Please see below all abstracts in order of presentation times.
Please note that times might change.

Day 1: Thursday, 17 January 2019


11:30 – 12:00 | Registration, Coffee and Wraps

12:00 – 12:10 | Welcome, Magnus Gulbrandsen, NORSI Chairman and Ui0 TIK

12:10 – 12:25 | Short presentation about Norsi, Birte M. Horn-Hanssen, Norsi Coordinator

12:25 – 13:20 | Key Note: The Rise of the Platform Economy: An Institutional Perspective, Professor Koen Frenken, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University

13:20 – 13:30 | Coffee Break – Move to 2 parallel sessions

PARALLEL A – SESSION 1 Room B2-060: STUDENT PRESENTATIONS, Session Chair, Bjørn T. Asheim, University of Stavanger

13:30 – 14:00 The effect of physical staging and human interaction on revisit intention in different experience types, Ingvild Hansten Blomstervik, UiT The Arctic University
Senior Opponent: Martin Rønningen, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences; Junior Opponent: Sveinung Grimsby, Nofima and University of Oslo TIK
Tourists’ tendency of choosing new and different experiences and destinations are well known in tourism research and practice. By drawing on service-dominant logic and social exchange theory, the present study explores different experience types, i.e. different settings with various degree of novelty. Further, the study investigate how physical staging and human interaction in different experience types effect the intention to revisit the experience. An empirical investigation is conducted to test the current hypotheses, using the case of Zoomarine Park in Portugal. The results show that the importance of physical staging and human interaction varies dependent on the experience with various degree of novelty, which also effects the intention to revisit. The paper contributes to literature in tourism research by comparing different experience types with various degrees of novelty, differing between physical staging and human interaction and attempts to measure revisit intention

14:00 – 14:30 The team formation process of new venture teams established in a venture creation program (VCP), Iselin Kristine Mauseth, Nord University
Senior Opponent:Lene Foss, UiT The Arctic University ; Junior Opponent: Ingvild Hansten Blomstervik, UiT The Arctic University
This paper investigates the team formation process of new venture teams established in a venture creation program (VCP). A VCP is an action-based entrepreneurship education program that allows students to get actual entrepreneurship practice by creating real-life ventures as a part of the formal curriculum with the intent to let the student continue running the ventures post-graduation (Lackèus et al., 2015). One common denominator of most VCPs is that students work in teams about the new venture development. While research indicates that the functionality of the teams strongly influences learning outcomes, there is little research-based knowledge on how well-functioning teams are developed in this setting. Most VCPs facilitate team formation and include activities to help students establish and develop start-up teams (Lackéus and Williams Middleton, 2015). However, there is limited evidence on the effects of such activities. This paper addresses this gap by examining the following research questions: 1. How do new venture teams in the VCP context develop? 2. How do VCP activities influence the team formation process over time? We build on five cases of new venture teams from the VCP, NTNU School of Entrepreneurship. For the purpose of this paper, we build upon interviews conducted with team members at initiation of team formation, as well as follow-up interviews and observations 3 months after team formation. In total, we conducted 35 interviews with student team members, both individually and in groups, in addition 3 interviews with faculty members. Preliminary findings indicates that three groups of practices emerged capturing ways in which practices influence the team formation process, in total including 13 practices. Two groups of practices were organized by the VCP: 1) Curricular practices, and 2) Co-curricular practices. The third group of practices were self-organized, here termed 3) Student practices.

14:30 – 15:00 Novel Food policy and openness,Sveinung Grimsby, Nofima and University of Oslo TIK
Senior Opponent: Bjørn T. Asheim, University of Stavanger; Junior Opponent: Iselin Kristine Mauseth, Nord University
Novel Food regulations in Europe only authorized 125 products for the first 20 years. In the same period, 523 notification applications, often from competing firms, claiming to have products substantially equal have been approved. While a full application has taken 2-4 years, a notification has only taken months, putting the first mover in a disadvantageous position. How do firms under these highly regulated conditions arrange external ties and collaboration? There seems to be a paradox where regulation openness leads to less open innovation processes. Novel Food regulations have affected radical innovation through the publication of dossiers revealing ideas and technology. Costly scientific risk assessments have affected innovation speed and novelty. The rigid but open regulation system seems to have prevented innovation, since the number of applications has exploded from an average of 10 dossiers per year (1997 – 2017) to nearly 100 applications for 2018 under new regulations. The NF regulation and its effect on radical food innovation has not been studied according to innovation management previously. This study will attempt to clarify the following research questions: How has the European regulation on NF affected collaboration among firms from an Open Innovation perspective, and how do food firms under these highly regulated conditions arrange external ties and collaboration in order to develop successful innovations.


