Cathrin Söllner (p)

Kirill Sablin

‘Culture’ is a term which is broadly used, having slightly different associations every time it is mentioned. Based on the six Hofstede indices of cultural values (namely power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity / femininity, individualism / collectivism, long-/ short-term orientation and restraint / indulgence) the present paper investigates to which degree cooperation propensity can be explained by cultural influences on a regional basis. Data for cooperation propensity will be derived from the PATSTAT (2015) database provided by the European Patent Office, focusing on patents with more than one applicant and covering the years 2007 to 2009. Cooperation propensity will be calculated for all EU-regions (NUTS-1 to NUTS-3 level depending on the availability of cultural data on a regional level). Then, data from the latest European Values Study (EVS) wave from 2008 will be taken to firstly calculate separate measures for the six above mentioned cultural dimensions, giving the possibility to investigate the impact of the single cultural dimension. Subsequently, combinations of the measures of the six dimensions are calculated (again for each region), revealing reinforcing combinations as far as cooperation propensity is concerned and those that compensate for each other.

Kirill Sablin (p), Elena Kagan, Elena Goosen (p), Sergey Nikitenko

Cathrin Söllner

Abstract. At the end of the XX century, the success or failure of economic development of a country is largely determined by the capacity for innovative development of the distinct regions, territories of the country. A significant differentiation in the level of socio-economic and innovative development of the regions has a negative impact on the internal and external competitiveness of the country. Many liberal economic concepts based on place neutral approach have been developed in order to explain these regional differences and to evaluate their impact on the economic growth and development of the national economy. Among them there were the theory of tacit knowledge, the cluster approach, the concept of innovation ecosystems and others. Most of them are focused on the search for innovative development tools for the most «advanced» regions and believe that other regions will inevitably follow the leaders. However, practice shown that this model that such a development model cannot always be realized. Especially problematic its implementation in «resource-type countries», to which Russia belongs. In these conditions it is particularly the important role plays the place-based approach – a new paradigm of the regional development specializing on searching, creating and implementation the internal and external tools of development of the several countries and territories. In the literature, there are at least five major fields of discussions on the place-based approach.We believe that the Smart specialization is the most adequate concept for the analysis the problems of the Russian «resource-type» regions.
The purpose of this report is to study the possibility of implementation the basic elements of the concept of Smart Specialization in Russian «resource-type» regions
Report supported by the Russian Science Foundation (contract №16-18-10182 – «Formation of the organizational-economic mechanisms of integrated development of mineral resources based on the partnership between science, business and authorities in the resource type regions»).
Research methodology: the concept of place-based approaches (Barca F., McCann, P. and Rodriguez P., Gray N.), the concept of «Smart specialisation» (D. Foray, David P., B. Hall), a model of the enclave dual economy (M. Ross, J. Stiglitz, S. Levin et al) descriptive statistics, cluster analysis.