Innovation orchestration in rural-peripheral regions. A systematic review and research agenda

Despite its significance for rural revitalization, rural innovation has received little attention in the mainstream innovation literature (Foster and Heeks, 2016; Yin et al., 2019). However, more recently, increasing attention is paid to studying innovation in a rural context, as it is seen as an essential means of promoting competitiveness among the rural SMEs (Reidolf, 2016; Eder, 2019; Johnston and Prokop, 2021). While most firms may find it difficult to create necessary conditions for innovation adoption (Sapsed, Grantham, and Defillippi 2007), small and medium enterprises (here onwards SMEs) face additional challenges due to their limited resources and limited external knowledge scanning and processing abilities (Kirkels and Duysters 2010), thus seeking external support. Intermediaries in this regard have been considered vital institutional actors to facilitate external collaboration for innovation and the development of the capabilities of actors (Hoffmann and Schlosser 2001; Kaufmann and Tödtling 2002; Van Gils and Zwart 2004; Spithoven, Clarysse, & Knockaert, 2010; Dutt et al., 2016). However, there exists a black box in the literature to identify and understand the intermediary's engagements with the SMEs in rural-peripheral regions, aspiring to innovate, especially the mechanisms of their innovation support in geographically marginalized and peripheral regions small and micro-firms (Rigg et al., 2021).