Research Policy 34 (2005) 1203–1219 One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach Franz T ¨ odtling ∗ , Michaela Trippl Department of City and Regional Development, Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration, Nordbergstrasse 15, UZA 4, A-1090 Vienna, Austria Received 18 August 2004; received in revised form 15 December 2004; accepted 10 January 2005 Available online 14 July 2005 Abstract Innovation has moved to the foreground in regional policy in the last decade. Concrete policies were shaped by “best practice models” derived from high-tech areas and well performing regions. These are often applied in a similar way across many types of regions. Here an attempt is made to show that there is no “ideal model” for innovation policy as innovation activities differ strongly between central, peripheral and old industrial areas. In this paper we analyse different types of regions with respect to their preconditions for innovation, networking and innovation barriers. Based on this classification different policy options and strategies are developed. © 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Regional innovation policy; Clusters; Regional innovation systems; Less favoured regions; Innovation barriers 1. Introduction There is a widespread agreement in academic lit- erature that knowledge, learning and innovation are key to economic development and competitiveness for firms, regions and nations. Innovation is also rank- ing on the top of policy agendas today both in the fields of industrial and regional policy. Until the 1990s the linear model of innovation policy was dominating, ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +43 1 31336 4781; fax: +43 1 31336 705. E-mail addresses: franz.toedtling@wu-wien.ac.at (F. T¨ odtling), michaela.trippl@wu-wien.ac.at (M. Trippl). leading to a focus on R&D infrastructure provision, financial innovation support for companies, and tech- nology transfer. These policies emphasised the supply of innovation inputs and of support instruments, often neglecting the absorption capacity of firms and the spe- cific demand for innovation support in less favoured regions. Also, behavioural characteristics and man- agement and organisational deficits of companies, in particular of SMEs, were not sufficiently taken into account (Lagendijk, 2000). Instruments were usually addressed to individual companies and applied in a rather uncoordinated way (Asheim et al., 2003). More recently attention has shifted to innova- tive regions and milieux (Camagni, 1991; Crevoisier, 0048-7333/$ – see front matter © 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2005.01.018