在創新系統中，產、學、研為新技術與知識積蓄的點，創新網絡中節點與節點之間的互動扮演重要的角色。區域內領導性廠商為了取得技術優勢，提供經費購買技術、引進技術等外部資源建立核心能力，在區域內形成產、學、研的技術聯盟組織，形塑區域特殊產業。各單位所交織形成的網絡動態為有助於區域創新活動的決定性因素。 透過這樣的角度來檢視台灣，本研究以區域創新系統的角度出發，觀察「數位遊戲」這項新興產業在技術與知識網絡中，行動者之間彼此的互動連結。將廠商、相關研究機構、產業公協會、人才培育機構、大專院校與育成中心視為區域創新網絡的驅動角色，透過問卷調查與社會學中的網絡分析工具，觀察網絡中技術與知識的互動關係。本研究的主要結論如下： ㄧ、由本研究實證結果發現，台灣北部區域所形塑遊戲產業產官學研合作所環繞的創新氛圍十分強烈。北部區域中，又以台北縣中和「遠東世紀廣場科技園區」與台北市「南港軟體工業園區」分別為遊戲產業高度密集聚點。 二、由於台灣數位遊戲產業各廠商之間的封閉性，各單位間技術與知識的互動關係偏低。廠商之間的網絡活動主要是以垂直性的關係為主，而非水平性的關係。廠商傾向倚賴國際之間網絡技術資源。 三、知識網絡中越是有能力的單位，越可能處於技術網絡的核心位置。也就是原本在遊戲產業中處於優勢地位的單位，基於資訊流通與知識傳遞方便的優勢，技術能力的掌握能力亦強，少數特定單位重複扮演技術與知識互動的重要角色。本研究從網絡結構中證實了技術與知識的高度關係。 四、技術網絡的連結模式呈現環環相扣的環狀結構，彼此交流與技術互動的相當頻繁與快速。知識網絡的星狀連結模式，具有明顯的核心單位，此類結構有利於知識的傳遞，處於散佈節點的單位居處特別重要的地位。 / In the innovation system, firms, schools and research institutes are new technology and knowledge storage places. The interactions between nodes play important roles in the innovation networks. In order to gain technology advantages, leading firms provide expenses to purchase and introduce technology to establish core ability. They form consortia with other firms, schools, and research institutes to build up regional specific industries in the regions. The dynamic network formed from the interaction of units is the main factor to facilitate regional innovative activities. This thesis is on the basis of Regional Innovation System (RIS) in Taiwan and takes “Digital Games” for example. Each actor interacts in the technology and knowledge networks in the RIS. Regarding firms, associate research institutes and industry associations as driving roles in the innovative networks, this thesis applies innovation networks surveys and the methodology of Social network analysis in Sociology to observe technology and knowledge interactions in the innovative networks. The major conclusions are as follows: First, “Far East Century Scientific Square” in Jhonghe City and “ Nan-Gang Software Industrial Park” in Taipei City are surrounded extremely strongly innovation milieu in the north of Taiwan. Secondly, owing to self-contained, digital games firms are deficient in interaction with each other. Activities in the networks are vertical relations almost, not horizontal ones. Firms tend to depending on international technology resources in the networks. The third, many competent actors basing on the advantage of information and knowledge transfer very quickly and conveniently in knowledge networks are located in the core of technology networks. A small number of firms repeatedly play the important role in technology and knowledge networks. From the network structure, this thesis proved technology and knowledge have a close relationship. Finally, technology networks display circular structures which exchange and transfer quite frequently and quickly; knowledge networks display star structure which have apparent core units and which are advantageous to transfer knowledge.

