Abstract:

Problem: Do innovation systems in the Nordic countries meet the needs of the industry in order to cope with global challenges and new opportunities? How the digital globalisation affects marine industry; The change from closed to open systems of innovation;
Hypotheses: Digital competence in marine industry reduces the distance between basic science/universities and applications in business. (Venter) Multinational companies have national centres of command (Freeman) Clustering generates global cities (Sassen). Power, not transparent, expanding, globally connected, with high wealth and large low paid categories of immigrant service workers. St-Johns, Reykjavik, Edinburgh and Bergen are examples of early formations of such cities.
Digital time-space reduction makes marine actor ability to network between established modern institutions a condition for survival. The triple helix metaphor suggests that a key is building specific, selective, functional networks between government – science/education and business. (L. Leydesdorff, H Etzkowitz)
Three types of competence in functional groups, business firms and regional organisation: Learning, Innovation and Regulation. Combination called LIR systems
Learning: Ability to learn: knowledge production. How the world is. Insight into the world, the physical and social world. The field of experience/tacit knowledge, science and education.
Innovation: inventing and building new technology. Ideas and actions that change the world. The field of entrepreneurship,
Regulation: power to make binding rules for activities in a field. The field of powerful, rational institutions
LIR system findings
Iceland: no formalised Innovation System for the marine sector. Many innovation-engaged institutions.
NFL: strong Innovation Systems in private sector. Historically informal, from 2000 formal: Oceans Advance. Few other formal innovation systems.
Norway and Scotland in between: both formal IS (Innovation Norway and Enterprise organisations) and many Innovation-engaged institutions.
Iceland and NFL extremes
Iceland: No formal IS. Strong local government, Strong Regulation. Fish
NFL: Strong IS. Weak local government, Weak regulation. No fish (Bay of St. Lawrence empty of cod in 1992)
Norway and Scotland: Somewhat strong local government (weak on business management). Several IS. Good public regulation. Both wild and farmed fish
What can the extremes Iceland and NFL teach us?
Marine industries should see the difference between learning, innovation/entrepreneurship and regulation, between knowledge production, devising new technology and the wielding of authority.

All are necessary in some combination at all levels, firm, region, nation state etc. if marine production, trade, communities and sea climate are to be balanced sensibly, as the Nordic prime ministers seemed to express their vision.
LEARNING: More reciprocal support and cooperation between basic science/universities and marine industry. More ability to transform tacit knowledge among employees and customers to explicit knowledge in the industry.
ENTREPRENEURSHIP: Normalisation. Part of normal business models. As important in science (development of investigative technology), in government (ability to develop new forms of governance thru LIR) as in the industry.
REGULATION: Business organisation is itself a mode of regulation. Industry should participate in regulatory activities at all levels where the specific firm is active.

Keywords:

innovation systems, marine sectors, north atlantic rim, comparative case study.