Coastal regions are generally conceived as highly advanced in terms of socioeconomic and innovative development. Acting as international contact zones, coastal agglomerations are described as gateways for absorbing new knowledge, technologies, business cultures, etc. Yet, this perception is based on studies of large coastal cities and agglomerations. In our study, we focus on coastalization effects manifested in rural settlements and evaluate the innovation capability of the economies of coastal rural areas. The research scope covers 13 municipalities of the Leningrad region, including 134 rural settlements. The research methodology is structured into three main blocks: the evaluation of the human capital, assessment of the favorability of the entrepreneurial environment, and analysis of susceptibility of local economies to innovations. The list of analyzed innovation dynamics parameters includes the geospatial data for the distribution of population, companies and individual entrepreneurs, localization of specialized support and innovation infrastructure, sectoral analysis of the economic structure, digitalization aspects, et cetera. The data coverage period is 2010–2019 with variations depending on the availability of individual indicators. The research findings reveal particular features of the countryside as compared to urban settlements. Strong asymmetries are observed between the development of rural settlements cross-influenced by coastalization, near-metropolitan location, and national border proximity.
regional innovationdynamics ( Carayannis et al. 2018 ). Symbolic knowledge base, modes of innovation and physical proximity Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) and Doing, Using and Interacting (DUI) are the two concepts usually adopted by scholars to identify and examine different modes of innovation ( Jensen et al. 2007 ). Based on this distinction, STI mode refers to the generation and application of – primarily codified – scientific knowledge, especially in industries such as chemicals, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology and nanomaterials. This mode of innovation is
Technological Change, Blackwell, Oxford. Cohen, W. M., Klepper, S. (1996), A Reprise of Size and R & D, The Economic Journal, 166 (437), July, pp. 925-951. Corsino, M., Espa, G., Micciolo, R. (2008), R&D, Firm Size, and Product InnovationDynamics, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 20 (5), pp. 423-443. Ettlie, J. E., Rubenstein, A. H. (1987), Firm Size and Product Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 4 (2), pp. 89-108. Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R. (eds.) (2006),The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford Handbooks Online. Ferreira, D
, 48 (1), 65–84. Kilkenny, M., Nalbarte, L., & Besser, T. (1999). Reciprocated community support and small town-small business success. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development , 11 , 231–246. Kim, L. (1997). From Imitation to Innovation: Dynamics of Korea’s Technological Learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press. Kim, K. J., & Bonk, C. J. (2002). Cross-cultural Comparisons of Online Collaboration. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication , 8 (1). Kroeber, A. L., & Parsons, T. (1958). The Concepts of Culture and of Social System. American Sociological
, R. (2005): Rethinking change in old industrial regions: reflecting on the experiences of North East England. Environment and Planning A, 37(4): 581–596. ISAKSEN, A. (2009): Innovationdynamics of global competitive regional clusters: The case of the Norwegian centres of expertise. Regional Studies, 43(9): 1155–1166. ISAKSEN, A. (2015): Industrial development in thin regions: trapped in path extension? Journal of Economic Geography, 15(3): 585–600. ISAKSEN, A., JAKOBSEN, S. (2017): New path development between innovation systems and individual actors. European
Innovation. In: Administrative Science Quarterly 35, 1, 128–152. Cohen W. M. Levinthal D. M. 1990 Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation Administrative Science Quarterly 35 1 128 152 Cooke, P.; Laurentis, C; MacNeill, S.; Collinge, C. (Hrsg.) (2010): Platforms of Innovation: Dynamics of new Industrial Knowledge Flows. Cheltenham, Northampton. Cooke P Laurentis C MacNeill S. Collinge C. 2010 Platforms of Innovation: Dynamics of new Industrial Knowledge Flows Cheltenham, Northampton Crevoisier, O.; Jeannerat, H. (2009): Territorial Knowledge
University Press Santos-Arteaga, F. J.; D. Di Caprio; M. Tavana; A. O’Connor (2017): InnovationDynamics and Labor Force Restructuring with Asymmetrically Developed National Innovation Systems. International Business Review 26, 36-56. Santos-Arteaga F. J. Di Caprio D. Tavana M. O’Connor A. 2017 InnovationDynamics and Labor Force Restructuring with Asymmetrically Developed National Innovation Systems International Business Review 26 36 56 Schiff, Maurice (2006): Brain Gain: Claims About Its Size and Impact on Welfare and Growth Are Greatly Exaggerated, in: Ozden, C; M