Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 32718
Advancing the Hi-Tech Ecosystem in the Periphery: The Case of the Sea of Galilee Region

Authors: Yael Dubinsky, Orit Hazzan

Abstract:

There is a constant need for hi-tech innovation to be decentralized to peripheral regions. This work describes how we applied Design Science Research (DSR) principles to define what we refer to as the Sea of Galilee (SoG) method. The goal of the SoG method is to harness existing and new technological initiatives in peripheral regions to create a socio-technological network that can initiate and maintain hi-tech activities. The SoG method consists of a set of principles, a stakeholder network, and actual hi-tech business initiatives, including their infrastructure and practices. The three cycles of DSR, the Relevance, Design, and Rigor cycles, lay out a research framework to sharpen the requirements, collect data from case studies, and iteratively refine the SoG method based on the existing knowledge base. We propose that the SoG method can be deployed by regional authorities that wish to be considered as smart regions (an extension of the notion of smart cities).

Keywords: Design Science Research, socio-technological initiatives, Sea of Galilee method, periphery stakeholder network, hi-tech initiatives.

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 222

References:


[1] Gabay U., Linzen N., Aharon A. 2018. An Innovation Driven Economy in the Periphery, A National Priority. In State of Innovation in Israel 2018, Israel Innovation Authority. 86-95.
[2] Katz, B. and Wagner, J. 2014. The Rise of Innovation Districts: A New Geography of Innovation in America
[3] Florida, R. Oct 3, 2017. Venture Capital Remains Highly Concentrated in Just Few Cities. Citylab.
[4] CBS Data, Labor Force Survey, High-tech sectors excluding communications sector.
[5] Kon F., Cukier D., Melo C., Hazzan O., and Yuklea H., A Panorama of the Israeli Software Startup Ecosystem, March 1, 2014.
[6] Hevner AR (2007) A three cycle view of design science research. Scand J Inf Syst 19(2):87–92.
[7] Hazzan, O. and Levontin, L. (October 2018). A Multifaceted Analysis of the Study-Work Conflict in Science and Engineering Higher Education: The Case of the Technion, Tomorrow’s Professor Postings, Number 1674.
[8] Monday.com.
[9] Hazzan, O. and Dubinsky, Y. (2014). Agile Anywhere. Essays on Agile Projects and Beyond. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
[10] Shwed, U., & Shavit, Y. (2006). Occupational and economic attainments of college and university graduates in Israel. European Sociological Review, 22(4), 431-442.
[11] Ayalon, H., & Yogev, A. (2005). Field of study and students’ stratification in an expanded system of higher education: The case of Israel. European sociological review, 21(3), 227-241.
[12] Talby, D., Hazzan, O., Dubinsky, Y., & Keren, A. (2006, July). Reflections on reflection in agile software development. In AGILE 2006 (AGILE'06) (pp. 11-pp). IEEE.
[13] Bélissent, J. (2010). Getting clever about smart cities: New opportunities require new business models. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, 193, 244-277.
[14] Schaffers, H., Komninos, N., Pallot, M., Trousse, B., Nilsson, M., & Oliveira, A. (2011, May). Smart cities and the future internet: Towards cooperation frameworks for open innovation. In The future internet assembly (pp. 431-446). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
[15] Nam T, Pardo TA (2011) Conceptualizing smart city with dimensions of technology, people, and institutions. In: Bertot J, Nahon K, Chun SA, Luna-Reyes L, Atluri V (eds) the 12th Annual International Digital Government Research Conference, pp 282–291
[16] Markkula, M., & Kune, H. (2015). Making smart regions smarter: smart specialization and the role of universities in regional innovation ecosystems. Technology Innovation Management Review, 5(10).
[17] Pidorycheva, I., Shevtsova, H., Antonyuk, V., Shvets, N., & Pchelynska, H. (2020). A conceptual framework for developing of regional innovation ecosystems. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 9(3), 626-626.
[18] Viitanen, J. (2016). Profiling regional innovation ecosystems as functional collaborative systems: The case of Cambridge. Technology Innovation Management Review, 6(12).
[19] Reichert, S. (2019). The role of universities in regional innovation ecosystems. EUA study, European University Association, Brussels, Belgium.
[20] Roberts, E., Anderson, B. A., Skerratt, S., & Farrington, J. (2017). A review of the rural-digital policy agenda from a community resilience perspective. Journal of Rural Studies, 54, 372-385.
[21] Hosseini, S., Frank, L., Fridgen, G., & Heger, S. (2018). Do not forget about smart towns: how to bring customized digital innovation to rural areas. Business and Information Systems Engineering, 60(3), 243-257.
[22] Neirotti P, de Marco A, Cagliano AC, Mangano G, Scorrano F (2014) Current trends in smart city initiatives: some stylised facts. Cities 38:25–36.
[23] Barca F, McCann P, Rodríguez-Pose A (2012) The case for regional development intervention: place-based versus place-neutral approaches. J Reg Sci 52(1):134–152.
[24] Tödtling F, Trippl M (2005) One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Res Policy 34(8):1203–1219.
[25] Zygiaris S (2013) Smart city reference model: assisting planners to conceptualize the building of smart city innovation ecosystems. J Knowl Econ 4(2):217–231.
[26] Crawley, A., & Hallowell, A. (2021). Smart Specialisation: insights from the North American periphery. Regional Studies, 55(3), 427-440.
[27] De Falco, S., Angelidou, M., & Addie, J. P. D. (2019). From the “smart city” to the “smart metropolis”? Building resilience in the urban periphery. European Urban and Regional Studies, 26(2), 205-223.
[28] Ghinoi, S., Steiner, B., Makkonen, T., Hassink, R. (2021) Smart Specialisation strategies on the periphery: a data-triangulation approach to governance issues and practices. Regional Studies, 55(3), 402-413.
[29] Pierce P, Andersson B (2017) Challenges with smart cities initiatives—a municipal decision makers’ perspective. In: Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
[30] Stahlbröst A, Bergvall-Kareborn B, Ihlström-Eriksson C (2015). Stakeholders in smart city living lab processes. In: Proceedings of the 21st Americas Conference on Information Systems.
[31] Kinneret Academic College on the Sea of Galilee, https://www.kinneret.ac.il/en/.