Journal Special Issues: Calls for Papers 

Special Issue Editor(s)

Anna Butzin, Westphalian University of Applied Sciences Gelsenkirchen | Luís Carvalho, University of Porto | Hugues Jeannerat, University of Neuchâtel | Jesper Manniche, Centre for Regional and Tourism Research

Manuscript deadline: 15 December 2025

From knowledge-intensive to transformative knowledge regions

In recent decades, societal challenges such as climate change, demographic shifts, resource scarcity, and growing inequalities have underscored the limitations of traditional regional development paradigms (Tödtling et al., 2022). Addressing these challenges requires more than incremental improvements; instead, they demand systemic transformations in how societies produce, consume, and govern themselves. In Europe, the – now age-old – Lisbon Agenda (European Council, 2000) established a regional development framework centred on fostering knowledge-intensive innovation and economic competitiveness. However, the more recent European Green Deal (European Commission, 2019) illustrates a paradigm shift, prioritizing the transformation of entire socio-technical systems and directing innovation to tackle ongoing sustainability challenges (Schot & Steinmueller, 2018).

This shift calls for a fundamental rethinking of the role, nature, and context of knowledge and innovation in regional development, and has prompted a surge of new perspectives and research in regional studies and related disciplines (Chlebna et al., 2024; Flanagan et al., 2023; Tödtling et al., 2022; Truffer & Coenen, 2012; Uyarra et al., 2019). Many of these studies interface with transition studies (Binz et al., 2020), and focus on topics such as the geographies of sustainable innovation (Hansen & Coenen, 2015), the multi-scalarity of sustainability transitions (Miörner & Binz, 2021), “green” regional path development (Boschma et al., 2017; Gibbs & Jensen, 2022; Gong et al., 2022; Grillitsch & Hansen, 2019), power imbalances and core-periphery relations (Vale et al., 2024), social innovation and participation (Butzin et al., 2024; Coenen & Morgan, 2020; Jeannerat & Lavanchy, 2024), the regionalization of mission-oriented policy (Henderson et al., 2024; van Winden & Carvalho, 2019), and challenge-oriented regional innovation systems (Trippl et al., 2024). While these studies implicitly challenge conventional rationales for regional innovation, they rarely address knowledge as an explicit research focus. Often, knowledge is treated imprecisely as an implicit vector of change, closely tied to technology and co-evolving with other resources in innovation systems.

At the same time, there is a long-standing tradition in regional studies of examining the nature and role of knowledge in regional development and innovation. For instance, some research schools draw on a the distinction between the dominant view of “knowledge as object” and a practice-based understanding of “knowing” (Bathelt & Glückler, 2011; Ibert, 2007). Others have analysed the production-consumption nexus in territorial knowledge dynamics (Jeannerat & Crevoisier, 2016), knowledge combinations at the business and regional levels using the analytical-synthetic-symbolic knowledge model (Asheim et al., 2017; Manniche et al., 2017; Strambach & Klement, 2012) and innovation biography approaches (Butzin & Widmaier, 2016). However, it is increasingly relevant to assess whether these conceptualizations and methodologies, among others, are adequate for examining and steering the knowledge dynamics required to address contemporary regional transformation challenges – namely as transformation-inducing knowledge (or, “transformative knowledge”) is fundamentally action-oriented, involves multi-actor and multi-local participatory contexts, and is subject to societal valuation processes.

The Special Issue responds to this context. Already theorized and considered as a key sustainability transition dimension in, for example, education studies (Rodríguez Aboytes & Barth, 2020; Urmetzer et al., 2020), the Special Issue will offer a platform to explore, from a systemic and territorial perspective, the conceptual, methodological, empirical and policy implications of “transformative knowledge” within and for regional development in today’s era of societal grand challenges.

We particularly encourage the submission of abstracts from non-European regions/cities as well as abstracts following quantitative and semi-quantitative approaches. Contributions may address one or more of the following (or related) specific questions and topics:

• The nature of transformative knowledge, knowing and learning: What are distinctive features of transformative knowledge and learning involved in sustainability transitions? To what extent and how are existing knowledge concepts and typologies from regional innovation studies, organization studies and other adjacent disciplines – such as the distinctions between tacit and codified knowledge, knowledge (object) and knowing (process), and the combinatorial knowledge bases model of analytical, synthetic, and symbolic knowledge – appropriate for studying sustainability transitions? What kinds of knowledge do regions and regional actors need to facilitate system-wide transformation?
• The territorial contexts for transformative knowledge: what kinds of regional conditions and geographical settings matter to co-create, activate and diffuse transformative knowledge? How do different types of regional and urban systems vary in this matter? Does transformative knowledge underpin new types of core-periphery relations? Which geographies, scales, sites and materialities matter to enact the “transformability” of knowledge?
• Knowledge actors in regional context: How do different types of actors create, enact and diffuse transformative knowledge in (and across) regions? How do civic and not-for-profits engage with companies and the private sector? What are the new possibilities and challenges for research, universities, and education institutions to play transformative roles and support transformative knowledge dynamics in regions? What is the impact on universities’ “third mission” strategy and regional engagement?
• Regional Policy and governance: What are the regional policy implications of a transformative knowledge paradigm? Which types of policy and regulation schemes support for the generation and diffusion of transformative knowledge? Which competences are needed by local and regional policy agents, and how do they shift from a competitiveness paradigm to envision and act upon transformative change?

References

Asheim, B., Grillitsch, M., & Trippl, M. (2017). Introduction: Combinatorial Knowledge Bases, Regional Innovation, and Development Dynamics. Economic Geography, 93(5), 429–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/00130095.2017.1380775

Bathelt, H., & Glückler, J. (2011). The Relational Economy. Oxford University Press. https://academic.oup.com/book/32779 https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199587384.001.0001

Binz, C., Coenen, L., Murphy, J. T., & Truffer, B. (2020). Geographies of transition—From topical concerns to theoretical engagement: A comment on the transitions research agenda. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 34, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.11.002

Boschma, R., Coenen, L., Frenken, K., & Truffer, B. (2017). Towards a theory of regional diversification: combining insights from Evolutionary Economic Geography and Transition Studies. Regional Studies, 51(1), 31–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2016.1258460

Butzin, A., Rabadjieva, M., & Terstriep, J. (2024). Anchoring challenges through citizen participation in regional challenge-based innovation policies. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 52, 100856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2024.100856

Butzin, A., & Widmaier, B. (2016). Exploring Territorial Knowledge Dynamics through Innovation Biographies. Regional Studies, 50(2), 220–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2014.1001353

Chlebna, C., Evenhuis, E., & Morales, D. (2024). Economic geography and planetary boundaries: Embracing the planet’s uncompromising call to action. Progress in Economic Geography, 2(2), 100021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peg.2024.100021

Coenen, L., & Morgan, K. (2020). Evolving geographies of innovation: existing paradigms, critiques and possible alternatives. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift – Norwegian Journal of Geography, 74(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/00291951.2019.1692065

European Commission. (2019). Communication on The European Green Deal. https://commission.europa.eu/publications/communication-european-green-deal_en

European Council. (2000). Lisbon European Council 23-24.03.2000: Conclusions of the Presidency. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/lis1_en.htm

Flanagan, K., Uyarra, E., & Wanzenböck, I. (2023). Towards a problem-oriented regional industrial policy: possibilities for public intervention in framing, valuation and market formation. Regional Studies, 57(6), 998–1010. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2021.2016680

Gibbs, D., & Jensen, P. D. (2022). Chasing after the wind? Green economy strategies, path creation and transitions in the offshore wind industry. Regional Studies, 56(10), 1671–1682. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2021.2000958

Gong, H., Binz, C., Hassink, R., & Trippl, M. (2022). Emerging industries: institutions, legitimacy and system-level agency. Regional Studies, 56(4), 523–535. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2022.2033199

Grillitsch, M., & Hansen, T. (2019). Green industry development in different types of regions. European Planning Studies, 27(11), 2163–2183. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1648385

Hansen, T., & Coenen, L. (2015). The geography of sustainability transitions: Review, synthesis and reflections on an emergent research field. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 17, 92–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2014.11.001

Henderson, D., Morgan, K., & Delbridge, R. (2024). Putting missions in their place: micro-missions and the role of universities in delivering challenge-led innovation. Regional Studies, 58(1), 208–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2023.2176840

Ibert, O. (2007). Towards a Geography of Knowledge Creation: The Ambivalences between ‘Knowledge as an Object’ and ‘Knowing in Practice’. Regional Studies, 41(1), 103–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400601120346

Jeannerat, H., & Crevoisier, O. (2016). Editorial: From ‘Territorial Innovation Models’ to ‘Territorial Knowledge Dynamics’: On the Learning Value of a New Concept in Regional Studies. Regional Studies, 50(2), 185–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2015.1105653

Jeannerat, H., & Lavanchy, P. (2024). Transformative social innovation in, of and by the city: Beyond mission-driven policy rationales. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 52, 100890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2024.100890

Manniche, J., Moodysson, J., & Testa, S. (2017). Combinatorial Knowledge Bases: An Integrative and Dynamic Approach to Innovation Studies. Economic Geography, 93(5), 480–499. https://doi.org/10.1080/00130095.2016.1205948

Miörner, J., & Binz, C. (2021). Towards a multi-scalar perspective on transition trajectories. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 40, 172–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2021.06.004

Rodríguez Aboytes, J. G., & Barth, M. (2020). Transformative learning in the field of sustainability: A systematic literature review (1999-2019). International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 21(5), 993–1013. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-05-2019-0168

Schot, J., & Steinmueller, W. E. (2018). Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change. Research Policy, 47(9), 1554–1567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.011

Strambach, S., & Klement, B. (2012). Cumulative and Combinatorial Micro-dynamics of Knowledge: The Role of Space and Place in Knowledge Integration. European Planning Studies, 20(11), 1843–1866. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.723424

Tödtling, F., Trippl, M., & Desch, V. (2022). New directions for RIS studies and policies in the face of grand societal challenges. European Planning Studies, 30(11), 2139–2156. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2021.1951177

Trippl, M., Seiringer, S. B., & & Kastrup, J. (2024). Challenge-oriented regional innovation systems: towards a research agenda. Investigaciones Regionales – Journal of Regional Research, 2024(60), 11761–11766. https://investigacionesregionales.org/es/article/challenge-oriented-regional-innovation-systems-towards-a-research-agenda/

Truffer, B., & Coenen, L. (2012). Environmental Innovation and Sustainability Transitions in Regional Studies. Regional Studies, 46(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2012.646164

Urmetzer, S., Lask, J., Vargas-Carpintero, R., & Pyka, A. (2020). Learning to change: Transformative knowledge for building a sustainable bioeconomy. Ecological Economics, 167, 106435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106435

Uyarra, E., Ribeiro, B., & Dale-Clough, L. (2019). Exploring the normative turn in regional innovation policy: responsibility and the quest for public value. European Planning Studies, 27(12), 2359–2375. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1609425

Vale, M., Peponi, A., Carvalho, L., Veloso, A. P., Queirós, M., & Morgado, P. (2024). Are peripheral regions in troubled waters for sustainability transitions? A systematic analysis of the literature. European Urban and Regional Studies, 31(2), 116–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/09697764231194316

van Winden, W., & Carvalho, L. (2019). Intermediation in public procurement of innovation: How Amsterdam’s startup-in-residence programme connects startups to urban challenges. Research Policy, 48(9), 103789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.04.013

Submission Instructions

Authors interested should email an extended abstract of about 800 words (excl. references) to all guest editors (Anna Butzin butzin@iat.eu, Luís Carvalho lcarvalho@fep.up.pt,  Hugues Jeannerat hugues.jeannerat@unine.ch, Jesper Manniche jesper.manniche@crt.dk) by the 16th of May 2025.

All contributing authors will receive further information regarding the outcome of their abstract submission and the submission deadline for full papers following the call. The anticipated deadline for submission of full papers for peer review is 15th December 2025. All selected papers will be subject to the journal’s usual peer review process.

We welcome informal inquiries relating to the Special Issue, proposed topics, and potential fit with the Special Issue objectives. Please direct any questions on the Special Issue to the guest editors.

Instructions for Authors

Submit an Article

Submit a Manuscript

Special issue page

---

Special Issue Editor(s)

Olle Järv, University of Helsinki | Philippe Gerber, Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER) | Ate Poorthuis, KU Leuven

Moving and interacting across borders: a people-centric approach to reimagine border regions

Abstract deadline: 10 May 2025

Manuscript deadline: 15 October 2025

Border regions are generally defined as regions that are geographically close to a state border and interact with and are influenced by regions on the other side. Cross-border interaction across economic, governance, social and cultural perspectives can form cross-border regions – regions that function as one system across the border (Jackson et al. 2004). Due to these valuable interactions, border regions can serve as resources (Sohn 2014) and living laboratories to engender territorial integration at a wider geographical scale (Hooper & Kramsch 2004).

However, research often defines and examines border regions based on top-down, pre-assigned administrative units for ease of policymaking, without considering where, when and how cross-border interactions occur in reality. For example, in the European Union border regions consist of “NUTS 3” administrative units aligning with a national border. While institutional cooperation in private and public sectors is examined (Blatter 2004; Dörry & Decoville 2014), cross-border interactions of people are less often studied. Rephrasing Hägerstrand’s seminal paper (1970), we could ask: “what about people in border region science”?

Twenty-five years ago, the special issue “Borders, Border Regions and Territoriality: Contradictory Meanings, Changing Significance” published in Regional Studies foresaw that research on “space of places” would give way to “space of flows” amid an emerging borderless world (Anderson & O’Dowd 1999; p.594). Indeed, recent attempts have started to try to redefine cross-border regions based on interaction potential proxied through the number of people residing within a certain distance or travel time from the state border (Jakubowski et al. 2022; Bertram et al. 2023), and based on border permeability (Medeiros 2019). Initial efforts are also made to reimagine functional border regions as cross-border living areas (Coletti et al. 2024) and operationalize it based on actual cross-border mobilities of people (Drevon et al. 2018; Järv et al. 2023; Aagesen et al. 2023). Despite these recent efforts, a people-centric perspective on (and “space of flows” of) border regions remain under-examined, and the multilayered nature of border regions is less acknowledged in research and practice.

This special issue seeks to challenge the current status quo in the definition of and research on border regions. It calls for a rethinking and redefinition of (functional) border regions, providing a more nuanced understanding of the various layers that contribute to the functioning of border regions. The collection of papers will focus on border regions from a people-centric perspective, examining flows of mobilities and social interactions. This advances theoretical and conceptual developments in research, and policy debates, and supports evidence-based policymaking for border regions.

The special issue will welcome studies that make the following contributions to border region research.

First, address the perspective of people in border region research by focusing on cross-border interactions of people (e.g. local communities) and their social practices and spatial mobilities, which form the functional border region. This includes cross-border commuting, residential mobility, shopping and consumption of services, visiting friends and relatives as well as sustaining social networks across the border.

Second, mitigate the theory-practice gap by tackling the discrepancy between current empirical research based on predefined nation-state administrative delineations of border regions and theoretical advancements on transnational spaces (e.g. “soft spaces”, “fuzzy boundaries”) and on functional regions regarding “spaces of flows” (be it people, goods, information etc).