本研究以區域創新系統觀點，分析在兩岸區位優勢差異下，影響台灣製造業廠商兩岸研發區位選擇及廠商研發網絡治理情形，強化既往研究未同時關注台商、兩岸地區及偏重個案研究的不足之處；經實證結果發現，區位優勢、研發部門類型、市場規模、政策條件、產業群聚、知識流通及研發經費投入等變數為台商兩岸研發區位佈點的影響變數，除了市場規模及市場型研發部門與研發區位選擇呈現負向關係外，其他皆與區位選擇呈現正向關係，顯示除因台灣市場規模太小造成台商選擇至對岸設立研發部門外，台灣在其他表現上皆較對岸具有吸引力，台灣仍具有不可忽視的區域創新能量，建議政府部門應在產業政策上有新作為，提供廠商各項研發所需要的協助，以吸引更多本土企業於台灣設立研發部門，以不斷累積及提升台灣的研發競爭力。 區域創新系統強調區域內行動者的網絡連結及互動，形塑該地區無可取代的區域特色，為彌補研發區位選擇的量化研究，無法表達出區域創新系統內廠商在地化網絡連結及互動的情況，本研究在研發網絡治理部分以華碩企業集團為研究對象，探討其如何運用本身及當地資源，建立在地化網絡及維持網絡關係運作等網絡治理議題，經研究結果發現，由於華碩企業集團具有豐富的研發經驗、高水準的研發人員及雄厚的資金，扮演在地化網絡主要行動者的角色，掌握與其他行動者（例如政府部門、研究機構、大專院校及其他廠商等）間關係建立的主導權，在研發技術的傳遞上係以公司內部的垂直組織網絡為主要傳遞路徑，與區域創新系統內各行動者的網絡關係及在地鑲嵌程度不強。 / With the viewpoint of regional innovation system, this paper analyzes the impacts of R&D locational choices and enterporises’ R&D network governance that manufacturing firms in Taiwan have under the differentiation of locational advantages between China and Taiwan as well as consolidates some points which are incompletely focused in the past on Taiwanese firms, two sides of Taiwan Strait, and overweighing case-studies. The empirical evidences bring that the impacts of variable to locational distribution of Taiwanese manufacturing firms across the strait are many: locational advantages, the types of R&D unit, the scales of market, policy conditions, industrial clusters, knowledge flows and R&D investment. Except for the negative correlations between the scale of market/type of R&D unit and R&D locational choices, the rest variables have the positive correlation with R&D locational choices, which means that, barring that the scale of market in Taiwan is so small that Taiwanese firms choose to institute R&D spots in China, other variables in Taiwan are more attractive than those in China; Taiwan possesses innegligible energy of regional creativity. The suggestion is that the government has to take new actions on industrial policy, providing the assistance to R&D that enterprises need, in order to attract more and more local enterprises to set up their R&D functions in Taiwan for accumulating and advancing Taiwan’s competitive power continuously. Regional innovation system emphasizes on actors’ network linkages and interactions within one region, shaping irreplaceable regional characteristics for that region in order to atone for the quantitative research of R&D locational choices which cannot express the situation of enterprises’ localized network linkages and interactions within regional innovation system. Taking ASUS as example, this research, in terms of network governance, confers how ASUS draws on own and local resources for network governance issues like establishing localized networks and maintaining the operation of network relations. After the analysis, it is found that, on account of ASUS with abundant R&D experiences, high-level R&D staffs and tremendous funds, ASUS plays the role as key actor in the localized network, controlling the predominant power established by relations between other actors (i.e. public sectors, research institutes, colleges/universities, other enterprises and so on). In terms of R&D technology transfer, vertical networks in the inner company as main transfer passage is less attached with every actor’s network relation and its local embeddedness within regional innovation system.

Questo lavoro ha lo scopo di valutare i distretti tecnologici italiani. A tal fine sono stati sinteticamente presentati nel primo capitolo alcuni concetti chiave della letteratura economica rilevanti ai fini di questo lavoro. Nel secondo capitolo è stata condotta un'analisi di tipo descrittivo relativamente a tutti i distretti tecnologici approvati dal MIUR alla data del novembre 2007. Nel terzo capitolo si passa ad un'analisi di tipo quantitativo che sulla base di dati provenienti da varie fonti misura: il livello di specializzazione delle varie regioni italiane relativamente all'area tecnologica prescelta per l'implementazione del distretto tecnologico; il livello di performance delle varie regioni relativamente ad una serie di indicatori di attività scientifico-tecnologiche; il livello dell'ambiente economico in termini di tasso di imprenditorialità e di disponibilità di finanziamenti di tipo venture capital. Nel quarto capitolo si procede alla creazione di quattro indicatori sintetici: uno di specializzazione tecnologica; uno di performance scientifico-tecnologica; uno economico-ambientale; l'ultimo riassuntivo dei precedenti. Nel capitolo quarto i dati degli indicatori ottenuti dall'analisi quantitativa vengono combinati con le informazioni riportate nel capitolo secondo utilizzando un'analisi di tipo dicotomico. La visione d'insieme che ne deriva diventa la base per alcune considerazioni di policy sull'implementazione di questo strumento di politica innovativa. / This work analyses a specific policy instrument namely the establishment of technological districts (TD) in Italy. After a selective literature review of the main theoretical concepts used in the research (chapter 1), the work provides a general overview of the Italian TDs approved by MIUR at November 2007 (chapter 2). In the third chapter the work provides a statistical analysis of the regional innovation contexts using a wide set of indicators measuring: levels of regional specialization in the sectors chosen for TDs implementation; science and technology performances; features of the economic environment (entrepreneurship and venture capital funds). In the fourth chapter it is presented a system of four synthetic indices providing information on: 1) regional specializations; 2) scientific-technological performances; 3) economic environment. The fourth synthetic index, being the combination of the previous three, reflects simultaneously all the three dimensions. The analysis of statistical data is complemented, in chapter 4, by an evaluation of the institutional features of the TDs based on the information gathered in chapter 2. This has allowed to bring together the outcomes of chapter 2 and of chapter 3 in order to formulate some policy conclusions.

區域技術創新能力是展現區域將知識轉化為經濟的能力，是區域競爭力的重要內容。由於區域創新能力是造成中國各區域經濟發展差距的主要原因之一。本研究採用中國之上市公司為研究對象，探討公司創新活動的揭露與中國各省（自治區、直轄市）創新能力對分析師預測行為及分析師預測跟隨人數之影響。由三個面向檢視區域創新能力：研究與試驗發展全時人員當量增長率(REGTH)、政府研發投入占GDP比例(GIGDP)、每百萬人平均發明專利授權數(AVPAT)。研究結果發現創新活動揭露越多之公司，分析師之預測誤差程度越低、分析師之離散度越高且能吸引越多分析師對公司做預測。區域創新能力指標REGTH越高地區，分析師預測跟隨人數越少；區域創新能力指標GIGDP越高地區，分析師之預測誤差程度越低、分析師之離散度越低、分析師預測跟隨人數越少；區域創新能力指標AVPAT越高地區，分析師之預測誤差程度越低、分析師之離散度越低、分析師預測跟隨人數越多。 / Regional innovation capability is an important competitive ability to improve the economic development in China. Using a sample of Chinese listed companies, this study investigates the extent to which innovation disclosure at the company level and regional innovation capabilities affect analysts’ forecast characteristics in terms of forecast error, and forecast dispersion, and the number of analysts’ following. The indicators of regional innovation capabilities are the growth rate of R&D full-time equivalent personnel (REGTH), regional government's investment in R&D per GDP (GIGDP), and average of innovation patent authorized per millions of people in one region (AVPAT). The results indicate that firms with more innovation disclosures improve analysts’ forecast error, and regions with higher GIGDP and AVPAT also improve analysts’ forecast error. For firms with more innovation disclosures increase analysts’ forecast dispersion, and for regions with lower GIGDP and AVPAT increase analysts’ forecast dispersion. I also find firms with more innovation disclosures attract more analysts’ following, and regions with higher REGTH and GIGDP have less analysts’ following, while regions with higher AVPAT attract more analysts’ following.

No description available.

Submitted by Alzir Antônio Mahl (alzir_mahl@hotmail.com) on 2017-05-10T11:54:36Z No. of bitstreams: 1 ALZIR ANTONIO MAHL_Impressão.pdf: 14048608 bytes, checksum: 9be7df17ffa2c77f8b1b9025cc96badd (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Maria Auxiliadora da Silva Lopes (silopes@ufba.br) on 2017-05-10T14:52:49Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 ALZIR ANTONIO MAHL_Impressão.pdf: 14048608 bytes, checksum: 9be7df17ffa2c77f8b1b9025cc96badd (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-05-10T14:52:49Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ALZIR ANTONIO MAHL_Impressão.pdf: 14048608 bytes, checksum: 9be7df17ffa2c77f8b1b9025cc96badd (MD5) / A pesquisa buscou avaliar a evolução dos sistemas regionais de inovação no Brasil no período 2000 a 2011. Foram analisados os sistemas de inovação de 13 (treze) estados selecionados das cinco macrorregiões do Brasil, considerando para tanto: se as empresas empregaram conhecimento tecnológico nas atividades de inovação; se a produção e difusão do conhecimento tecnológico são elementos que melhoram o desempenho de um sistema regional de inovação; se é possível caracterizar estes sistemas regionais de inovação a partir das informações sobre as inovações das empresas e; se a maturidade dos SRIs pode ser avaliada por meio de variáveis relacionadas com as atividades de inovação. Para tanto, utilizaram-se as informações relatadas nas atividades de inovação pelas empresas na PINTEC destes estados como variável proxy para representar os sistemas regionais. Realizou-se uma revisão bibliográfica sobre conceitos relacionados ao trabalho, como conhecimento tecnológico, sistema de inovação e sistema regional de inovação, bem como discutiu-se o tema das políticas multinível ou mix de políticas, que podem ser, por exemplo, a combinação das políticas industrial e de inovação. Ademais, utilizaram-se os estados como unidades de análise dos SRIs, pelo fato destes possuírem os ingredientes necessários para caracterização dos sistemas regionais de inovação. A metodologia da pesquisa foi baseada na análise multivariada de dados, na qual os dados capturados das empresas participantes da pesquisa PINTEC dos anos de 2000, 2003, 2005, 2008 e 2011, foram agrupadas em variáveis onde aplicou-se a técnica da análise fatorial. Esta técnica permitiu a redução das 46 variáveis iniciais para uma matriz 13x67 (treze variáveis e sessenta e sete observações), o que permitiu a análise dos 13 SRIs a partir da obtenção de três fatores após a análise fatorial, denominados de Produção de Conhecimentos, Impactos e Obstáculos. No período da pesquisa, verificou-se a evolução dos SRIs em geral, pelo aumento da produção de conhecimentos e dos impactos das inovações, bem como da diminuição dos obstáculos às atividades de inovação das empresas. Como resultado, foi realizada uma análise das correlações entre os três fatores e indicadores de desenvolvimento socioeconômico (PIB per capita, Índice de Gini e Produtividade do Trabalho na Indústria) para os trezes SRIs. A definição de um indicador de correlação permitiu classificar os estados quanto à correlação entre as atividades de inovação e o desenvolvimento socioeconômico, resultando na formação de quatro grupos de estados, a saber: estados com correlação mais forte, moderada, média e fraca. / ABSTRACT The research aimed to evaluate the development of regional innovation systems in Brazil from 2000 to 2011. The innovation systems of thirteen selected states from the five macro regions of Brazil were analyzed considering: if companies used technological knowledge in innovation activities; if the production and dissemination of technological knowledge improve the performance of a regional innovation system; if it is possible to characterize these regional innovation systems from the information on the companies’ innovations and; if the maturity of SRIs can be evaluated by means of variables related to innovation activities. The information reported during innovation activities by the PINTEC companies in these states were used as a proxy variable to represent the regional systems. A literature review was conducted on concepts related to work, such as technological knowledge, innovation system and regional innovation system as well as the issue of multilevel policies or policy mix, which can be, for example, the combination of industrial and innovation policies. Moreover, the states were used as units of analysis of SRIs, because they have the necessary ingredients to characterize the regional innovation systems. The research methodology was based on multivariate data analysis, in which the captured data of the participating companies on PINTEC research from the years 2000, 2003, 2005, 2008 and 2011 were grouped into variables, where the technique of factor analysis was applied. This technique allowed the reduction of the 46 initial variables for a 13x67 matrix (thirteen variables and sixty-seven observations), which allowed the analysis of 13 SRIs from the achievement of three factors after the factor analysis, named Knowledge Production, Impacts and Obstacles. During the survey, it was possible to notice the evolution of SRIs in general, by the increase of knowledge production and the impact of innovation, as well as the reduction of barriers to the companies innovation activities. As a result, an analysis of correlations between the three factors and socio-economic development indicators (GDP per capita, Gini Index and Labor Productivity in Industry) was held for the thirteen SRIs. The definition of a correlation indicator allowed to classify the states about the correlation between innovation activity and socioeconomic development, resulting in the formation of four groups of states: states with stronger, moderate, medium and weak correlation.

This thesis deals with the Kosovar agricultural economy and the introduction of new approaches. Kosova is an economy in transition with high unemployment, young population and structural problems. The privatization process promises a better future and economic growth. However, hard work and new approaches are needed. Privatization does not mean immediate growth. Hereby, clusters are considered as an appropriate approach to develop rural areas. Especially the wine sector in Kosova could be an example for cluster development as it is a promising sector. Wine has a long history in Kosova although wine consumption is not widespread. This sector is a rare example where exports are higher than imports. Climate conditions cheep working force and as stated the background make this sector attractive. Foreign agencies and investors are very interested in this sector. This thesis will show the main problems and main opportunities of this sector. It will describe the structural changes and current developments. Cluster creation is not a government function. Further, it is not a tailor-made solution. In fact, clustering involves many roles. Each participant has certain duties but the whole process needs coordination. The monitoring and supervision of the whole process, the identification of needs and permanent exchange of the participants are organized in a cluster. At the end, a win-win situation is created even if competition is raised to a high level. Competition and the functioning of free markets guarantee the success of the sector and as a results regional development. One cluster helps to create another. Starting one process means that many others could follow. By reading this thesis, the reader should recognize potentials and understand the local circumstances. This is the aim of the study. / Faton Deva "Shkodra" 14, Prishtina 10000 Kosova mob: +377(0)44122883 e-mail:faton99d@gmail.com

National innovative capacity, a central driver of countries’ long-term economic growth, has been one of the focal points in innovation research for roughly thirty years. Initially proposed as an index to measure technologic invention over time, this concept has become the widely accepted standard for measuring the performance of (sub) national and sectoral innovation systems toward being an analytic tool attributed to innovation systems theory. Country comparison, knowledge flows, and R&D forecasting are in the center of analysis feeding the concrete practical use of innovation policy optimization. In this regard, a rich body of studies has contributed indispensable knowledge about the determinants of innovative capacity. However, the multi-dimensional interconnections have not been covered in depth. Thus, to gain a holistic understanding of the “DNA” behind national innovative capacity a new “comparative” view of these determinants is necessary. To this end, this dissertation proposes revisiting the focus, unit and parameters of analysis that predominate within current national innovative capacity studies and sets forth three interlinked academic articles that focus on different layers of innovative capacity in countries. Besides furthering academic discourse on the determinants of innovational outcome, this conceptual revision leads to a new approach on national innovation capacity research. Its intention is to make policy makers aware of certain pathways leading to the same outcome. This knowledge will enable them to pursue a dynamic approach of supporting the innovative processes in countries by defining appropriate innovation strategies that consider both the countries’ specific preconditions and the sub-systems perspective.:1. Introduction 2. The purpose of revisiting the NIC concept for innovation policy 3. The scientific contribution of this doctoral thesis 3.1 Article 1: Increasing the national innovative capacity: Identifying the pathways to success using a comparative method 3.2 Article 2: National Health Innovation Systems: Clustering the OECD countries by innovative output in healthcare using a multi-indicator approach 3.3 Article 3: Increasing the innovative capacity of European cities: Making use of proven concepts from the national level 4. References

