Suchergebnisse

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Tables and Figures -- 1 Introduction -- 2 Capacity Concepts in Cluster and Innovation Research -- 3 Cluster Policy and Cluster Organizations -- 4 Cluster Analysis -- 5 The Innovation Context for Cluster Management -- 6 Concluding Remarks: Capacity Building in Biotech Clusters -- References -- Index

AbstractGovernments are increasingly facilitating the roll-out of so-called "smart meters", a technology for measuring energy consumption that are able to transmit and receive data using a form of electronic communication. However, implementation has been slow or even stalled. To identify some of the causes for this, the policy coordination perspective serves as a lens to unravel the different elements involved in smart meter implementation. The research adds the demand and supply dimension to account for market dynamics and public engagement challenges in the process. A case study of the UK finds that government efforts are challenged by the timely and coherent coordination of diverse stakeholders and regulatory measures.

Knowledge exchange and collaboration in innovation networks is based on trust. Individuals and organizations within the network further play an important role in creating trusting relationships. Using this as a basis, the article explores the dynamics of trust when relationships and positions within the network change. Counter to the expectation that relationships are formalized in this scenario, the article shows that in the Chicago case, trust is layered. The article concludes that third-party sources of information about trustworthiness are strategically established as a layer in the network and that individuals translate past interactions into lasting organizations that can facilitate trust.

Increased pressure to use policy transfer as a tool has led policy-makers to seek it as a solution for innovation efforts. A prominent example is Silicon Valley, whose replication attempts have been widely criticised. Based on 'Silicon Somewhere' cases in Asia, Europe and the US, the research suggests that there are different types of learning contributing to the success or failure of policy transfer. These variations in the learning processes underlying the transfer include imitation, trialand- error and adaptive learning.

Countries increasingly bring in facilitators for managing high-tech networks. Facilitators are broadly defined as experts who take on a central position in the network with the goal of connecting various stakeholder groups. They also receive public funding and pose as a communication link between stakeholders and government. However, the use of facilitators challenges government to identify their benefits. Based on three case studies and interviews in biotechnology networks, the article opens up the black box of facilitation. It addresses the evaluation challenges by establishing a conceptual framework based on collaborative and absorptive capacity-building theory to identify the elements relevant to facilitation. The analysis of Chicago (USA), Medicon Valley (Denmark/Sweden), and Singapore shows that facilitators not only create capacity-enhancing elements within networks, they also occur in varying forms, including a government- and stakeholder-funded model in European countries, an independent model in North America, and a government-financed model in Asia. Adapted from the source document.

The editorial sets the stage for the special issue on algorithmic transparency in government. The papers in the issue bring together transparency challenges experienced across different levels of government, including macro-, meso-, and micro-levels. This highlights that transparency issues transcend different levels of government – from European regulation to individual public bureaucrats. With a special focus on these links, the editorial sketches a future research agenda for transparency-related challenges. Highlighting these linkages is a first step towards seeing the bigger picture of why transparency mechanisms are put in place in some scenarios and not in others. Finally, this introduction present an agenda for future research, which opens the door to comparative analyses for future research and new insights for policymakers.

AbstractIn their efforts to digitize public service delivery, countries increasingly use algorithms based on mathematical models, data and/or a combination of different administrative datasets to issue decisions, but recent studies point towards challenges around citizens' understanding, accessing, and filing objections to such automated decisions. This paper focuses on the social infrastructure supporting citizens that struggle with accessing such services. To address this, we ask: How does the social infrastructure affect administrative burdens associated with digital government services? This is studied in the Dutch context through expert interviews and observations of support programs in libraries. We find that although libraries as primary sites for these services may pose the disadvantage of being more difficult to reach for low‐literate citizens, advantages are their organizational structure at the local level as well as their currently changing role to include a growing range of services, including (digital) skills courses.