Higher Education Institutions and tourism destination development A challenge for triple-helix policies? Lise Smed Olsen – Henrik Halkier– 1. The challenge: Triple-helix in a different environment 2. Research design: Explorative case studies 3. Results: Nordland and North Jutland 4: Conclusions: Diversity and intermediaries

The challenge: TRIPLE HELIX IN A NEW ENVIRONMENT From a high-tech manufacturing concept…  Interaction between firms and public/private knowledge producers  Informal institutional context and organised interaction  Triple helix: Universities/government/industry with overlapping roles  Wide appeal among policy-makers … to a high-touch service context  SMEs, low education, seasonality, life-style entrepreneurs  Importance of tacit knowledge in incremental innovation  What role for HEIs/universities in tourist destination development?  Importance of destination and HEI characteristics! Lise Smed Olsen – Henrik Halkier–

RESEARCH DESIGN  Two case studies of Nordic peripheral regions  Nordland, Norway  North Jutland, Denmark  Interviews with policy-makers and HEIs, not firms  Identify patterns of collaboration, not impact evaluation  Focus on  Actor resources  Actors strategies  Interaction patterns Lise Smed Olsen – Henrik Halkier–

NORDLAND Coordinated research and development? Actor resources  Nature-based tourism, small private firms dominate  National funding for R&D (InnovationNorway, Research Council)  University with general teaching programmes and applied research Actor strategies  Firms: select few interest in access to HEI knowledge  HEI: from student projects to applied research centre  DMO marginal, region with geo-political concerns Interactions  Feed-back loop from research to firms via project manager Lise Smed Olsen – Henrik Halkier–

NORTH JUTLAND Arm’s-length project interaction? Actor resources  Nature-based tourism, small private firms dominate  Regional funding via DMO  University with triple-helix profile and dedicated tourism profile Actor strategies  Firms: Limited interest, except very large/innovative  HEI: empirical data and dual publication (dissemination, academic)  DMO: building consortia, translating/endorsing knowledge Interactions  HEI as plug-in in DMO projects (occasionally proactive agenda) Lise Smed Olsen – Henrik Halkier–

CONCLUSIONS  Importance of education/labour market relations in knowledge dynamics  Funding: National versus regional  Agenda setting: HEI versus DMO  Important commonality: Importance of knowledge brokers  Translation taking tacit knowledge of firms into consideration  Importance of destination and HEI characteristics  What firms, DMOs, and HEIs?  Several types of tourism triple helix Lise Smed Olsen – Henrik Halkier–