This thesis is a study of the development and uptake of an emerging infrastructural technology: the mobile Wireless Broadband technology and service known as WiBro in South Korea, and Mobile WiMAX internationally. WiBro has emerged through a national development effort since the early 2000s. The commercial service was launched in 2006. However, uptake fell far below initial expectations, only succeeding in niche markets. This study was motivated by concerns about the perceived gulf between development and diffusion and the ‘failure’ of WiBro. However, this study seeks to go beyond the technology-driven perspective that informs conceptions of diffusion gap: it aims to explicate the sociotechnical factors leading to such a gap. This study draws on Science and Technology Studies (STS) and in particular the Social Shaping of Technology (SST) perspective, which provides tools to scrutinize the interactions among the various interests and factors involved in the process of technological innovation. The SST perspective goes beyond approaches that treat technology as a static object to be developed and diffused. It provides tools to examine the complex and dynamic forces that develop technical capacity towards particular forms and uses. The ‘social learning’ perspective extends SST and provides concepts to explore the changing dynamics over multiple cycles of innovation. Here, Jørgensen’s concept of ‘development arena’ helps examine the interlinked, yet dispersed and multiple spaces in which differing goals, motivations and strategies of innovation players together shape technological innovation. Through comprehensive analyses of a longitudinal study of WiBro, a broader view of the process and the outcomes of technological innovation have been achieved. Rather than viewing the technology as a stable object that would progress in a linear manner through the stages of design, development, and diffusion, it has focused on the process of shaping of WiBro through multiple cycles of innovation. Several arenas of innovation were identified as diverse players sought to align their interests towards exploiting the resources, capacities, and tools for innovation that seemed to be available. In these spaces, conflicting and yet coevolving dynamics were observed: one involving coordination through alignments of multiple interests, and the other incorporating tensions and misalignments among the differing concerns, aims and commitments towards the innovation. The complex dynamics involved a multi-level game where the collective actions among the innovation players and their individual strategies diverged to a degree. Furthermore, changing contingencies, linked to shifting choices of innovation players, resulted in the deviation of the innovation from the initial visions and aims. The study thus illustrates the outcomes of highly divergent interactions at play in innovation process and the mutual enrollment efforts of players that constituted the distributed governance of innovation. Here the complex interplays among the innovation players involved in multi-level games produced a gap between the generic vision and the actual uptake of WiBro. Changing contingencies, especially linked to broader and evolving structures and relations - brought about the reshaping of the generic vision of WiBro. This research therefore suggests the concept of the ‘distributed governance of innovation’ as a new mode for governance: that accommodates not only differing knowledges and interests but also the shifting choices and visions through the various cycles of technological innovation. The boundary of social learning is thus extended to incorporate diverging choices over time and across the multiple spaces of innovation. Its implications for policy include achieving reflexivity by incorporating into the policy framework the learning process that takes place as the innovation players go through the varying stages and cycles of technological innovation.

The power of financial innovations to impact societies at global scales compels us to ask how innovation occurs, how it is governed and how to support the responsible initiation and emergence of such innovation in society. This thesis focuses on investigating and comparing current approaches to, and limitations of, the governance of financial innovation and perceptions of responsible financial innovation in three very different institutional settings: a large, global asset management company; a SME developing disruptive, technology - related platforms and services based on big data and associated analytics supporting customer relationship management in the banking and retail sectors; and a global insurance broker. To date there has been almost no published empirical research into the processes and governance of financial innovation in such corporate settings. The initial hypothesis that financial innovation is not governed (internally, externally) was not supported by the empirical data: rather these suggest the existence of formal and informal mechanisms for innovation governance. As suggested in the literature, financial innovation was observed to be largely incremental in nature and involve multiple stakeholders, co-ordinated internally by an ‘innovation owner’ (e.g. an individual, a group of individuals or a department). The research suggests that while there is broad statutory (regulation) and non-statutory governance of the financial sector, there is limited direct regulation of financial innovation per se. Despite this, contextual regulation (e.g. EU) and industry standards set an important governance frame within which innovation was observed to occur, complemented by a range of organizational innovation governance approaches, which ranged from completely informal, ad hoc (‘de facto’) processes to formal staging innovation management tools. It was not possible to generalize across sectors, emphasizing the need for more empirical work in other organizations in order to understand innovation management and governance across the financial sector as a whole. Responsible financial innovation is an emerging concept associated with a very small body of academic literature. The case study data show responsible financial innovation to be perceived as an ‘interpretively flexible umbrella’ term, underpinned by a value system that leads to quantifiable positive outputs (e.g. creating customer satisfaction). The research suggests that several ‘competencies’ (e.g. compliance, learning, communication, monitoring, and ownership) were perceived as relevant to responsible financial innovation by respondents. Themes emerging from the study mirrored to some extent the seven framings suggested by Armstrong et al. (2012) and Muniesa and Lenglet (2012) and the four dimensions of responsible innovation proposed by Owen et al. (2013); these however were very narrowly framed, especially with regard to second-order reflexivity (e.g. on the normative purposes and functions of finance in society). While dimensions of anticipation, reflection, deliberation and responsiveness (Owen et al., 2013) were evident to varying degrees in the cases these were narrowly configured (e.g. around ethics of data monetization, or on anticipation of operational risks), with deliberation often being internally focused, or including only a limited range of external stakeholders. These observations cause me to argue that current mechanisms for governing financial innovation are not sufficiently robust to support their responsible emergence in society. I conclude that any framework for responsible financial innovation should endeavor to broaden the scope for stakeholder engagement and make use of multi-level governance mechanisms (including committees in the innovation and governance process), while continuing to acknowledge the importance of contextual legislation in the framing of innovation trajectories. I recommend the initiation of a cross sector and independent institution for systematic financial innovations assessment, the establishment of formal cross-sector fora and communication channels to facilitate engagement with external stakeholders, and the codification of responsible financial innovation competencies into contextual legislation.

This paper investigates governance mechanisms in international technology alliances (ITAs), firm-level innovation capabilities, and performance outcomes in the mobile computing market. This high-tech market is characterized by numerous cross-border strategic technology collaborations between hardware (HW) and software (SW) firms. Anchoring this work in the relational view, transaction cost economics, and the resource-based view, I develop a model and empirically test and validate relationships related to behavioral ITA governance mechanisms, innovation capabilities, and business performance. In the international cross-industry context, the findings explain to what extent complementary technology resources, through a relational governance mechanism, contribute to the innovation capabilities and superior business performance of high-tech firms, providing a competitive advantage. The data which is analyzed using partial least squares (PLS) path modeling, indicates technological commitment is a factor in expediting technology resource exchange in ITAs between HW and SW firms. The findings also show that the multi-dimensional business performance of firms is only influenced by market development capability, and not new product development capability in product innovation. The results are consistent, regardless of controlling for firm size, industry type, partner-specific experience, and alliance duration in the model. Thus, this research offers insights into how heterogeneous HW and SW high-tech firms in the emerging high-velocity market benefit from a relational governance mechanism in ITAs, thereby establishing competitive advantage through firm-level innovation capabilities. It also explains the relationships between firm-level product innovation mechanisms and business performance. Furthermore, this research provides evidence of the methodological usefulness of PLS path modeling in explaining new phenomena in international business, strategic management, and innovation fields.

Boosting economic growth and competitiveness in different spatial contexts such as national, regional, metropolitan etc. has always been in the epicenter of both large and small-scale planning efforts pursued at different levels of government from local to extra- regional and their significance is still, and probably will always be, on the rise given the ever increasing competition in today’s, and yet-to-come future world. In order to achieve this, relevant authorities have devised and implemented a vast variety of policies and approaches which are, more often than not, based on abundance of theoretical contributions in the field of economic geography. This thesis explores one of the main theoretical contributions to this field being Innovation Systems theory and tries to adapt the concept, originally intended for application at a larger scale, to the perspective of an individual firm rather than a whole production system while briefly using empirics from the spatial context of Adelaide/South Australia, loosely defined as a region, and the sectoral context of electricity infrastructure. The initial conclusion here is that applying the concept to the more manageable context of an individual firm, may have the potential to enable one to identify the relevant organizational and institutional setup more effectively and present a better explanatory description of their role in the whole Innovation system and in turn, can contribute to a more informed planning and policy- making process for regional economic growth.

Il lavoro di ricerca ha a oggetto l’analisi del modello europeo (UE) di regolamentazione delle nanotecnologie nel settore agroalimentare, con riferimento agli aspetti etico-giuridici e sociali, ai fini della definizione del quadro normativo di riferimento nella sua relazione con la dimensione di complessità e incertezza intrinseca nel sapere scientifico-tecnologico. La prospettiva teorica da cui muove l’analisi è la co-produzione tra i linguaggi della scienza e del diritto proposta dagli STS (Science & Technologies Studies). Partendo dalla descrizione degli aspetti scientifici dei nanomateriali e delle applicazioni nanotecnologiche nel settore alimentare, il lavoro analizza, in primo luogo, le problematiche correlate alle procedure di gestione del rischio – dalle prospettive più riduzionistiche della cd. “scienza del rischio” nell'innovazione alle più complesse modalità di valutazione integrata del rischio. L’indagine s’incentra, quindi, sulle forme che la normazione sta assumendo nell'intreccio con i saperi delle nanotecnologie, attraverso un approccio comparatistico delle esperienze normative europea e statunitense. L’ultima parte del lavoro s’indirizza, infine, all’analisi delle esigenze di democraticità sottese alle suddette scelte scientifico-giuridiche, problematizzando il concetto di governance anticipatoria e responsabile delle nanotecnologie (concetto correlato all’idea di riuscire a guidare i processi di innovazione attivamente), alla luce del rapporto tra conoscenze scientifiche, politiche agroalimentari e diritto. / In recent decades technoscientific innovation has pushed the food boundaries to a new frontier of nanofood. Such a term refers to an array of food products, whose processes of growing, production and packaging involve nanoscale (nanotechnology and nanosciences) knowledges and applications. This research focuses on the analysis of the European (EU) regulatory framework in the field of agrofood nanotechnology. The analysis considers the salient features of emerging applications of nanotechnologies in the agrofood sector and compares the legal framework on nanofood in the EU with the USA’s regulatory approach. It also develops an interpretation of the normative evolution in the EU, by trying to understand what is the role of science in governing technological risks in nanofood safety, and assessing how adequate the regulatory instruments are in achieving the goal of responsible research and innovation as proposed within the process of rethinking European governance.

[pt] A difusão de sistemas locais de inovação pode ser entendida como uma das expressões de uma nova forma de cooperação que se manifesta no contexto amplo das mudanças estruturais enfrentadas pela sociedade, com impacto nas organizações produtivas. O objetivo deste trabalho é entender a dinâmica de um Sistema Local de Inovação - SLI, em particular, dos de base universitária, identificando seus principais atores (stakeholders) e as políticas mais eficazes para garantir seu funcionamento por parte do governo, universidades e setor privado. Faz-se um estudo sobre a dinâmica da inovação tecnológica e sobre as mudanças no ambiente das organizações, sendo também analisada a proposta da PUC-Rio em estabelecer um SLI de base universitária no bairro da Gávea, avaliando-se seus possíveis impactos na economia da região e sua capacidade para promover a transferência de resultados da pesquisa científica para a sociedade. Tal esforço enfrenta o desafio de planejar uma estrutura de governança que contenda com as várias questões envolvidas no gerenciamento de complexos sistemas sociotécnicos. Esse sistema é entendido como uma ecologia organizacional, sendo portanto utilizado o instrumental teórico fornecido pela abordagem socioecológica com o intuito de visualizar o complexo ambiente como um sistema aberto, mais dinâmico e apropriado para as características dos sistemas locais de inovação. O trabalho não se constitui em um estudo de caso, mas em uma tentativa de auxiliar a Universidade no esforço de planejamento de um SLI de Base Universitária. / [en] The diffusion of Local Innovation Systems - LIS can be understood as one of the expressions of a new form of cooperation manifested in the context of the organizational changes faced by modern societies. In this regard, the diffusion of this one particular organizational form - that brings together the advantages of clustering and networking - can be understood in light of the perceived benefits from heightened cooperation to innovative activities. The objective of this dissertation is to understand the properties and dynamics of a LIS and, in particular, of University-based LIS, to shed more light into the elements of its structure and governance that promote cooperation among the many players involved. The dynamics of technological innovation, as well as the environmental changes faced by productive firms are also studied. One particular contextual interest presented in this dissertation is the ongoing effort of PUC-Rio to establish an University-based LIS in order to increase its capacity to transfer results of its academic research to society. Such effort faces the challenge of planning a governance structure that contends with the many issues involved in managing such complex social-technical system, a rather new subject of academic research. To assist in meeting this challenge, the PUC-Rio LIS will be understood as an organizational ecology. Hence, the theoretical framework provided by the socioecological approach will be used in understanding the environment as an open system, which is more dynamic and appropriate for the characteristics of LIS. Therefore, rather than a case study on innovation systems, this dissertation is an attempt to contribute to the Universitys effort of planning its LIS.

Municipal bottom-up urban development is growing into an increasingly common urban practice. However, bottom-up urban development differs considerably from conventional top-down planning. The discrepancy forms obstacles for the relationship between top-down and bottom-up actors. Yet, creating an enabling relationship is possible, although how it can be realized is rather underexamined. Therefore, the aim of this research is to contribute knowledge to how municipalities can enable citizen-led urban initiatives. Empirical research in Stockholm and Istanbul, based on four examples of citizen-led urban initiatives and one municipal representative, provided valuable insights. On the one hand, within the existing municipal framework, certain possibilities and constraints for municipal bottom-up urban development arise. However, aiming to creating a structural change that transforms the relationship, new urban governance arrangements need to be established at the local level. From a governance innovation perspective, implementing a neighborhood council and a municipal guide form feasibly possibilities. Especially its combination is found key to redeem most of the constraints while it has the potential to establish socially innovative urban development.

This short paper considers all possible stakeholders in different stages of a sustainability transition and matches their behavioral features and diversity to policies. This will involve an assessment of potential or expected responses of stakeholders to a range of policy instruments. Following the Multi-Level Perspective framework to conceptualize sustainability transitions, we classify the various transition policies at niche, regime and landscape levels. Next, we offer a complementary classification of policies based on a distinction between social preferences and bounded rationality. The paper identifies many barriers to making a sustainability transition and how to respond to them. In addition, lessons are drawn from the case of Denmark. The detailed framework and associated literature for the analysis was discussed in Milestone 31 of the WWWforEurope project (Gazheli et al., 2012). / Series: WWWforEurope