Alwin Gerritsen and Nicola Francesco Dotti
While innovation has become a major issue in territorial innovation policy, the scientific debate in this field has focused very little on issues such as knowledge for policymaking, learning and adaptation. This chapter explores the emerging notion of ‘knowledge governance’ and the challenges imposed by assuming a territorial perspective, due to the intrinsic limits of local learning communities and the need to anchor trans-territorial knowledge. The derived territorial knowledge governance framework will be explored by discussing the eight case studies presented in the second part of this volume, leading to reflections on the need for identifying realistic and situated knowledge governance arrangements.
Nicola Francesco Dotti and Annalisa Colombino
This chapter discusses a cognitive-evolutionary model, inspired by the work of Schumpeter and Hall, which pivots on the role of knowledge for policymaking. The model highlights the importance of adopting a territorial perspective to achieve ‘policy resilience’ in cities and regions by discussing the model’s main assumptions and dimensions. It presents four different scenarios in which policy learning has different potentials for achieving policy change/innovation. The core argument is that policymakers can develop knowledge to achieve policy resilience in cities and regions only by being aware of the dynamics of policy learning (i.e. they need to learn how to learn).
Nicola Francesco Dotti and Alessandro Colombo
The final chapter summarises the main results discussed in the previous chapters and draws conclusions about the notion of research–policy dialogue. After reviewing each chapter, we argue that, first, research and policymaking should recognise their different rationales. Once they recognise these differences and mutual ‘right’ to speak, the research–policy dialogue is likely to lead to better policy outcomes through policy learning. Finally, we should recognise that this ‘dialogue’ is located ‘somewhere’, and policy learning is context-specific. For the future, we suggest questioning the notion of ‘research–policy dialogue’ for theoretical development and empirical validations as well as alternative models.