Third, foster the discussion on the nexus between national and supranational regional policy and governance in the context of border regions, and explore how new approaches can be implemented in the planning, development and governance of functional border regions, not only in the European Union but around the globe.

We are interested in papers that address the following (non-exhaustive) topics:

• How to theoretically (re)define border regions through spatial and social interactions of people and “spaces of flows”?
• How to empirically measure and analyse functional border regions from a people-centric perspective?
• What new insights about functional border regions can a people-centric perspective provide?
• How (functional) cross-border regions in a wide range of geographic contexts, especially those understudied in existing border region research (i.e. outside of the European Union) take place?
• How data and inferred information from a people-centric perspective can support policy, planning and governance of border regions from various geographical as well as social and economic contexts?

We invite submissions from researchers in the fields of geography, regional studies, urban planning, public and regional policy, and related fields. Conceptual, theoretical and empirical submissions (both qualitative and quantitative) are welcome. We especially encourage studies from outside Europe focusing on different border regions and contexts around the globe.

References

Aagesen, H. W., Järv, O., & Gerber, P. (2023). The effect of COVID-19 on cross- border mobilities of people and functional border regions: The Nordic case study from Twitter data. Geografska Annaler: Series B, Hum. Geography, 105(4), 356-378. 10.1080/04353684.2022.2101135

James Anderson & Liam O’Dowd (1999). Borders, Border Regions and Territoriality: Contradictory Meanings, Changing Significance. Regional Studies, 33:7, 593-604, 10.1080/00343409950078648

Bertram, D., Chilla, T., & Hippe, S. (2023). Cross-border mobility: Rail or road? Space- time-lines as an evidence base for policy debates. Journal of Borderlands Studies, 39(5), 913-930. 10.1080/08865655.2023.2249917

Blatter, J. (2004). From ‘spaces of place’ to ‘spaces of flows’? Territorial and functional governance in cross-border regions in Europe and North America. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28: 530-548. 10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00534.x

Coletti, R., Chilla, T., & Salerno, G. (2024). Cross-border living areas as popularisation of cross-border integration?: Debating ‘Bacino di vita’and ‘Bassin de vie’. European Journal of Spatial Development, 21(4). 10.5281/zenodo.13836891

Drevon, G., Gerber, P., Klein, O., & Enaux, C. (2018). Measuring Functional Integration by Identifying the Trip Chains and the Profles of Cross-Border Workers: Empirical Evidences from Luxembourg. Journal of Borderlands Studies, 33 (4), 549:568. 10.1080/08865655.2016.1257362

Dörry, S., & A. Decoville (2016). Governance and Transportation Policy Networks in the Cross-Border Metropolitan Region of Luxembourg: A Social Network Analysis. European Urban and Regional Studies 23: 69–85. 10.1177/0969776413490528

Hägerstrand, T. (1970). What About People in Regional Science?. Papers of the Regional Science Association 24: 6–21. 10.1007/BF01936872

Hooper, B. & Kramsch, O. (2004). Cross-Border Governance in the European Union. Research in Transnationalism. Routledge.

Jackson, P., Crang P., & Dwyer, C. (2004). Transnational Spaces. Routledge.

Jakubowski, A., Trykacz, K., Studzieniecki, T. & Skibiński, J. (2022). Identifying Cross-Border Functional Areas: Conceptual Background and Empirical Findings from Polish Borderlands. European Planning Studies 30(12): 2433–55. 10.1080/09654313.2021.1958760

Järv, O., Aagesen, H. W., Väisänen, T., & Massinen, S. (2022). Revealing mobilities of people to understand cross-border regions: Insights from Luxembourg using social media data. European Planning Studies, 31(8), 1754-1775. 10.1080/09654313. 2022.2108312

Medeiros, E. (2019). Cross-Border transports and cross-border mobility in EU border regions. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 7(1), 1–12. 10.1016/j.cstp.2018.11.001

Sohn, C. (2014). Modelling Cross-Border Integration: The Role of Borders as a Resource. Geopolitics, 19 (3), 587:608. 10.1080/14650045.2014.913029

Submission Instructions

Authors interested in publishing in the Special Issue should email an abstract of about 500 words to Olle Järv (olle.jarv@helsinki.fi) by the 10th of May 2025, and after the first screening, the decision on abstract acceptance will be released by 26th of May 2025.

