The Discursive Construction of Innovation Policy in Peripheralising Estonia

Sebastian Schulz

doi:10.1515/esrp-2017-0010

Authors

Sebastian Schulz Public Economics and Policy, School of Economics and Business Administration, University of Tartu, Juhan Liivi 4–214, 50409 Tartu, Estonia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1515/esrp-2017-0010

Keywords:

discourse, innovation policy, Estonia, peripheralisation

Abstract

An innovation-driven agenda in regional development policy has emerged in the European Union against the backdrop of peripheralisation, especially in Central and Eastern Europe. Using a discursive analytical framework, the article investigates the ways in which peripheralisation is manifested through language, practices and power-rationalities in Estonian innovation policy discourse. The analysis is footed on key strategic policy documents and semistructured expert interviews. Findings suggest that Estonian innovation policy’s main narrative of the ‘knowledge-based economy’ accepts growing disparities on sub-national level in order to overcome peripherality at European scale and narrows the range of policy solutions perceived as suitable.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

APPLICA, ISMERI and WIIW (2006), ‘Ex Post Evaluation of Cohesion Policy Programmes 2000–2006’ financed by the European Regional Development Fund in Objective 1 and 2 Regions, Working package 1: Coordination, analysis and synthesis, Task 4: Development and achievements in Member States: Estonia, Applica, Ismeri Europa and wiiw Consortium.
Google Scholar

BACHTLER, J., YUILL, D. and DAVIES, S. (2005), ‘Regional policy and innovation’, EoRPA Paper, 5.
Google Scholar

BACHTLER, J. and McMASTER, I. (2007), ‘EU cohesion policy and the role of the regions: investigating the influence of structural funds in the new member states’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 26 (2), pp. 398–427.
Google Scholar

BARCA, F. (2009), ‘An Agenda for a Reformed Cohesion Policy: A Place-Based Approach to Meeting European Union Challenges and Expectations’, [in:] HÜBNER D., Independent Report, Prepared at the Request of the European Commissioner for Regional Policy, Brussels, European Commission.
Google Scholar

BEETZ, S. (2008), ‘Peripherisierung als räumliche Organisation sozialer Ungleichheit’, [in:] BARLÖSIUS, E. and NEU, C. (eds.), Peripherisierung – eine neue Form sozialer Ungleichheit? Materialien Nr 21, Berlin: Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Google Scholar

BOHLE, D. and GRESKOVITS, B. (2007), ‘Neoliberalism, embedded neoliberalism and neocorporatism: Towards transnational capitalism in Central-Eastern Europe’, West European Politics, 30 (3), pp. 443–466.
Google Scholar

BRENNER, N. (2009), ‘Open questions on state rescaling’, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 2, pp. 123–139.
Google Scholar

BRISTOW, G. (2010), Critical reflections on regional competitiveness. Theory, policy, practice, New York: Routledge.
Google Scholar

CARTER, H. (2015), ‘Peripheralization through planning: The case of a golf resort proposal in Northern Ireland’, [in:] LANG, T., HENN, S., EHRLICH, K. and SGIBNEV, W. (eds.), Understanding New Geographies of Central and Eastern Europe. Socio-Spatial Polarization and Peripheralization in a Rapidly Changing Region, London: Palgrave, pp. 98–111.
Google Scholar

DE BRUIJN, P. and LAGENDIJK, A. (2005), ‘Regional innovation systems in the Lisbon strategy’, European Planning Studies, 13 (8), pp. 1153–1172.
Google Scholar

EHRLICH, K., KRISZAN, A. and LANG, T. (2012), ‘Urban Development in Central and Eastern Europe – Between Peripheralization and Centralization?’, disP – The Planning Review, 48 (2), pp. 77–92.
Google Scholar

EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2007), Cohesion Policy – 2007–2013 – Commentaries and official texts. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Google Scholar

EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2015), European Structural and Investments Funds 2014–2020: Official texts and commentaries, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Google Scholar

EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2016), WP1 Synthesis report ‒ Ex post evaluation of Cohesion Policy programmes 2007‒2013, focusing on the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the Cohesion Fund (CF), Task 3 Country Report Estonia, September 2016.
Google Scholar

FISCHER, F. (2003), Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

FISCHER-TAHIR, A. and NAUMANN, M. (eds.) (2013), Peripheralization – The Making of Spatial Dependencies and Social Injustice, Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Google Scholar

