A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF BALTIC REGIONAL HIGHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS IN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

1. A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF BALTIC REGIONAL HIGHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS IN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT Garri Raagmaa garri@ut.ee +372 578 899

2. The aim • to describe the role of non-metropolitan HEIs in the framework of the Regional Innovation System, • in parallel with other regional knowledge transfer institutions: R&D units, business advisory services (BAS), • and their interaction with local/regional authorities and business organizations • in three Baltic States

3. Outline • Theoretical background • Baltic States in comparison with the Nordic Countries • Baltic administrative & ecucational systems • Methodology discussion

4. Theoretical foundations • evolutionary economic geography • path dependency (Nelson & Winter 1982) • National innovation systems (Lundvall 1992) • social networks (Camagni 1995) • lock-ins (Liebowitz et al. 1995) • learning region (Morgan 1997) • A triple helix (Etzkowitz 1997) • RIS (Cooke et al 1998)

5. Cont… • knowledge spillovers (Jaffe 1989) • co-evolution (Murmann 2003) • local buzz & global pipeline (Bathelt, Malmberg and Maskell 2004) • organizational proximity (Boschma 2005) • related variety (Frenken et al 2007) • cluster life cycles (Bergman 2007) • institutional environment (Hassink 2010) • geographical proximity (Graf 2010)

6. What are regional HEIs, what tasks they perform? • Locatedoutsidetraditionaluniversitycentres • Main tasks: • knowledge transfer • through education and human resources development • knowledge creation • through research and technology transfer • cultural and community development OECD 2007

7. The dilemma of regional HEIs in policy making • two controversial opinions about HEIs outside old university centres: • wasting resources (Deschryvere, 2009) • regional economy needs HEI for economic restructuring (Nordregio 2009, 2011, OECD 2007) • direct effects that universities may have had on regional development are difficult to measure or prove(ITPS 2004)

8. Macro level studies have confclicting results • resources that are allocated to universities do not have influence on the specialization of companies or the international orientation of a region.The relationship between expenses for education and research and knowledge-intensive businesses is non-existent in regions with less than one million inhabitants (ITPS 2004) • universities may be important drivers pushing forward regional development, since a regional centre with a university is better off in respect of occupational and demographic development than a regional centre that lacks such a facility (Hanell & Neubauer 2006)

9. R&D = Innovation • Investment to the R&D does not guarantee innovation and economic development of the regions • Tartu case: bioscience versus software • Geography matters: knowledge and new values take roots in close interaction of PEOPLE not that much between institutions • Where is the reasonable dividing line (balance) on the geographical scale???

10. The Baltic States versus Nordic Countries REGIONAL INNOVATION SYSTEMS& HEI POLICIES

13. Finnish centres of knowledge transfer(osaamiskeskus)2008-13 - Takes part in 1 cluster - Takes part in 9 clusters

14. Differences in Innovation Baltic and Nordic Countries Source: European Innovation Scoreboard 2011

15. Convergenceininnovationperformance Source: European Innovation Scoreboard 2011

16. Source: Nordregio 2009

17. Regional Innovation Performance Source: Nordregio 2009

18. The Baltic States also differ • 1990s transition period, over hundred of new regional HEIs: independent schools, university colleges, branches and the like were set up in the Baltic States outside traditional university campuses. • However, quite different approaches were applied in the Baltic States

19. Baltic HEI units by 2010

20. Three different approaches • Estonia and Latvia liberalized their educational market, Lithuania did not • Explosion of HE – “mass production” • Estonian HEIs outside Tallinn and Tartu were set up mainly by the largest public universitiessince 1996 • Forperforminguniversityfunctionslocally • In Latvia, private HEIs took a lead and created a disperse HEI system of filials • Formakingmoney

21. (Wild) hypothesises • The innovative performance of a region is place placed (proximity dependent) fenomen and it’s success depends mainly on local networking within critical distance • Nordic Countries and Estonia, that follows their policies, have very high innovative performance because of geographically spread network of HEIs and R&D units closely co-operating with business sector • Regional HEIs guarantee integration of university and business sectors on the spot

22. Methodology design Going to the micro level! Putting regional HEI in the centre Do regional HEIs contribute to the overall innovation?

23. Knowlegde flows around regional HEIs Foreign partners (universities, agencies, etc.) National university/ies State agencies (G L O B A L) P I P E L I N E S RIS Regional HEI Regional development agency Public authorities L O C A L B U Z Z (living lab) Secondary schools Enterprises Vocational schools NGOs

24. Research questions – Phase Iknowledge flows • Which and in what capacity knowledge is transferred via HEIs to the region? • Main university • Other national universities and partners • Partners abroad • What kind and what amount of knowledge is produced locally? • Balance between imported and locally created knowledge

25. Research questions – Phase I RIS • What kind of RIS? (Cooke 2002) • (a) territorially embedded • (b) regionally networked, or • (c) regionalised National In. System • Are the regional development/innova-tion policies considering regional HEIs? • Is the knowledge available in the regio-nal HEIs coherent with the dominant production line(s) of the region?

26. Research questions – Phase II human resources • Are HEIs attracting talents to the region from outside? • Teachers/researchers • Students • In what capacity are graduates employed in the region? • Are HEIs offering “taylor made” locally adjusted curriculas and courses to local enterprises / society?

27. Research questions – Phase II local buzz • What institutional agreements and personal contacts have HEIs with local stakeholders? • In what capacity HEIs participate in local strategy making and projects? • Are teachers/researchers locally embedded or “travellers”? • Linkages to local enterprises • Participating in local policy making

28. Methods • Statistical analyse of regions’ development and economic structure • Analyse of HEIs factual activity (survey) • In-depth case studies of different type of regional RIS/HEIs • Face-to-face interviews with leaders of HEIs and RIS institutions • Focus group interviews with students of regional HEIs • Face-to-face or telephone interviews of broader local stakeholders

29. Urmase hüpotees • Innovatsiooniallikad sõltuvalt asukohast ja HEI olemaolust – CIS põhjal • Kaunases link Tõnisega/Sulev