-economy and circular economy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 2016:29(5):749–765. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-016-9632-910.1007/s10806-016-9632-9
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  49. [49] Berlin Senate and the Government of the State of Brandenburg (2011). Joint Innovation Strategy of the States of Berlin and Brandenburg (innoBB). 2011.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  50. [50] Vironen H., Kah S. Meeting the challenges of digitalization: implications for regional and rural development. EU European Policies Research Centre, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow. 2019.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  51. [51] Wiggins S., Proctor S. How special are rural areas? The economic implications of location for rural development. Development policy review 2001:19(4):427–436. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7679.0014210.1111/1467-7679.00142
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  52. [52] Ayres W. S., McCalla A. F. Rural development, agriculture, and food security. Finance and Development 1996:33(4):8.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  53. [53] Tomlinson M., Walsh V., Green K., McMeekin A. Innovation by demand: An interdisciplinary approach to the study of demand and its role in innovation. Manchester University Press. 2002.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  54. [54] Razmak J., Bélanger C. H. Interdisciplinary Approach: A Lever to Business Innovation. International Journal of Higher Education 2016:5(2):173–182. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v5n2p17310.5430/ijhe.v5n2p173
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  55. [55] Larrea M., Estensoro M., Pertoldi M. Multilevel governance for Smart Specialization: basic pillars for its construction, JRC Technical Reports. 2019. https://doi.org/10.2760/425579
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  56. [56] Iammarino S., Rodríguez-Pose A., Storper M. Regional inequality in Europe: evidence, theory and policy implications. Journal of Economic Geography 2019:19(2):273–298. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lby02110.1093/jeg/lby021
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  57. [57] Cooke P. Four minutes to four years: the advantage of recombinant over specialized innovation – RIS3 versus ‘smartspec’. European Planning Studies 2016:24(8):1494–1510. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2016.115148210.1080/09654313.2016.1151482
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  58. [58] Prause G., Thurner T. User Communities – Drivers for Open Innovation. Foresight – Russia 2014:8(1):24–32. ttps://doi.org/10.17323/1995-459x.2014.1.24.3210.17323/1995-459x.2014.1.24.32
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  59. [59] Tödtling F., Lehner P., Trippl M. Innovation in knowledge intensive industries: The nature and geography of knowledge links. European Planning Studies 2006:14(8):1035–1058. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965431060085236510.1080/09654310600852365
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  60. [60] Gertler M. S., Levitte Y. M. Local nodes in global networks: the geography of knowledge flows in biotechnology innovation. Industry and Innovation 2005:12(4):487–507. https://doi.org/10.1080/1366271050036198110.1080/13662710500361981
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  61. [61] Boschma R. A., Ter Wal A. L. J. Knowledge networks and innovative performance in an industrial district: The case of a footwear district in the South of Italy. Industry and Innovation 2007:14(2):177–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/1366271070125344110.1080/13662710701253441
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  62. [62] Evers H. D. Knowledge hubs and knowledge clusters: Designing a knowledge architecture for development. ZEF Working Paper Series. 2008.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  63. [63] Youtie J., Shapira P. Building an innovation hub: A case study for the transformation of university roles in regional technological and economic development. Research Policy 2008:37(8):1188–1204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.01210.1016/j.respol.2008.04.012
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  64. [64] Schartinger D., Rammer C., Fröhlich J. Knowledge interactions between universities and industry in Austria: sectoral patterns and determinants. In Innovation, networks, and knowledge spillovers. Springer, 2006, pp. 135–166.10.1007/3-540-35981-8_7
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  65. [65] Franco M., Haase H. University – industry cooperation: Researchers’ motivations and interaction channels. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 2015:36:41–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2015.05.00210.1016/j.jengtecman.2015.05.002
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  66. [66] European Commission. A new Circular Economy Action Plan. For a cleaner and more competitive Europe. COM(2020) 98 final. Brussels. 11.03.2020 [Online]. [Accessed 12.03.2021]. Available: https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1583933814386&uri=COM:2020:98:FIN
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  67. [67] Bjørkhaug H., Richards C. A. Multifunctional agriculture in policy and practice? A comparative analysis of Norway and Australia. Journal of Rural Studies 2008:24(1):98–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.06.00310.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.06.003
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  68. [68] Šťastná M., Peřinková V., Pokorná P ., Vaishar A. New approach t o sustainability in r ural areas comprising agriculture practices–analysis of demonstration farms in the Czech Republic. Sustainability 2019:11(10):2906. https://doi.org/10.3390/su1110290610.3390/su11102906
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  69. [69] Borrelli I. P. Territorial sustainability and multifunctional agriculture: A case study. Agriculture and agricultural science procedia 2016:8:467–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaspro.2016.02.04610.1016/j.aaspro.2016.02.046
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  70. [70] Meyer C. Reinforcing comparative monitoring of Smart Specialization performance across European regions: transnational RIS3 observatory model as a tool for Smart Specialization governance. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues 2020:8(2):1386. http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2020.8.2(81)10.9770/jesi.2020.8.2(81)
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  71. [71] Bacsi Z., Kovács E. The role of cross-border cooperation in rural development-a new European perspective. Journal of Central European Agriculture 2006:7(3):485–488.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  72. [72] Santoalha, A. Technological diversification and Smart Specialization: The role of cooperation. Regional Studies 2019:53(9):1269–1283. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2018.153075310.1080/00343404.2018.1530753
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  73. [73] Manhart A., Vogt R., Priester M., Dehoust G., Auberger A., Blepp M., Dolega P., Kämper C., Giegrich J., Schmidt G., Kosmol J. The environmental criticality of primary raw materials – A new methodology to assess global environmental hazard potentials of minerals and metals from mining. Mineral Economics 2019:32(1):91–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13563-018-0160-010.1007/s13563-018-0160-0
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  74. [74] International Energy Agency. Energy Technology Perspectives 2020.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  75. [75] Boschma R. Constructing regional advantage and smart specialization: Comparison of two European policy concepts. Scienze Regionali 2014:18:51–68. https://doi.org/10.3280/SCRE2014-00100410.3280/SCRE2014-001004
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/rtuect-2021-0039 | Journal eISSN: 2255-8837 | Journal ISSN: 1691-5208
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 537 - 550
Published on: Sep 20, 2021
Published by: Riga Technical University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 times per year
Keywords:
Case study,
conceptual cooperation framework,
environmental spillovers,
innovation policy,
legume supply chain,
smart specialization,
rural development
Related subjects:
Life sciences,
Life sciences, other

© 2021 Christopher Meyer, Tim Oliver Howe, Christian Stollberg, Laima Gerlitz, published by Riga Technical University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 25 (2021): Issue 1 (January 2021)Next article