13:30 – 14:00 Corporate entrepreneurship and sustainability transitions: the oil and gas industry powering up innovation in offshore wind technologies, Tuukka Rainer Reinhold Mäkitie, University of Oslo TIK
Senior Opponent: Roger Sørheim, NTNU; Junior Opponent: Stine Alm Hersleth, NMBU
Abstract confidential

14:00 – 14:30 The Emergence of Hydrogen Energy in the Norwegian Transport Sector,Cyriac George, TOI and University of Oslo TIK
Senior Opponent: Martin Rønningen, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences; Junior Opponent: Tuukka Rainer Reinhold Mäkitie, University of Oslo TIK
Hydrogen fuel is often cited as a potential component of a sustainable transport system. Unlike battery electric vehicles (BEVs), which have dramatically increased in popularity over the last two decades in many countries, hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles (FCVs) have failed to garner mass adoption. Although Norway has been a center for hydrogen research and production for nearly a century, more recent activities related to transport applications still lag behind leading countries like Germany, Japan and the USA. Furthermore, given Norway’s natural resource base and built infrastructure, it is uniquely positioned to be a large producer (as well as potential exporter) of hydrogen fuel using both natural gas reformation and electrolysis. This paper focuses on transport in Norway to analyze hydrogen fuel using a technological innovation systems (TIS) perspective (Bergek et al., 2008; Bergek et al., 2015). It seeks to identify key barriers and bottlenecks related to the introduction of hydrogen energy as well as contextual characteristics and development pathways within the TIS. Based on a mix-methods approach that employs, document analysis and elite interviews with key stakeholders, this paper lays out the structural components (i.e. actors, networks and institutions) of the Norwegian hydrogen sector and maps the functional patterns therein. Preliminary analysis suggests that research and development activities have gained steam in recent years and that the increased prevalence of pilot projects across multiple sectors marks an important step towards commercialization. Furthermore, the heavy duty segments, including buses, trucks and ferries appears better equipped, both technically and organizationally, to begin adopting hydrogen fuel. In terms of the private vehicle segment, the success of BEVs in Norway may stall the introduction of FCVs and related infrastructure for the foreseeable future. In the longer-term, if Norway is to phase out fossil fuels as the Government has declared, then it is likely that the national fleets of vehicles will consist of a mix of BEVs and FCVs depending on the type of vehicle and journey.

14:30 – 15:00 A baseline for trade secret management research – evidence from Norwegian SMEs, Haakon Thue Lie, NTNU and LeogrifF
Senior Opponent: Gry A. Alsos, Nord University; Junior Opponent: Cyriac George, TOI and University of Oslo TIK
Trade secret management is part of the wider concepts of Intellectual Property (IP) management and innovation management. We studied 3871 Norwegian SMEs that answered a survey in 2013 on their use and management of intellectual property, including trade secrets. We combined the survey data with accounting data from 2009 to 2016 to study the association between trade secret management, economic and organisational data for the firms.
Whereas other studies indicate that secrecy is the preferred appropriation mechanism (e.g. by 30% of the firms), our study indicates the same preference, but a much lower use of trade secrets (6% of the firms). For the SMEs that report use of trade secrets as an appropriation mechanism, we found that there is a positive correlation between use of trade secrets, and export, R&D and knowledge exchange. We conclude that the SMEs that reported use of trade secrets, are to a larger degree than other firms involved in international trade, invest more in R&D, and enter into more non-disclosure agreements with other firms. This indicates that for SMEs there is a positive association between management of trade secrets, R&D and knowledge exchange with other firms.
Norwegian law regarding trade secrets is in line with the requirements for legislation from the EU directive on trade secrets, and Norway will implement the EU directive on trade secrets. Thus, our study may serve as a baseline for later research on the impact of the directive.

15:00 – 15:15 | Coffee Break

PARALLEL A – SESSION 3 ROOM B2-060: STUDENT PRESENTATIONS, Session Chair, Taran M. Thune, University of Oslo TIK

15:15 – 15:45 The role of organizational climate for employee’s creative performance, Barbara Rebecca M. Lappalainen, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences
Senior Opponent: Åsa Lindholm Dahlstand, Circle, Lund University; Junior Opponent: Odd Rune Stalheim, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences
The role of organizational climate for employee’s creative performance Abstract Purpose – The aim of this study is to examine the role of organizational climate for employee’s creative performance using public sector as an empirical context. Employee’s creative performance was divided into two and studied as two separate effect variables, namely; (i) individual creativity and (ii) individual innovative behavior. Design/methodology/approach – A conceptual model was developed and tested in a survey in which employees in a public sector organization participated. Findings – This study found that organizational climate have an imperative role for employees creative performance. Organizational climate found to positively and significance correlate with the two creative performance variables included in the study. Specifically, organizational climate individual plays a role for especially employee’s individual creativity but simultaneously it plays a role for employee’s individual innovative behavior. Moreover, the findings reveal that individual creativity mediates the relationship between organizational climate and individual innovative behavior. Research limitations/implications – This paper is limited examining the role of organizational climate on two creative performance variables related to individual employees. Moreover, the study is limited to include three aspects related to organizational climate construct. Practical implications – The paper demonstrates the important role of organizational climate for employee’s individual creative performance. Specifically, for firms in public sector in order to trigger individual creativity and innovative behavior, there is clearly a need for managers to build, develop and maintain an organizational climate that supports the public firm’s need for employees that not only are creative, but also simultaneously are enthusiastic in implementing those novel and useful ideas into practical action. Originality/value – This paper enhances one’s knowledge and influence of the role of organizational climate on employee’s creativity and innovative behavior, including furthering one’s understanding of the role of these influences in a public sector context. Keywords Innovative behavior, Organizational climate, Creativity, Public Sector Abstract classification: Research paper

15:45 – 16:15 Pedagogical innovations in practice-a promising response to develop professional knowledge,Odd Rune Stalheim, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences
Senior Opponent: Taran M. Thune, University of Oslo TIK; Junior Opponent: Barbara Rebecca M. Lappalainen, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences
This article address how pedagogical innovations contribute to students’ development of practical knowledge and how their engagement in the activity relates to their development of professional skills. By examining, the differences in a technological innovation in nursing and a student-driven innovation in architectural education the article provide the background for a discussion about the potential of professional learning in innovative practices to inform the practice of Boyers Scholarship of engagement. Overall, does the study show that the importance of a) students’ initiatives and engagement, b) methods that facilitate learning activities that encourage students to collaborate and c) the structures of the innovations are important dimensions when employing innovations in practical learning.

16:15 – 16:45 Supplier organisational change to improve customer innovation, Kristin Wulff, NTNU
Senior Opponent: Taran M. Thune, University of Oslo TIK; Junior Opponent: Dennis Y.C. Gan, Digitization & Entrepreneurship Research Cluster, UiO
Fintech is disrupting the banking sector, and the banks feel a need to be more innovative. Kantega is an IT-supplier delivering IT capacity and projects to the banking sector and would like to support their customers in this. The company has 150 employees in 20-25 teams both in-house and in the customer’s organisation. I invited a selection of employees and leaders to write one-two paragraphs on what they believe to be the most important thing Kantega do now to help their customers be more innovative. This paper will explore the thoughts on what will help make the customers more innovative and see this in the light of socio-technical systems design principles. The findings suggest that the employees se the main problem as the unwillingness of customers to let the team from the supplier in on the shared purpose of the work. The research question is:
What characterizes an IT supplier with teams that supports their customers innovation?

PARALLEL B, SESSION 4 ROOM B2-085: STUDENT PRESENTATIONS, Session Chair, Gry A. Alsos, Nord University

15:15 – 15:45 Social entrepreneurs as partners in the public sector: Insights into collaborative practices in the Norwegian context, Mikhail Kosmynin,Nord University
Senior Opponent: Gry A. Alsos, Nord University; Junior Opponent: Jonathan Muringani, University of Stavanger
The idea that social entrepreneurship can be an effective response for dealing with societal challenges and the gaps in the provision of local welfare services can be addressed by cross-sector collaborations involving social enterprises is manifested in policy discourses across many states. In Norway, there is also growing evidence that municipalities can benefit from such collaboration with social enterprises that provide innovative solutions with a greater impact. This thesis proposal focuses on collaborative practices between social enterprises and public sector organisations in the Norwegian context. Specifically, the study explores the insights a practice-based approach within organizational studies and network-based theory provide to the question of how collaboration between social enterprises and public sector organisations is enacted in order to provide innovative solutions to social problems in the welfare state, how social entrepreneurs get involved in such collaboration and how embeddedness influences the shaping and enacting of those collaborative practices. Based on empirical material from six cases of such collaborative arrangements, the thesis attempts to unpack social entrepreneurial practices involved in organizing for collaboration across different types of boundaries in order to provide supplementary or complementary welfare services. Key words: social entrepreneurship, social enterprise, welfare innovation, collaborative practices, welfare state, Norway, practice-based approach, networks

15:45 – 16:15 Three forms of social capital and regional economic development in EU regions, Jonathan Muringani, University of Stavanger
Senior Opponent: Beniamino Callegari, BI Norwegian Business School; Junior Opponent: Sanaa Talha, Nord University
Economic geography and innovation studies scholars have acknowledged the role of social capital in regional economic development. However, understanding how the three forms of social capital: bonding, bridging and linking remains work in progress. In particular, their relationship and effect on regional economic development. This paper is the first to look at how the three forms of social capital affect regional economic development. We use four waves of the European Social Survey (ESS) for 223 EU regions covering 2002 to 2017. The data analysis involve fixed regression, panel data method. We expect the relationship between bridging and bonding social capital and their effect on regional economic development to be curvilinear suggesting an optimal balance. We also expect these characteristics to be influenced by the form of trust embedded in each form of social capital.