Full Manuscripts should be received by 15th of October 2025 for review and should be submitted via the journal’s online submission system. Please select the Special Issue title on submission. All submissions are subject to the journal’s usual, full peer review process.

Instructions for Authors

Submit an Article

Find the T&F page here. 

Submit a Manuscript

Special issue page

---

Special Issue Editor(s)

Philip Tomlinson, University of Bath

Policy Debates is an interdisciplinary forum for the analysis of policy and practice issues in regional, local and urban development. It connects academic and practitioner communities by exploring the interface between academic debates and policy design, implementation and results. We publish papers that engage with major strands of contemporary policy thinking and that improve our understanding of how and why policies work, or don’t. The result is papers published in Policy Debates are generally highly cited and receive high numbers of downloads.

Papers in Policy Debates need to be:

• Relevant – providing practical insights into the policy context, how policies work and drawing lessons.
• Novel – offering new approaches, new perspectives or new understanding.
• Analytical – exploring and explaining key policy issues
• Accessible – encouraging and opening debates within an interdisciplinary and international audience
• Stimulating – prompting new thinking on existing or emerging policy debates.

Potential contributors are encouraged to discuss their ideas with the Policy Debates section editor, Philip Tomlinson mnsprt@bath.ac.uk

Special issue page

---

More information

Special issue page

---

Special Issue Editor(s)

Felicia Fai, University of Bath | David Bailey, University of Birmingham | Phil Tomlinson, University of Bath

Manuscript deadline: 1st September 2025

Industrial policy is back in vogue (Bailey et al., 2023; De Propris, 2024). At the macro-level, policymakers have emphasised the importance of (and begun to implement) so-called mission led industrial policies to meet societal challenges, such as climate change and the transition to net-zero technologies (Mazzucato, 2021). This is evident with the Biden administration in the USA; the Inflation Reduction Act (2022) and CHIPS & Science Act (2022) committed over $2 trillion of funding to support the US healthcare, renewables, and clean-tech sectors (Gansauer, 2024). The EU’s response is a $250 billion Green Deal Industrial Plan, and the by-passing of state-aid rules to fast-track investment and skills upgrading in green sectors. Procurement policies are also being re-geared to support domestic manufacturing. In the UK, the new ‘mission-driven’ government also has ambitions for green technologies, to encourage greater resilience, and ensure security of supply in manufacturing supply chains ‘securonomics’ (The Financial Times, 21/5/24).

While these policies are touted as ‘mission led’, there are concerns the interventions represent a new era of protectionist trade policies, which are likely to have disruptive and displacement effects – with winners and losers – that play out at regional levels. There are also fears that mission-led policies are top-down (Henderson et al., 2023), highly selective, technology-policy focused, with insufficient consideration of differential regional impacts. Regions with existing capabilities, enhanced knowledge bases, skillsets and specialisms, and business and social networks may be in a better position to benefit from ‘mission-led’ initiatives. This will have implications for addressing (existing) regional inequalities. Local policymakers and place leaders will need to adjust place-based policies to ensure their region can take advantage of central government initiatives. Balancing efficiency and equity in the design and implementation of mission-led policy presents national and regional policymakers with significant challenges. Yet knowledge of the socio-economic regional impacts of mission-led policies are lacking and, as such, are typically ignored in national policy discourses.

These contemporary and salient issues are underexplored in the regional studies literature. This special issue seeks to explore these, (and related) issues through a collection of papers that consider how regions and regional policymakers can better align their place-based policy agendas to deliver regional development within the wider social and economic contexts of the new ‘mission-led’ industrial policies pursued by national and supranational states. The collection will draw on a mix of studies that can inform better place-based policymaking and placemaking. We welcome papers from anywhere across the globe where ‘mission-led’ policies are being pursued and crucially, their regional implications.

We are interested in papers that address the following (non-exhaustive) topics:

• Mission-led approaches to sustainability transitions, and their implication for and upon regions.
• Mission-led approaches to digital transitions to tackle regional and local digital divides.
• Tensions between mission-led policies that prioritise leading technologies and sectors and place-based policies to reduce regional inequalities.
• The regional implications of nationally focused mission-led policies (and ‘securonomics’) undertaken by major economies (i.e., US, EU, UK, China) for global supply chain resilience, manufacturing rebuilding and technology security.
• What multi-level institutional and governance arrangements (local, regional, national, and supra-national) are needed for the effective implementation of mission-led policies?
• The contradictions and compatibilities of regional and national policymaking under mission-led approaches, and their implications for inclusive regional development.
• The implications of mission-led policies for clusters and regional innovation ecosystems.
• The capabilities and constraints of ‘left behind’ regions (industrial, rural and coastal) to participate in and benefit from mission-led policies in the context of reducing regional inequalities.
• Demand-side perspectives on mission-led policy and regional impacts.

We invite submissions from researchers in the fields of regional studies, economic geography, industrial and regional policy, and related fields. Conceptual, theoretical and empirical submissions – qualitative and quantitative are welcome, as well as case studies from different regions/cities and contexts.

References

Bailey, D., Pitelis, C. N., & Tomlinson, P. R. (2023). ‘Place-Based Industrial and Regional Strategy – Levelling the Playing Field’. Regional Studies, 57(6), 977-983. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2023.2168260

De Propris, L. (2024). Globalisation must work for as many regions as possible. Regional Studies, 58(7), 1505–1508. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2024.2330618

Financial Times (21/5/24) ‘Labour sets out ‘securonomics’ vision to avoid inflationary shocks’, Financial Times, https://www.ft.com/content/15d6a761-4efe-4ac8-ba51-4ee2a6095304

Gansauer, G (2024) ‘For growth or equity: A taxonomy of ‘Bidenomics’ place-based policies and implications for US regional inequality’, Regional Studies

Henderson, D., Morgan, K., & Delbridge, R. (2023). Putting missions in their place: micro-missions and the role of universities in delivering challenge-led innovation. Regional Studies, 58(1), 208–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2023.2176840

Mazzucato, M (2021) Mission Economy: a moonshoot guide to changing capitalism, Allen Lane – Penguin, London

Submission Instructions

Authors interested in publishing in the special issue should email an abstract of approximately 500 words to Felicia Fai (F.M.Fai@bath.ac.uk) by the 31^st January 2025, and after the first screening, the decision on abstract acceptance will be released by 28^th February 2025.

Full manuscripts should be received by 1st of September 2025 for review and should be submitted via the journal’s online submission system. Please select the special issue title on submission. All submissions are subject to the journal’s usual, full peer review process.

The guest editors intend to host a Special Session at the RSA 2025 conference in Porto between 6^th-9^th May 2025, where draft papers can be presented and discussed. It should be noted, however, that invitations to the RSA Conference Special Session does not guarantee a paper’s acceptance to the special issue.

Submit a Manuscript

Special issue page

---

Special Issue Editor(s)

John Harrison, Loughborough University

The Urban and Regional Horizons section publishes agenda setting papers that seek to stimulate new thinking and develop novel approaches for addressing issues of profound relevance and significance to our changing world.

Papers should reflect on past theoretical and empirical research and identify fruitful news fields of enquiry and conceptual/methodological approaches.

Papers are expected to be ambitious and challenging while also being accessible to a broad audience.

Potential contributors are encouraged to discuss their ideas with the Urban and Regional Horizons section editor, John Harrison (j.harrison4@lboro.ac.uk)

Special issue page

---