「内発的地域イノベーション・エコシステム」とは、地域課題の革新的な解決を可能にする多様なプレイヤーによる機能的ネットワークであり、相互作用と共進化により持続する自律的システムである。人口減少を迎える小規模自治体において、いかにそうしたエコシステムを生み出し、地域公共財としての社会関係資本を蓄積しながら、しなやかに地域社会を維持・発展させていくことが可能なのかについて、国内の先進事例をもとに分析を行った。 / "Endogenous Regional Social Innovation Ecosystem" is that enable innovative solutions to regional challenges. It is a functional network of multi-sectoral players that is autonomous, sustained by interaction and co-evolution among the players. I analyzed based on advanced cases in Japan, about how it is possible for domestic small municipalities with declining populations to maintain and develop the local community in a flexible manner by creating such an ecosystem while accumulating social capital as local public goods. / 博士(ソーシャル・イノベーション) / Doctor of Philosophy in Social Innovation / 同志社大学 / Doshisha University

[ES] La presente investigación desarrolla un marco teórico que incluye, por una parte, elementos conceptuales referidos a los fenómenos de la innovación, de los sistemas de innovación (especialmente regionales) y de la gobernanza; y por otra, un esquema analítico de cuatro dimensiones (quién, qué, cómo y para qué) que permite entender mejor cómo funciona una gobernanza. Cada una de estas dimensiones es vinculada a algún tipo de componentes del sistema, como los estructurales (actores, redes e instituciones), los procesos clave y los bloqueos, los instrumentos de gobernanza y los propósitos. De esta forma se construye un conjunto coherente y robusto de instrumental de análisis. En un paso siguiente, se consigna la contrastación empírica basada en los elementos desarrollados en el marco teórico, aportando primeramente una contextualización de los sistemas regionales en Chile y agregando posteriormente una propuesta de variables para cada elemento conceptual, con datos de las regiones chilenas. Del mismo modo, utilizando la metodología del análisis cualitativo comparado de conjuntos difusos (fsQCA), que admite el uso de datos asimétricos y la información contextual para obtener generalizaciones, se propone un esquema operacional del cual se obtienen diversos modelos explicativos en función de determinados resultados esperados y, con ello, una serie de trayectorias de éxito y casos. Por último, una serie de conclusiones y recomendaciones son formuladas, luego de revisar el modo en que se ha dado respuesta a las preguntas de investigación y el grado de cumplimiento de los objetivos. Se destacan una serie aspectos teóricos, en tanto unificar diversos aspectos de los sistemas de innovación mediante los elementos estructurales, los procesos claves (además de los bloqueos), los instrumentos de gobernanza y los propósitos en un modelo más holístico y comprensivo. Así mismo, en términos metodológicos, el enfoque de fsQCA muestra una gran capacidad para la definición de trayectorias de éxito (combinaciones de componentes de cada dimensión) con diferentes propósitos, para la descripción de un conjunto de casos destacables (con resultados destacables o problemáticos) y la sugerencia de una serie de posibles propuestas de política en distintos contextos regionales. También se establecen las implicancias generales para el diseño e implantación de las gobernanzas de sistemas regionales de innovación, así como se destaca el rol de la colaboración, el impacto de la inversión en investigación y desarrollo para las regiones, además de la relevancia de los instrumentos estratégicos de gobernanza, en especial de ciertos organismos que pueden asimilares a agencias regionales. / [CA] This research develops a theoretical framework that includes, on the one hand, conceptual elements referring to the phenomena of innovation, innovation systems (mainly regional), and governance; and, on the other hand, a four-dimensional analytical scheme (who, what, how and why) that allows us to understand better how governance works. Each of these dimensions is linked to some type of system components, such as structural components (actors, networks, and institutions), key processes and blockages, governance instruments, and purposes. In this way, a coherent and robust set of analysis instruments is built. In the next step, the empirical contrast is recorded based on the elements developed in the theoretical framework, first providing a contextualization of the regional systems in Chile and subsequently adding a proposal of variables for each conceptual element, with data from the Chilean regions. Likewise, using the methodology of qualitative comparative analysis of fuzzy sets (fsQCA), which admits the use of asymmetric data and contextual information to obtain generalizations, an operational scheme is proposed from which various explanatory models are obtained based on specific results expected and, with it, a series of success stories and cases. The discussion of this evidence allows us to categorize the Chilean regional innovation systems, in addition to establishing the solidity of the analytical tools formulated in this research. Finally, a series of conclusions and recommendations are formulated after reviewing the way in which the research questions have been answered and the degree of fulfillment of the objectives. A series of theoretical aspects are highlighted while unifying various aspects of innovation systems through structural elements, key processes (as well as blockages), governance instruments, and purposes in a more holistic and comprehensive model. Interestingly, in methodological terms, the fsQCA approach shows an excellent capacity for defining success trajectories (combinations of components of each dimension) with different purposes for the description of a set of notable cases (with notable or problematic results), and the suggestion of a series of possible policy proposals in different regional contexts. The general implications for the design and implementation of the governance of regional innovation systems are also established, as well as the role of collaboration, the impact of investment in research and development for the regions, in addition to the relevance of the instruments, governance strategies, especially of certain organizations that can be assimilated into regional agencies. / [EN] La present investigació desenvolupa un marc teòric que inclou, d'una banda, elements conceptuals referits als fenòmens de la innovació, dels sistemes d'innovació (especialment regionals) i de la governança; i per una altra, un esquema analític de quatre dimensions (qui, que, com i per qué) que permet entendre millor com funciona una governança. Cadascuna d'estes dimensions és vincula a alguna mena de components del sistema, com els estructurals (actors, xarxes i institucions), els processos clau i els bloquejos, els instruments de governança i els propòsits. D'esta manera, es construeix un conjunt coherent i robust d'instrumental d'anàlisi. En un pas següent, es consigna la contrastació empírica basada en els elements desenvolupats en el marc teòric, aportant, primerament, una contextualització dels sistemes regionals a Xile i agregant, posteriorment, una proposta de variables per a cada element conceptual, amb dades de les regions xilenes. Igualment, utilitzant la metodologia de l'anàlisi qualitativa comparada de conjunts difusos (*fsQCA), que admet l'ús de dades asimètriques i la informació contextual per a obtindre generalitzacions, es proposa un esquema operacional del qual s'obtenen diversos models explicatius en funció de determinats resultats esperats i, amb això, una sèrie de trajectòries d'èxit i casos. La discussió d'eixa evidència permet categoritzar els sistemes regionals d'innovació xilens, a més d'establir la solidesa de les eines analítiques formulades en la present investigació. Finalment,es formulen una sèrie de conclusions i recomanacions, després de revisar el mode amb el qual s'ha donat resposta a les preguntes d'investigació i el grau de compliment dels objectius. Es destaquen una sèrie d'aspectes teòrics, amb el quan s'unifiquen diverses característiques dels sistemes d'innovació mitjançant els elements estructurals, els processos claus (a més dels bloquejos), els instruments de governança i els propòsits en un model més holístic i comprensiu. Així mateix, en termes metodològics, l'enfocament de *fsQCA mostra una gran capacitat per a la definició de trajectòries d'èxit (combinacions de components de cada dimensió) amb diferents propòsits, per a la descripció d'un conjunt de casos destacables i el suggeriment d'una sèrie de possibles propostes de política en diferents contextos regionals. També s'estableixen les implicancions generals per al disseny i implantació de les governances de sistemes regionals d'innovació, així com es destaca el rol de la col·laboració, l'impacte de la inversió en recerca i desenvolupament per a les regions, a més de la rellevància dels instruments estratègics de governança, especialment d'uns certs organismes que poden assimilar-se a agències regionals. / Sandoval Nehme, JY. (2024). Sistemas regionales de innovación y dimensiones de gobernanza. Evidencia desde Chile [Tesis doctoral]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/208294