16:15 – 16:45 Identity Formation among Immigrant Women Entrepreneurs: The Role of Structural and Cultural Embeddedness, Sanaa Talha, Nord University, Business School; Gry Agnete Alsos, Nord University, Business School
Senior Opponent: Roger Sørheim;NTNU; Junior Opponent: Utku Ali Rıza Alpaydın, University of Stavanger
Main Topic Research on entrepreneurial identity seeks to understand if, how and when individuals see themselves as entrepreneurs corresponding to certain beliefs, meanings and behaviours. Entrepreneurial behaviour is shaped in relation to how entrepreneurs perceive themselves relative to others through their social activity, i.e. their social identity (Fauchart and Gruber, 2011). Increasingly, the issue of entrepreneurial identity is seen less as something one has or not, and more as a process of becoming (Hytti, 2005; Kasperova and Kitching, 2014). Identity formation happens in an interaction between the entrepreneur and her environment (Kasperova, Kitching, and Blackburn, 2018). A key aspect of this environment is its gendered nature (Welter, Brush, and De Bruin, 2014). Hence, the process of identity formation is likely to be gendered. This study aims to investigate how immigrant women nascent entrepreneurs form their entrepreneurial identity during the early stages of the business start-up process. Building on the concept of mixed embeddedness, we examine how the women’s integration in formal and informal social communities influences their process of entrepreneurial identity construction. Mixed embeddedness refers to both the social networks of immigrant entrepreneurs and their embeddedness in the socio-economic and politico-institutional environment of the country of settlement (Kloosterman, Van Der Leun, and Rath, 1999). For the purpose of this study, we focus on structural and cultural embeddedness to help us understand identity construction among women immigrant entrepreneurs. Since research on female entrepreneurs often does not consider ethnicity, and literature on mixed embeddedness hardly discusses gender, there are scarce research on immigrant women entrepreneurs (Essers and Benschop, 2007). As immigrants and women these entrepreneurs are exposed to double subordination and challenges of not aligning with the white male image of entrepreneurship (Ahl and Nelson, 2010). By examining how these female entrepreneurs navigate themselves and their nascent role as entrepreneurs in the contexts in which they are embedded, we aim to contribute to a better understanding of the process of identity construction. Our research question is ‘How do the structural and cultural embeddedness of immigrant women effect the formation of their entrepreneurial identity?’ Theoretical background Who we think we are and how we act in the world is determined by our identity. Identity is defined as set of personal and behavioural beliefs and characteristics that form ones personality and attach one to a certain group (Collins, 2000). Identity is not ‘given’ but formed over a period of time, defined and constructed by lived experiences of belonging and assigning meanings (Wenger, 1998). Becoming an entrepreneur typically requires individuals to transition to a new work role as an entrepreneur, and thereby developing and entrepreneurial identity (Hoang and Gimeno, 2010). This process of becoming, is the focus of this study. In particular, we examine how the identity formation among women immigrant entrepreneurs are influenced by the multiple contexts in which they are embedded. The concept of embeddedness states that the social relations impact every transaction be it economic or non-economic (Granovetter, 1985). Kloosterman et al. (1999) used the idea of mixed embeddedness to study immigrant entrepreneurship in formal and informal institutional contexts. For the purpose of this study we distinguish between structural and cultural contexts of mixed embeddedness. Structural embeddedness is here regarded as integration and strength of interpersonal networks one holds in the country of settlement, whereas cultural embeddedness is defined as the extent to which individuals of a community share similar norms and behaviours, i.e. assimilation in one’s own cultural community. Goldberg (2016) proposed a relational matrix between structural and cultural embeddedness with four distinct stances of assimilated actor, doubly embedded actor, disembedded actor and integrated nonconformist. These degrees of embeddedness provide the base for analysing how the structural and cultural embeddedness of the immigrant women nascent entrepreneurs affect the early development of their entrepreneurial identity. Method The study is aimed to analyse the entrepreneurial identity formation of immigrant women entrepreneurs. The context is immigrant women entrepreneurs in Norway. We build on 13 cases of immigrant women just starting the process of becoming entrepreneurs. Data are collected through observations and interviews with these immigrant women. Cases were identified from incubators for immigrant entrepreneurs located in Oslo, Norway; Charge and Moy Intensive Oslo, which both focuses on immigrant entrepreneurs. Initial interviews have been conducted, lasting between 15 and 45 minutes each. Follow-up interviews will be carried out early 2019. Additionally, we have conducted key informant interviews related to both incubators, as well as participated in meetings and events between the entrepreneurs. Preliminary Results By following immigrant women nascent entrepreneurs during their first months of their entrepreneurial process, this paper aims to analyse how they see themselves in the beginning of their entrepreneurial venture process, and how this develops over time. As a starting point, we examine whether and how they see themselves as entrepreneurs and how they interpret their role as business founders. Further, we seek to understand how their own cultural communities and previous experience influence their view of themselves as entrepreneurs, and also the influences by their time spent in Norway, as well as the start-up context they now are entering. In particular, we highlight the interaction between their different context, be it mutual fertilization, potential conflicts or both, and how this interaction influence their identity formation.

16:45 – 17:00 | Coffee Break

JOINT SESSION Move back to one room: B2 – 060:

17:00 – 17:45 | NORSI Alumni Perspective: “My industrial PhD, a gateway to the Norwegian innovation community,” Hanne-Kristine Hallingby, Telenor and UiO TIK

17:45 – 18:00 | NORSI Student Representatives: Perspective and Election of new representatives(x2),Nina Hjertvikrem, University of Stavanger and Norsi student rep.

18:00 – 20:00 | Tapas Dinner and Socializing/networking – Everyone welcome! (outside room B2-060)



09:00 – 9:30 | Registration and Coffee/Tea – Move to 2 parallel sessions

PARALLEL A – SESSION 5 ROOM B2-060: STUDENT PRESENTATIONS, Session Chair, Magnus Gulbrandsen, UiO- TIK

9:30 – 10:00 Research networks and regional differences in innovation activities, Nina Hjertvikrem, University of Stavanger
Senior Opponent: Magnus Gulbrandsen, UiO- TIK; Junior Opponent: Mari Liavaag Holm, NTNU/Kjersti Kjos Longva, NTNU
In the Norwegian national budget 2017 proposal, the Norwegian government claims that research will lead to regional development.
In Norway, there are regional differences when it comes to urbanization, industry mix, knowledge base and demography. Using data on all the funding given from the Norwegian Research council in the years 2005 – 2015, this study aims to contribute to the understanding of regional differences in research and innovation activity, and regional differences in collaboration patterns and networks.

10:00 – 10:30 Boundary crossing theory – a fruitful theoretical perspective to introduce to the field of entrepreneurial learning, Mari Liavaag Holm, NTNU and Kjersti Kjos Longva, NTNU
Senior Opponent: Bjørn Erik Mørk, BI Norwegian Business School; Junior Opponent: Mikhail Kosmynin, Nord University
As the role of entrepreneurship as an engine for economic growth has increasingly been recognized, research on entrepreneurial learning has gained momentum in the recent decades as the research community aspire to understand more about the entrepreneurial process. The developing literature has however been criticized for being fragmented and too focused on the individual entrepreneur. After all, an entrepreneurial process will always be part of an entrepreneurial ecosystem. Hence, it is not just the entrepreneur who learns during an entrepreneurial process. There is also potential for learning among several other actors within the ecosystem. These are however complex mechanisms to study and this paper therefore explores whether boundary crossing theory could be a fruitful theoretical perspective to introduce to the field of entrepreneurial learning. Boundary crossing refers to a person’s or organization’s transition and interaction across different practices. According to boundary crossing theory, these boundaries enable learning for those who transition and interact within them. Through qualitative interviews with participants and key stakeholders in an entrepreneurship grant competition, we therefore seek to explore whether boundary crossing theory can contribute to advancing our understanding of the entrepreneurial learning that takes place at the boundaries of sociocultural practices. Further, this enables a multilevel analysis of the learning that is taking place. Hence, the paper makes both theoretical and methodological contributions, but also has implications for policy makers who aim to support entrepreneurial learning among nascent entrepreneurs.

10:30 – 11:00 Barriers for regional industrial path development – the case of the Centre for Research-Based Innovation Offshore Mechatronics (SFI OM), Nina Kyllingstad, University of Agder
Senior Opponent: Bjørn T. Asheim, University of Stavanger; Junior Opponent: Nina Hjertvikrem, University of Stavanger
Due to increasing globalisation, regional industries face competition worldwide. Thus, how regional industries can develop in a sustainable way is high on the research agenda. This article explores regional industrial change by investigating how the Centre for Research-Based Innovation Offshore Mechatronics (SFI OM) in southern Norway may contribute to new regional industrial path development. Further, the paper seeks to investigate the barriers that might hamper such a development. This is done by zooming in on three dimensions of the SFI; Actors, networks and the system. The SFI OM was awarded its status and funding from the Research Council of Norway during the peak of the oil and gas industry. The aim of the centre was to improve growth and innovation within the established industry and beyond. However, at the time of initiation, the oil prices had dropped severely, thus resulting in new conditions for the centre and its partners. This changed dynamic, to the established industry of oil and gas, makes the SFI OM an interesting case for studying barriers for regional industrial path development.

11:00 – 11:30 Contextualising system agency in new path development, Johan Furemar Miörner, Circle, Lund University
Senior Opponent: Arne Isaksen, University of Agder; Junior Opponent: Nina Kyllingstad, University of Agder
Abstract: This paper contributes to our understanding of system agency in new path development and investigate how context conditions influence the scope for system agency. Particular attention is given to historical specificities of the evolution of the RIS and the role they play in shaping the scope and nature of system agency in RIS reconfiguration. A conceptual framework is developed, outlining the structure-agency dynamics at play in system agency and introducing the concept of ‘hard and soft RIS selectivities’ as a tool to understand the context conditions influencing system agency. The conceptual discussion is followed by a comparison of two empirical cases of RIS reconfiguration, associated with the development of a digital games industry in the region of Scania and transformation of the automotive industry in the region of West Sweden. The case comparison reveals how the strategies adopted by system agents are conditioned and shaped by RIS selectivities and the findings point to the idea that differences in how system agency play out can be traced back to the historical evolution of RIS specific factors. The conclusions suggests that a deeper understanding of RIS selectivities is instrumental to inform more place-sensitive regional innovation policy.

11:30 – 12:00 MaaS as an innovation, Jørgen Aarhaug,University of Oslo TIK and TOI
Senior Opponent: Arne Isaksen, University of Agder; Junior Opponent: Johan Furemar Miörner, Circle, Lund University
In the recent academic literature, Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) has been held up as one of the solutions to achieving mobility without the need for the private car. Still, the empirical evidence backing this conclusion is limited. MaaS is a concept that has yet to mature into a marketable service. There are both question related to finding a suitable business model, and to find to what extent such a solution will be preferable to existing mobility solutions.
This paper draws on the evolving literature of MaaS experiments and pilots in order to discuss possible pathways for MaaS to evolve into a marketable service. The insights form literature is combined with analyses of the differences in mobility patterns and user needs, based on the national travel survey.
In the paper the theoretical framework “the multi-level perspective” (MLP) is contrasted with “the open innovation system” (OIS) to give new insight into how MaaS can be implemented, and the barriers to such an implementation. Using MLP MaaS can be seen as one of several niche innovations that can change the future mobility regime. This can be used to see how MaaS point towards a different transition pathway, with more public sector involvement, compared other alternative innovations. The OIS perspective highlights some of the complexities facing an innovation such as MaaS, with a reliance on many different actors.
Preliminary conclusions include that it is difficult to achieve modal shifts from users that presently have a dominant mode choice, and that it is far from obvious that the models of MaaS promoted by the proponents are in the interests of all the parties that a developed MaaS system would rely on.

PARALLEL B – SESSION 6 ROOM B2-085: STUDENT PRESENTATIONS, Session Chair, Lene Foss, UiT Arctic University

9:30 – 10:00 The knowledge-based bioeconomy: A network analysis of the food processing industry, Nhat Strøm-Andersen, University of Oslo TIK
Senior Opponent: Arne Isaksen, University of Agder; Junior Opponent: Janna Alvedalen, Circle, Lund University
The transition towards the bioeconomy necessitates a shift in production and consumption from fossil-based to a more sustainable mode—bio-based, which requires a strong commitment and an active engagement from all stakeholders in the economy. To foster the bioeconomy, new and relevant knowledge is needed, especially for production firms in a considered low-tech industry like food. This paper explores why Norwegian food processing firms participate research grants and projects, what types of knowledge bases they need through networking and collaborating, and how those knowledge are created and transferred. The theoretical foundation for the paper is based on knowledge bases and university–industry (U–I) collaboration perspectives. By applying social network analysis (SNA) method, the paper studies the relationships and interactions between the actors as well as their structural interconnections in the knowledge network. The paper highlights the importance of U–I collaboration in developing new knowledge, and the role of analytical knowledge for food firms in the context of the bioeconomy.
Keywords: knowledge bases, university–industry collaboration, bioeconomy, food industry, social network analysis, sustainability transitions

10:00 – 10:30 The entrepreneurial ecosystem for life science in Lund, Sweden Janna Alvedalen, Circle, Lund University
Senior Opponent: Roger Sørheim, NTNU; Junior Opponent: Nhat Strøm-Andersen, University of Oslo TIK
The Entrepreneurial ecosystem (EE) concept has gained a lot of attention in recent years both from policy makers and from scholars. It claims to solve the problem of the lack of a systemic approach to entrepreneurship and of ignoring the context of entrepreneurship (Alvedalen and Boschma 2017; Stam and Spigel, 2017). Scholars have stressed the importance of the interactions between the elements of an entrepreneurial ecosystem as those interactions have a strong impact on the entrepreneurial performance of a region. The definition of the EE is “ a set of interdependent actors and factors coordinated in such a way that they enable productive entrepreneurship” (Stam 2015, p 1765). One of EE’s central functions is the entrepreneurial experimentation which comprises creation, selection and scaling up (Lindholm-Dahlstrand et al., 2016). The study focuses on the Life Science industry as it is one of the most dynamic industries undergoing major changes, affecting many countries, driven by global trends. The aim of this paper is to analyze the entrepreneurial activity and its environment in the life science industry in Lund, Sweden, following the dramatic change in the ecosystem – exit of an anchor firm. The research question is: Which are the most important features of the entrepreneurial system for life science in Lund, Sweden and what are the processes of creation, selection and scaling up? The background of the study is the changes in the regional entrepreneurship stimulated by actions taken by one of the multi-national firms – Astra Zeneca. Astra Zeneca closed down its research and development facility and moved away from the region, leaving behind highly skilled employees, high-end labs and equipment. The base for the research paper is document studies and a set of interviews with small life science firms and industry experts such as representatives of supporting organizations and regional government. Findings expose the role of entrepreneurs, considering their backgrounds, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, support system based on different support organizations, sources of funding, culture and local and global links.

