SpringerLink
Log in

Is smart specialisation monopolising the research on the EU cohesion policy? Evidence from a bibliometric analysis

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of the paper is to perform a bibliometric analysis of the scientific literature of the European cohesion policy based on articles published in more than three decades, from 1986 to 2019. The period considered covers the main events that have characterised European policy for regions and cities, starting from the signature of the Single European Act in 1986 to the implementation of Smart Specialisation Strategy (S3) since 2014, which has been guiding investment policies in scientific research and innovation funded by cohesion policy. One of the key results concerns the exponential interest of researchers on the topic of Smart Specialisation which has the potential to monopolise the debate in the coming years, especially if it will be associated with the emerging topic of sustainability under the EU regional policies. The map** and evaluation of the literature relating to cohesion policy can represent an important point of reference to inspire future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Research and Innovation for Smart Specialisation Strategy.

  2. For an overview on NUTS classification is useful to consult: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/nuts/background

  3. Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021, Official Journal of the European Union L 231, 30.6.2021, p. 159–706 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1060/oj

  4. In the case of excluded papers, this information on funding was present, for some reason, in the abstract.

  5. SCIMAGO Journal & Country Rank reports alternative measurements to the IF. See https://www.scimagojr.com/.

  6. This index is calculated as Inclusion index = #(A ∩ B)(#A;#B) and assumes value 1 when all keywords of theme B are contained in theme A.

  7. https://www.aeaweb.org/jel/guide/jel.php.

References

  • Aiello, V., Reverberi, P. M., & Brasili, C. (2019). Regional diversity in experiences of cohesion policy: The cases of Emilia-Romagna and Calabria. Papers in Regional Science, 98(6), 2275–2293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science map** analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aria, M., Misuraca, M., & Spano, M. (2020). Map** the evolution of social research and data science on 30 years of social indicators research. Social Indicators Research, 149(3), 803–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, H. (1985). The reform of the European-Community regional policy. Journal of Common Market Studies., 23(4), 319–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bachtler, J., & McMaster, I. (2008). 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), 398–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, D., Pitelis, C., & Tomlinson, P. R. (2020). Strategic management and regional industrial strategy: Cross-fertilization to mutual advantage. Regional Studies, 54(5), 647–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, P. (2019). The reform of European cohesion policy or how to couple the streams successfully. Journal of European Integration, 41(2), 147–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benner, M. (2022). An institutionalist perspective on smart specialization: Towards a political economy of regional innovation policy. Science and Public Policy, scac035.

  • Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., & Laville, F. (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry. Scientometrics, 22(1), 155–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castellacci, F., Consoli, D., & Santoalha, A. (2020). The role of e-skills in technological diversification in European regions. Regional Studies, 54(8), 1123–1135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, X., Lun, Y., Yan, J., Hao, T., & Weng, H. (2019). Discovering thematic change and evolution of utilizing social media for healthcare research. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-019-0757-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 146–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coulter, N., Monarch, I., & Konda, S. (1998). Software engineering as seen through its research literature: A study in co-word analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(13), 1206–1223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croxford, G., & e Wise, M. (1988). The European Social Fund—Retrospect and prospect. Regional Studies, 22(1), 65–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Croxford, G. J., Wise, M., & Chalkley, B. (1987). The reform of the European regional development fund—A preliminar assessment. Journal of Common Market Studies, 26(1), 25–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuccurullo, C., Aria, M., & Sarto, F. (2016). Foundations and trends in performance management a twenty-five years bibliometric analysis in business and public administration domains. Scientometrics, 108(2), 595–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Adda, D., Iacobucci, D., & Palloni, R. (2020). Relatedness in the implementation of smart specialisation strategy: A first empirical assessment. Papers in Regional Science, 99(3), 405–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewitte, B. (1986). The reform of the European Regional Development Fund. Common Market Law Review, 23(2), 419–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elango, B., & Rajendran. (2012). Authorship trends and collaboration pattern in the marine sciences literature: A scientometric study. International Journal of Information Dissemination and Technology, 2, 166–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2019), The European Green Deal, COM(2019) 640/ final, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1588580774040&uri=CELEX%3A52019DC0640

  • Foray, D., David, P. A., and Hall, B. (s.d.). Smart Specialisation – The Concept. Knowledge Economists Policy Brief N° 9, European Commission, 5.

  • Fratesi, U., & Wishlade, F. G. (2017). The impact of European Cohesion Policy in different contexts. Regional Studies, 51(6), 817–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A.-W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google scholar, scopus and the web of science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2), 787–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, J. E., & Buela-Casal, G. (2014). The meaning of the h-index. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 14(2), 161–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurtado, S. D. G. (2019). Understanding the influence of EU urban policy in Spanish cities: The case of Málaga. Urban Research & Practice, 14(1), 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koseoglu, M. A. (2016). Map** the institutional collaboration network of strategic management research: 1980–2014. Scientometrics, 109(1), 203–226.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall, B. -Å., Vang, J., Joseph, K. J., & Chaminade, C. (2009). Innovation system research and develo** countries. Handbook of Innovation Systems in Develo** Countries Building Domestic Capabilities in A Global Setting, DOI. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781849803427.00006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, P., & Ortega-Argilés, R. (2013). Transforming European regional policy: A results-driven agenda and smart specialization. Oxford Review of EconOmic Policy, 29(2), 405–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, P., & Ortega-Argilés, R. (2015). Smart specialization, regional growth and applications to European Union cohesion policy. Regional Studies, 49(8), 1291–1302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendez, C. (2013). The post-2013 reform of EU cohesion policy and the place-based narrative. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(5), 639–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miedzinski, M., Ciampi Stancova, K., Matusiak, M., & Coenen, L. (2021). Addressing sustainability challenges and sustainable development goals via smart specialisation. Towards a Theoretical and Conceptual Framework Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/410983

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreton, T. (1992). European Supporto for people with disabilities. Personnel Review., 21(6), 74–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, K. (1997). The learning region: Institutions, innovation and regional renewal. Regional Studies, 31(5), 491–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, M., & Oppenheim, C. (2007). Comparing alternatives to the web of Science for coverage of the social sciences’ literature. Journal of Informetrics, 1(2), 161–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pompili, T. (1994). Structure and performance of less developed regions in the EC. Regional Studies, 28(7), 679–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robson, B. (1994). No city, no civilisation. Transaction of the Institute of Brithis Geographers, 19(2), 131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schrader, H. (1994). Impact assessment of the Eu structural funds to support regional economic-development in rural-areas of Germany. Journal of Rural Studies, 10(4), 357–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternitzke, C., & e Bergmann, I. (2009). Similarity measures for document map**: A comparative study on the level of an individual scientist. Scientometrics, 78(1), 113–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vieira, E. S., & Gomes, J. A. N. F. (2009). A comparison of Scopus and web of Science for a typical university. Scientometrics, 81(2), 587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittle, A., & Kogler, D. F. (2020). Related to what? Reviewing the literature on technological relatedness: Where we are now and where can we go? Papers in Regional Science, 99(1), 97–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wise, M., & Croxford, G. (1988). The European regional-development fund—community ideals and national realities. Political Geography Quarterly., 72(2), 161–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zubek, N., & Henning, C. H. C. A. (2016). Local government, spatial spillovers and the absorption of EU structural funds. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67(2), 368–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium

    Francesco Foglia

Authors
  1. Francesco Foglia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francesco Foglia.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article. No funds, grants, or other support was received.

Additional information

The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the European Commission.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Foglia, F. Is smart specialisation monopolising the research on the EU cohesion policy? Evidence from a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics 128, 1001–1021 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04585-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04585-2

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation