Regional Development Agencies and the knowledge economy: Harnessing the potential of universities
In: Environment & planning: international journal of urban and regional research. C, Government & policy, Band 17, Heft 6, S. 685-700
ISSN: 0263-774X
3 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Environment & planning: international journal of urban and regional research. C, Government & policy, Band 17, Heft 6, S. 685-700
ISSN: 0263-774X
In: Environment and planning. C, Government and policy, Band 17, Heft 6, S. 685-699
ISSN: 1472-3425
The authors explore the bases for regional engagement by universities in the light of structural change within higher education and ongoing debates about the nature of regional economic development. They focus on the implications for a university's relationship with its region of the New Labour policy environment within England as set out in a series of White Papers and consultation papers concerned with industrial competitiveness, lifelong learning and Regional Development Agencies (RDAs), and assess how far these new policy proposals address Old Labour issues of uneven development within the knowledge economy. The authors conclude the paper by setting out new procedures on the part of government departments, RDAs, and universities themselves for linking universities and regions in order to create regional learning systems.
The promise of co-production to address complex sustainability challenges is compelling. Yet, co-production, the collaborative weaving of research and practice, encompasses diverse aims, terminologies and practices, with poor clarity over their implications. To explore this diversity, we systematically mapped differences in how 32 initiatives from 6 continents co-produce diverse outcomes for the sustainable development of ecosystems at local to global scales. We found variation in their purpose for utilizing co-production, understanding of power, approach to politics and pathways to impact. A cluster analysis identified six modes of co-production: (1) researching solutions; (2) empowering voices; (3) brokering power; (4) reframing power; (5) navigating differences and (6) reframing agency. No mode is ideal; each holds unique potential to achieve particular outcomes, but also poses unique challenges and risks. Our analysis provides a heuristic tool for researchers and societal actors to critically explore this diversity and effectively navigate trade-offs when co-producing sustainability.
BASE