Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorDanson, Mike
dc.contributor.authorde Souza, Peter
dc.date.accessioned2013-10-31T11:57:07Z
dc.date.available2013-10-31T11:57:07Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.identifier.citationDanson, M., & de Souza, P. (2013). Peripheries – the agenda. Fraser of Allander Economic commentary 36(spec.issue 4)6-11no_NO
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/134737
dc.descriptionArtikkel utgitt i Fraser of Allander Economic commentary, 2013no_NO
dc.description.abstractFra første side: According to analysis for the European Commission, three of the four leaders in innovation in the European Union are the Nordic countries of Denmark, Finland and Sweden – Germany being the other (Innovation Union Scoreboard, http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/facts-figuresanalysis/ innovation-scoreboard/index_en.htm). Confirming this tendency to modernity and adaptation to the demands of a globalised marketplace, in a similar pan-European study, it has been observed that there are: “economically successful regions with below average accessibility. Often ... sparsely populated and remote ... in the Nordic Countries, north-east of Spain, Scotland, Ireland and in and around northern Italy. ... Regions in the Nordic Countries, for example, have overcome their peripheral location by capitalising on current strengths in relation to ICT, research, educational and environmental opportunities and less on improving their accessibility”. ESPON (2010), New Evidence on Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive Territories. Polycentric Europe: smart, connected places, First ESPON 2013 Synthesis Report. http://www.espon.eu/export/sites/default/Documents/Publications/SynthesisReport/FirstOcto ber10/fullversion.pdf). Contributions to the book on Regional Development in Northern Europe : Peripherality, Marginality and Border Issues,( edited by Mike Danson and Peter de Souza, published February 2012, Routledge) include chapters which extend this particular research theme by focusing on specific regions, especially in Scotland and Norway. Around the former, Davies et al. (2012) provide positive answers to the question of “Can peripheral regions innovate?” while in the Norwegian context Bergum (2012) discusses “Proximity and distributed innovations. Innovations ‘in the shadow of the clusters’’ revealing that, indeed, the ESPON and CEC findings are transparent on the ground.no_NO
dc.language.isoengno_NO
dc.publisherUniversity of Strathclyde - Business Schoolno_NO
dc.relation.urihttp://www.strath.ac.uk/media/departments/economics/fairse/specialissues/Special_Issue_No_4_-_Economic_and_Social_Aspects_of_the_Peripheral_Region_-_September_2013.pdf
dc.subjectregionerno_NO
dc.subjectinnovasjonno_NO
dc.subjectregional utviklingno_NO
dc.subjectperiferienno_NO
dc.titlePeripheries – the agendano_NO
dc.typeJournal articleno_NO
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Social science: 200::Political science and organizational theory: 240no_NO
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Social science: 200::Economics: 210no_NO
dc.source.pagenumber6-11no_NO
dc.source.volume36no_NO
dc.source.journalFraser of Allander Economic commentaryno_NO
dc.source.issuespecial issue 4no_NO


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel