Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Samverkansnätverk för innovation: en interaktiv och genusvetenskaplig utmaning av innovationspolitik och innovationsforskning
Luleå University of Technology, Department of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Human Work Science.
2010 (Swedish)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)Alternative title
Joint action for innovation : a participative and gender scientific challenge of innovation policy and innovation research (English)
Abstract [en]

In recent decades, politicians, civil servants and scientists have drawn attention to the role that joint action plays in the emergence of innovations. Among other things, the importance of the joint action networks with participants from different sectors of society has been stressed. Joint action networks - otherwise referred to as ‘innovation systems', ‘triple helix' and ‘clusters' - are believed to contribute to the development of innovations. Through national and regional authorities, public funding is distributed to such joint action networks in order to encourage innovation and with the ultimate goal of attaining ‘sustainable growth'. However, critiques have been articulated towards the public promotion of innovation systems and clusters that marginalises certain actors and areas. In particular, women and industries employing many women have been disadvantaged by the priorities made. The marginalization occurs despite the fact that several of the industries employing many women - primarily services industries - are attributed a central role in the transformation of Western economies to become more dynamic and knowledge-based. Neither policy makers nor researchers have analyzed how joint action networks promote innovation within women dominated settings. This dissertation strives to address that gap by depicting some Swedish efforts employed to organize joint action networks based on women's entrepreneurship and innovation. Both policy and research have been characterized by a ‘top down' approach, discerning only a limited scope of actors and areas as relevant in the area of joint action networks promoting innovation. In contrast, this thesis considers that a ‘bottom up‘ approach could highlight the importance of a broader spectrum of actors and areas. The dissertation extends the arena for knowledge development in the area of joint action networks by depicting some of the actors and areas currently marginalized in innovation policy and innovation research. This study questions the existing norms utilised to categorise and measure innovation systems and clusters and scrutinises how gender is "done" both in innovation research and innovation policy, which is also the purpose of the thesis. The core of this thesis is to offer a participative and gender scientific challenge to innovation policy and research. The empirical data includes efforts to promote women's entrepreneurship and innovation being pursued by four regional joint action networks in Sweden. These are: SAGA and Emma Resource Centre in northern Sweden, as well as Företagsamma Kvinnor (Enterpreneurial Women) and Lika Villkor (Equal Conditions) in central Sweden. These networks had problematized the use of innovation systems and clusters as theoretical concepts and policy tools before the thesis work was initiated. Selecting these same networks to work with for the purposes of this thesis is thus particularly suitable to illustrate and challenge the prevalent innovation policies and research. The analytical frame of reference used to highlight the empirical data consists of three comprehensive groups of theories. These three groups of theories are:A bottom up approach to studies of policies, on the basis of Carlsson's (1996, 2000a, 2000b) approach for non-hierarchical studies of policies.Doing gender in policy and research, on the basis of West & Zimmerman's (1987) approach of ‘doing gender' and Bacchi's (1999) approach to studies of problem representation in policies.Organization and classification of innovation systems, on the basis of Frankelius' (2005) approach to studies of innovation systems.One of my aims in this study is to depict actors and activities that have been given a low priority in policy and research. The theories employed in the study make it possible to study the organization of innovation systems and management of innovation policy with a ‘bottom up' approach. As an analytical approach, ‘bottom up' implies that policies in a given field are studied on the basis of how people at the grassroots level identify policy problems and try to find solutions. This approach does not distinguish crucial actors and relevant areas in advance. Instead, the relevance of different actors and areas is established through empirical studies. The low prioritized areas and actors would not be as apparent if those parts of the theories were used that draws attention only to the importance of a few - centrally distinguished - actors and areas, as is the case in a ‘top down' approach. The research process depicted in this dissertation has been conducted by means of a participatory research approach. In this kind of approach, knowledge is developed jointly by researchers and the actors concerned by the research issues. Thus, the knowledge development has been characterized by a mutual influence between practice and theory. Participatory research (also known as ‘action research') has a long tradition within Nordic work life sciences. Within this stream of research, two different traditions have emerged: one emphasizing a pragmatic approach to participatory research and the other promoting a more critical approach. The first focuses dialogue within a group, stressing the importance of organizational learning and consensus. The latter tradition highlights how the dialogue between participants and researchers enhances a critical reorientation of existing norms and practices. This tradition can thus initiate social change in a broader sense than the pragmatic approach. The research process described in the dissertation adheres mainly to the critical tradition of participatory research, examining prevailing norms in innovation policy and innovation research. This challenge of norms has taken place in ‘dialogue seminars' arranged as a part of a mutual Research and Development (R&D) process. At these seminars, participants from the four regional networks were encouraged to discuss their experiences of promoting women's entrepreneurship and innovation. In the empirical chapter the results from the discussions at the dialogue seminars are presented, together with some additional data gathered from the networks' existing documents about their activities. Each network is described separately under three different headlines: Organization, Innovation and Surroundings. The empirical data reveals how the four networks have organized themselves around the topic of women's entrepreneurship and innovation. The SAGA network specifically focused technological development and thereto shared the focus of local and regional development with Emma Resource Centre. The network Företagsamma Kvinnor especially highlighted entrepreneurial women's ability to support themselves economically, while Lika Villkor stressed the importance of increasing the impact of local resource centres for women in the region. All networks involved actors from four different sectors: the public, the private, the academic and the non-profit sector. Concerning the topic of innovation, a wide range of innovations could be distinguished in connection with the activities of the four networks. For example, a new system for ICT connection has been developed in a sparsely populated area. New methods for mapping and supporting innovation systems and clusters within areas employing many women have also been developed. Wedding arrangements with a touch of local cultural history is another innovation. Three of the networks have primarily been active in areas employing many women, such as the services industries. One of the networks was equally active in the area of ICT, which is an industry employing mainly men. These networks have acknowledged that actors in their surrounding have influenced their activities, for example by granting or refusing funding.The empirical data is analyzed and discussed in the two last chapters of the dissertation. There it is portrayed how the four regional networks have challenged prevailing innovation policy and innovation research. The analysis shows that these networks have organized themselves in a manner that is consistent with the logic of innovation systems, gathering actors from different sectors in order to develop new knowledge and enhance innovation. Therefore, they could very well be classified as such, even though the contemporary research and policy on innovation systems have systematically excluded milieus focusing women as actors and areas employing many women. However, the four networks have not unconditionally accepted the prevalent norms for how innovation systems are supposed to be organized. Rather they have challenged these norms by expanding the range of relevant actors in such joint action networks. Besides women and areas employing many women, they have involved the non-profit sector contributing with new ideas, consistency and knowledge. They have also expanded the range of innovations emanating from joint action networks, including new services, methods and experiences besides new physical products. The purpose of the thesis was to examine how a ‘bottom up' approach can highlight how gender is done in innovation policy and innovation research. This purpose is fulfilled by the conclusion that gender is done in a segregating and hierarchical manner in innovation policy and innovation research when women and areas employing many women are marginalized in the promotion of innovation systems and clusters. The four networks have challenged this way of doing gender by proposing a less segregating and hierarchical tactic, opening up for many different actors at many different areas promoting many different kinds of innovations. This conclusion calls for further development of existing theories on how innovation is promoted by joint action networks. The development includes 1) a new operationalization of ‘innovation', ‘innovation systems' and ‘clusters' to comprise a wider range of actors and areas and 2) a shift from ‘triple helix' to ‘quattro helix' as a theoretical model in order to include the non-profit sector as well. Policy implications to be drawn from the analysis are the inclusion of a wider range of actors and activities in the innovation policy priority patterns, reaching beyond segregating and hierarchical notions of gender.

Abstract [sv]

Under de senaste decennierna har politiker, tjänstemän och forskare kommit att rikta uppmärksamheten mot den roll som samverkan spelar för uppkomsten av innovationer. Bland annat har betydelsen av samverkansnätverk med deltagare från olika samhällssektorer betonats. Några varianter av samverksansnätverk som tros bidra till utvecklingen av innovationer är de som kallas för 'innovationssystem', 'triple helix' och 'kluster'. Via nationella och regionala myndigheter har statliga medel delats ut till sådana samverksansnätverk i hopp om att främja innovation och att i förlängningen uppnå 'hållbar tillväxt'. Samtidigt har andra samverksansnätverk riktat strålkastarljuset mot den marginalisering som utövats i dessa satsningar gentemot vissa aktörer och verksamhetsområden. Det är då särskilt kvinnor och näringar som sysselsätter många kvinnor som missgynnats av prioriteringsmönstret i den förda politiken och forskningen. Detta trots att flera av de näringar som sysselsätter många kvinnor - företrädesvis service- och upplevelsenäringar - tillskrivits en central betydelse för omvandlingen av västvärldens ekonomier till att bli mer dynamiska och kunskapsbaserade. I avhandlingen utvidgas den kunskapsutvecklande arenan kring samverkansnätverk för innovation genom att gestalta några av de aktörer och verksamhetsområden som har marginaliserats. Genom att problematisera de normer som råder för kategorisering och värdering av innovationssystem och kluster analyseras hur kön "görs" i innovationsforskning och innovationspolitik, vilket är avhandlingens syfte. Därmed kan avhandlingen ses som en interaktiv och genusvetenskaplig utmaning av denna politik och forskning. Empirin omfattar de insatser för att främja kvinnors företagande och innovation som har utförts av fyra regionala samverkansnätverk i Sverige. De fyra samverkansnätverken är SAGA i Norrbotten, Emma Resurscentrum i Västerbotten, Företagsamma Kvinnor i Västmanland och Lika Villkor i Södermanland. Dessa är valda utifrån att de representerar två skilda delar av landet: norra Norrland och mellersta Mälardalen. De har dessutom alla själva problematiserat användningen innovationssystem och kluster som teoretiska begrepp och politiska verktyg redan innan avhandlingsarbetet inleddes, vilket gör dem särskilt lämpliga att gestalta. Med hjälp av en interaktiv forskningsansats - där kunskap utvecklas gemensamt av forskare och berörda - gestaltas hur dessa fyra samverkansnätverk har organiserat samverkansnätverk för innovation på ett sätt som överensstämmer med den logik som kännetecknar innovationssystem. Samtidigt har de utmanat de rådande normerna för hur samverkansnätverk bör organiseras genom att involvera aktörer och områden som hittills marginaliserats i innovationspolitik och innovationsforskning. Närmare bestämt den civila sektorn samt kvinnor och näringar som sysselsätter många kvinnor som företagare och anställda. Med hjälp av en analytisk referensram bestående av teorier om ett nedifrånperspektiv i studier av politik, görande av kön i politik samt organisering och klassificering av innovationssystem urskiljs den teoriutveckling och politiska förändring som analysen uppmanar till. Denna utveckling och förändring består bland annat i en ny operationalisering av innovation, innovationssystem och kluster, en vidareutveckling av 'triple helix' till 'quattro helix' samt ett bredare spektra av aktörer och verksamhetsområden i innovationspolitikens prioriteringsmönster som når bortom isärhållande och hierarkiska föreställningar om kön.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Luleå: Luleå tekniska universitet, 2010. , 332 p.
Series
Doctoral thesis / Luleå University of Technology 1 jan 1997 → …, ISSN 1402-1544
Keyword [en]
Social sciences
Keyword [sv]
Samhällsvetenskap
Research subject
Man Machine Relation Focusing Gender
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-18566Local ID: 93192920-6a28-11df-ab16-000ea68e967bISBN: 978-91-7439-131-2OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ltu-18566DiVA: diva2:991575
Note
Godkänd; 2010; 20100528 (mallin); DISPUTATION Ämnesområde: Människa-maskin med inriktning mot genusforskning / Man Machine Relation Focusing Gender Opponent: Docent, lektor Christine Hudson, Umeå universitet Ordförande: Professor Ewa Gunnarsson, Luleå tekniska universitet Tid: Fredag den 8 oktober 2010, kl 13.00 Plats: F341, Luleå tekniska universitetAvailable from: 2016-09-29 Created: 2016-09-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(2642 kB)6 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 2642 kBChecksum SHA-512
f166a2d81f93b3808475f071d74aa2f29a7530215a1510fddf847b146efd7a9488b2fbb37f97947f9c5afa261e0d9e54d6878896e08dbd336663aea1b41ebc26
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lindberg, Malin
By organisation
Human Work Science

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 6 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Total: 113 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link