10:30 – 11:00 Innovation in hard times: Design Thinking for innovating in mature markets, Stine Alm Hersleth, NMBU and Nofima, and Einar Risvik Nofima AS, Antje Gonera Nofima AS
Senior Opponent:Roger Sørheim, NTNU; Junior Opponent: Haakon Thue Lie, NTNU and Leogriff
Innovating in the present red meat market is increasingly challenging. Red meat is often associated with negative societal issues such as environmental sustainability, health risks and poor animal welfare. This paper focuses on innovation in small and micro sized businesses and how an Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) and Design Thinking (DT) practice can be an advantage when innovating in a mature market. We investigate a group of Norwegian meat SME’s, who participated in an innovation process facilitated through DT. The goal was to develop new insight and future innovation strategies for the Norwegian meat sector. Posterior in-depth interviews with the attending business managers are conducted. This study aims to identify patterns of innovation activities and new approaches to innovate in a mature market. We aim to find evidence whether EO and DT can be recognized as a competitive advantage. This is a research in progress and results are still preliminary. Keywords: Innovation; Design Thinking; Entrepreneurial Orientation; Case Study; SME; Food Industry; Food Innovation;

11:00 – 11:30 The Role of Universities in Smart City Projects, Utku Ali Rıza Alpaydın, UiS
Senior Opponent: Lene Foss, UiT Arctic University; Junior Opponent: Jørgen Aarhaug, Toi and University of Oslo

There is an increasing interest to make the cities ‘smart’ by implementing innovative solutions in response to the socio-economic, environmental and governance challenges threatening the overall well-being of citizens and their quality of life in urban settings. In addition, the lack of a common understanding on various aspects, such as definition, content, scope, and measurement, of the ‘smart city’ concept makes it attractive for academia as well. Despite the fragmented nature of approaches to the concept, several smart city initiatives have been put into force and being implemented especially with the push by international organizations like European Union.
By bringing together various stakeholders from academic, business and governmental domains around the common theme of ‘smart city’, these smart city initiatives and projects represent a perfect illustration of triple helix concept. Rather than treating the institutional spheres of universities, industry and governments, which are deemed conducive for innovation and economic development, separately, the triple helix model focuses on the interactions among them. In the model, the role of universities is emphasized as being the critical actor responsible for the creation and dissemination of new knowledge and ideas as the bedrock of innovations.
In the light of this theoretical background, the paper discovers the role of universities in smart city projects funded by European Union from the triple helix perspective. The initial findings show that universities’ full potential are not materialized. The universities taking part in project consortiums are treated as knowledge providers as expected, but their capability in attracting smart people into their cities is neglected mainly due to the technological focus of project designs.
Keywords: Smart cities, universities, Triple Helix, Lighthouse projects, European Union.

11:30 – 12:00 Growth & Renewal with Corporate Venture Capital,Dennis Y.C.Gan, Digitization & Entrepreneurship Research Cluster, UiO
Senior Opponent: Lene Foss, UiT Arctic University; Junior Opponent:Beniamino Callegari, BI Norwegian Business School
This paper aims to investigate the means incumbent firms employ to achieve growth and renew themselves by acquiring and investing in startups (new resources) through corporate venture capital (CVC).

12:00 – 13:00 | Lunch – outside B2 – 060

CLOSING SESSION – In room B2 – 060

13:00 – 13:45 |NORSI Research Workshop: Exploring Collaborative Spaces, Beniamino Callegari, BI Norwegian Business School

13:45 – 14:00 | Summary/Ending remarks & Adjourn, Roger Sørheim, NTNU