nep-ppm New Economics Papers
on Project, Program and Portfolio Management
Issue of 2008‒05‒31
three papers chosen by
Arvi Kuura
Parnu College - Tartu University

  1. Interaction Structures in Local Innovation Systems By Uwe Cantner; Holger Graf
  2. Process, People, Power and Conflict: Some Lessons from a Participatory Policy Process in Andhra Pradesh, India By Ahuja Vinod; ;
  3. Congestion at the floating road? Negotiation in networked innovation By Soekijad, M.; Walschots, J.; Huysman, M.

  1. By: Uwe Cantner (Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Economics Department); Holger Graf (Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Economics Department)
    Abstract: The flow of knowledge through interaction between innovative actors is central to the systemic view of innovation. We review the lite ature on interaction and innovator networks with a focus on regional aspects. To illustrate the relevance of these relations, we apply social network analysis methods to describe the evolution of the innovator network of Jena, Germany in the period from 1995 to 2001. During this period, the network is characterised by growth in the number of patents, actors and relations, with central positions of public research. The evolution is directed towards an increasing focus on core compe- tencies of the network.
    Keywords: Innovator Networks, Innovation System, R+D Cooperation. Mobility
    JEL: O31 L14 R11
    Date: 2008–05–08
  2. By: Ahuja Vinod; ;
    Abstract: A large body of empirical literature highlights the need for stakeholder participation within the context of policy change and democratic governance. This makes intuitive sense and may appear to be a straightforward process of managing conflicting interests, building consensus, and lining up support. The reality, however, is often much more complicated and conflictive, even where there is general agreement on the policy objectives. The present paper examines these issues in the context of participatory policy development for the delivery of veterinary services by para-professionals in the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh. It illustrates the challenges inherent in the politics of participatory policy processes and the potential of ‘agenda hijack’ by influential partners, resulting in missed learning opportunities. It also offers insights on practical steps to counter these dangers, as potential lessons for practitioners and project managers engaged in participatory policy reform processes.
    Date: 2008–05–21
  3. By: Soekijad, M. (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Econometrie (Free University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics Sciences, Business Administration and Economitrics); Walschots, J.; Huysman, M.
    Abstract: In this paper we develop a framework for analyzing negotiation processes in networked innovation, and apply it in infrastructure construction. The paper departs from the question: Why do technological innovative concepts sometimes emerge and diffuse while at other times they ‘congest’? An explanation is found in negotiation processes at different levels in networks, as technological innovations increasingly emerge in heterogeneous networks. We contribute to theory by focusing on the process of negotiation in networks (instead of on network structure), and by showing and explaining how negotiations can both contribute to and adjourn networked innovation processes.
    Keywords: Embeddedness; Infrastructure technology; Innovation processes; Negotiation; Networked innovation
    Date: 2008

This nep-ppm issue is ©2008 by Arvi Kuura. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.