HADJIMICHALIS, C. (2011), ‘Uneven geographical development and socio-spatial justice and solidarity: Europeans regions after the 2009 financial crisis’, European Urban and Regional Studies, 18 (3), pp. 254–274.
Google Scholar

HAJER, M. a. (1995), The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Google Scholar

HANSEN, T. and WINTHER, L. (2011), ‘Innovation, regional development and relations between high- and low-tech industries’, European Urban and Regional Studies, 18 (3), pp. 321–339.
Google Scholar

INZELT, A. (2006), ‘Country Profile: Estonia’, [in:] Private Sector Interaction in the Decision Making Processes of Public Research Policies. Study for the European Commission Research Directorate General Directorate M – Investment in Research and links with other policies Open coordination of research policies, Bad Camberg: Proneos.
Google Scholar

KATTEL, R. and PRIMI, A. (2010), ‘The periphery paradox in innovation policy: Latin America and Eastern Europe compared. Some reflections on why it is not enough to say that innovation matters for development’, Working Papers in Technology Governance and Economic Dynamics, 29.
Google Scholar

KÜHN, M. (2014), ‘Peripheralization: Theoretical concepts explaining socio-spatial inequalities’, European Planning Studies, 23 (2), pp. 367–378.
Google Scholar

LANG, T., HENN, S., EHRLICH, K. and SGIBNEV, W. (eds.) (2015), Understanding new Geographies of Central and Eastern Europe. Socio-Spatial Polarization and Peripheralization in a Rapidly Changing Region, London: Palgrave.
Google Scholar

LEFEBVRE, H. (1991), The production of space, Oxford‒Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Google Scholar

MINISTRY OF FINANCE OF THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA (2014), Partnership Agreement for the Use of European Structural and Investment Funds 2014–2020, Tallinn.
Google Scholar

NIINIKOSKI, M.L. and KUHLMANN, S. (2015), ‘In discursive negotiation: Knowledge and the formation of Finnish innovation policy’, Science and Public Policy, 42, pp. 86–106.
Google Scholar

OECD (2016), OECD Regional Outlook 2016 – Productive Regions for Inclusive Societies. Country profile Estonia.
Google Scholar

REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA (2007), Estonian National Strategic Reference Framework 2007–2013, Tallinn.
Google Scholar

RICHARDSON, T. and JENSEN, O.B. (2003), ‘Linking discourse and space: towards a cultural sociology of space in analysing spatial policy discourses’, Urban Studies, 40 (1), pp. 7–22.
Google Scholar

RUTTAS-KÜTTIM, R. and STAMENOV, B. (2016), RIO Country Report 2015: Estonia, Science for Policy Report by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission.
Google Scholar

SECRETARIAT OF THE ESTONIAN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL (2002), Estonian Research and Development Strategy ‘Knowledge-based Estonia 2002–2006’, Riigi Teataja, Part 1, No.97, December 18, 2001, Tallinn.
Google Scholar

SUURNA, M. and KATTEL, R. (2010), ‘Europeanization of innovation policy in Central and Eastern Europe’, Science and Public Policy, 37 (9), pp. 646–664.
Google Scholar

SWYNGEDOUW, E., MOULAERT, F. and RODRIGUEZ, A. (2002), ‘Neoliberal Urbanization in Europe: Large Scale Urban Development Projects and the New Urban Policy’, Antipode, 34 (3), pp. 542–577.
Google Scholar

VANOLO, A. (2010), ‘European Spatial Planning between Competitiveness and Territorial Cohesion: Shadows of Neo-liberalism’, European Planning Studies, 18 (8), pp. 1301–1315.
Google Scholar

VARRÓ, K. and FARAGÓ, L. (2016), ‘The Politics of Spatial Policy and Governance in Post-1990 Hungary: The Interplay between European and National Discourses of Space’, European Planning Studies, 24 (1), pp. 39–60.
Google Scholar

WEICHHART, P. (2008), ‘Neoliberalism meets Political Economy – Politikversagen, Entdemokratisierung und die vergebliche Hoffnung auf Governance in der Zweiten Moderne’, [in:] BRUCKMEIER, K. and SERBSER, J. (eds.), Ethik und Umweltpolitik – Humanökologische Positionen und Perspektiven,. München: Pekom, pp. 213–236.
Google Scholar

ŽENKA, J., NOVOTNÝ, J. and CSANK, P (2014), ‘Regional Competitiveness in Central European Countries. Search of a Useful Conceptual Framework’, European Planning Studies, 22 (1), pp. 163–184.
Google Scholar