Contenu du sommaire : Lectures bibliographiques

In the nineties, the watchmaking region of the Swiss Jura Arc became, with other emblematic regions such as the Silicon Valley and the Third Italy, an illustrative model of regional innovation and industrial resilience in a globalized post-Fordist economy. Is this region still exemplary to understand and to conceptualize contemporary issues of territorial development? What can be learnt from the Swiss watchmaking case to reconsider and renew current theories in regional studies and economic geography? This paper first highlights the conceptual dilemma posed by the evolution of the Swiss watchmaking industry in the last fifteen years with regard to the established territorial innovation models. It is argued that these models can explain how territorial dynamics are at the origin of economic change but not how the value of this change is territorially constructed. Based on different socio-economic theories of markets and on empirical illustrations of the Swiss watchmaking case, a relational, institutional and transactional approach to value is proposed. Building upon these socio-economic theories, the concept of “valuation” is introduced to interpret contemporary territorial dynamics of innovation. These dynamics are not only the capacity of a local innovation system to produce differently from competitors. They also imply the capacity of this system to embed in multi-local networks of co-production and consumption. Shifting from an “innovation” to a “valuation” paradigm, the paper finally concludes with some crucial issues for the Swiss Watchmaking industry today. It also opens promising research avenues to renew regional studies and economic geography in regard to the rise of a digitalized economy and to a transition towards new sustainability quality conventions in markets and society.

As underlined by FAO's (2019) The future of food and agriculture, the role of knowledge in agrifood and rural systems will be strategic. This paper deals with sound and pertinent knowledge to be spread in rural territorial systems. The aim of the paper is the analysis of “coherence” in rural areas' knowledge dynamics. More precisely, our paper analyses the coherence of Territorial Dynamics of Rural Knowledge by focusing on the role of agricultural extension services in knowledge transfers. Our hypothesis is that rural knowledge should be tailored to the characteristics of rural territories. In order to evaluate this coherence, we apply the “milieu innovateur” approach to excavate how mechanisms of coordination and interaction boost innovation adoption. Therefore, the two logics that represent the pillars of the milieu approach, logics of interaction and logics of learning, are empirically evaluated. Consequently, a multivariate analysis is carried out, to aggregate homogeneous groups of farms, with reference to interaction and learning logics. Our results evidence clear distortions within processes of knowledge transfer and show clear incoherence between demand and supply of knowledge in various rural contexts. More precisely, highly specialized agricultural areas seem to catch the most of knowledge provision, while in remote rural contexts, access to knowledge seems more difficult. This may raise risks of elite capture and social exclusion of farms with high potential for alternative and multifunctional paths of farm's development. Our results provide basis for planning a more targeted action for the next programming period 2021-2027, with a special attention to knowledge diffusion through empowering farms' interaction sphere and, through this way, boosting innovation adoption.

Cross-border areas have their own territorial capital. However, it cannot be mere summation of the individual components of the border areas concerned; it is often qualified, positively or negatively, by its own specific features, arising from the complex interplay of interactions, synergies, blockages and complementarities of the cross-border dimension.The multi-faceted dimensions of transborder areas' specificity represent a challenge for the regional science, which is emerging under a new light, between institutional constraints, integration processes and globalization. The goal of the article – within a theoretical framework which is still to be developed – is to detect the different issues concerning transborder areas' development and to address a typology as a basis for their governance.This approach is proposed on the backdrop of the territorial capital of different transborder areas focusing on evolving types of spatial barriers. A new theoretical frame is developed crossing the three articulations of territorial capital (productivity, clusterisation and attractiveness) with the three evolving views of frontiers (barrier borders, contact zone, open space and gateway). The resulting typological matrix (Table 1) reports this frame and exemplifies the different emerging border effects while acting as a trigger for the studies of new strategies for transborder policies.Economic and institutional changes do not necessarily go hand in hand; this even requires paradigm shifts, even to the notion of "borderity", in order to govern the new border effects due to networking and transnational production assemblages. Concerning the forms of governance of border spaces, our typological analysis shows - in a non-prescriptive way - that in the pursuit of long-term dynamics, these should rather be defined by their inductive, functional and variable-geometry character. This approach includes a strong presence of the market and civil society, with a dimension of "looseness" that can only guarantee rapid adaptations to the pressing dynamics of the world economy.

Brazilian metropolises, where poor people are mainly concentrated, are characterised by a high degree of socio-spatial fragmentation. In a very unequal society, it means that metropolises combine a high degree of social distance with spatial proximity; including in their urban cores, where precarious settlements, favelas, co-exist with neighborhoods fully integrated into globalization. Recife, the fifth biggest Brazilian metropolis, is one of the most relevant examples of this situation. Its degree of poverty is one of the highest in Brazil.The Municipality played a pioneering role in the quest for solutions to reduce urban precariousness in central areas, despite pressure from private real-estate investors to recover high value land for high standing buildings. A “Regularization Program of the Special Areas of Social Interest”, usually called Prezeis, was implemented, like in other cities. It is an original response to the dilemma between eradication and rehabilitation of precarious areas. Its main issue at stake is to respect the right to the city for all, like the written Brazilian Constitution has explicitly planned, and to allow poor people to remain inside their community and their informal housing.However, in Recife as well as in other cases, urban policies confront with permanent contradictions regarding a strategy of reinforcing the international attractivity of cities and the wish to reduce urban segregation; what should be regarded as a factor of insufficient results of the program.Focusing on this contradiction, we analyze the Prezeis as a paradoxical innovation from a political and a social point of view. Indeed, its implementation has for consequence to fix the socio-spatial fragmentation, at least temporarily. It aims to allow inhabitants to have access to living conditions in accordance with the usual housing and use of urban space standards, in their own living spaces, favelas.

Territories are facing an uncertain and complex context, characterized by globalization and economic, social and environmental challenges. In this context, clusters have become progressively a spreading territorial policy trend all around the world. Besides, recently the importance of clusters has been mixed with the concept of smart specialisation, a territorial development model focused on the efficiency and effectiveness of economic systems. Nevertheless, the revision of current policy designs on the field seems to point out that the combination of both approaches is more theoretical than real, resulting in isolated practices far away from an integrated territorial policy approach and the synergies it may generate. Therefore, the aim of this article is twofold: first, to review the common elements from both cluster and smart specialisation policy debates nowadays and, second, to propose potential implications of new RIS3 strategies regarding clusters, and vice versa, as a very preliminary proposal for an integrated territorial policy. The paper includes a first state of the art on clusters and cluster initiatives policies considering mainstream theories that have influenced and determined current cluster policy developments. At this point, some basic elements about the smart specialisation model as well as related regional strategies (RIS3) are analysed, with a focus on the core elements that are shared with current cluster and cluster policy approaches. Finally, the paper includes a general framework aiming to facilitate the combination of cluster initiatives with smart specialisation territorial strategies, as well as some conclusions on the challenges that policymakers will encounter when dealing with the cluster and smart specialisation mix.