Economic opportunity in the 21st century privileges people and places with the “right mix” of human capital to develop and apply digital technologies, and disadvantages those without. Increasing socio-technical, socio-economic, and socio-spatial polarization underscores inclusion as a critically important dimension of innovation. Workforce development and entrepreneurial ecosystems each have implications for “inclusive innovation” in restructuring cities, but understanding their realistic prospects requires attention to local institutional capacity as well as the broader multilevel policy contexts in which they operate. This study compares inclusive innovation programs in Saint-Etienne, France and Greensboro North Carolina, two mid-sized restructuring cities operating in two different macro-institutional settings. Highly variable but not entirely idiosyncratic dynamics emerge in each case; inclusive innovation is integral in Saint Etienne and incidental in Greensboro but not a resounding success in either city. “Top-down” and “bottom-up” dynamics interact in different ways to shape outcomes, but power matters most for local policy choice. The decisive factor is explicit linkage to a commonly accepted urban development agenda that is supported politically by local government. Intermediary organizations lack influence, and the private sector is disengaged. These findings suggest the need to rethink assumptions about the actor configurations that determine urban development priorities.

21 世纪的经济机会使拥有“正确组合”人力资本来开发和应用数字技术的人和地方享有特权，而对没有的人则处于不利地位。越来越多的社会技术、社会经济和社会空间两极分化强调了包容性是创新的一个至关重要的维度。劳动力发展和创业生态系统都对重构城市的“包容性创新”产生影响，但了解它们的现实前景需要关注当地机构能力以及它们运作的更广泛的多层次政策背景。本研究比较了法国圣艾蒂安和北卡罗来纳州格林斯博罗的包容性创新计划，这两个中等规模的重组城市在两种不同的宏观制度环境中运作。在每种情况下都会出现高度可变但并非完全特殊的动态；包容性创新在圣艾蒂安是不可或缺的，在格林斯博罗是偶然的，但在这两个城市都没有取得巨大成功。“自上而下”和“自下而上”的动态以不同方式相互作用以塑造结果，但权力对地方政策选择最重要。决定性因素是与当地政府在政治上支持的普遍接受的城市发展议程的明确联系。中介组织缺乏影响力，私营部门不参与。这些发现表明需要重新思考关于决定城市发展优先事项的参与者配置的假设。“自上而下”和“自下而上”的动态以不同方式相互作用以塑造结果，但权力对地方政策选择最重要。决定性因素是与当地政府在政治上支持的普遍接受的城市发展议程的明确联系。中介组织缺乏影响力，私营部门不参与。这些发现表明需要重新思考关于决定城市发展优先事项的参与者配置的假设。“自上而下”和“自下而上”的动态以不同方式相互作用以塑造结果，但权力对地方政策选择最重要。决定性因素是与当地政府在政治上支持的普遍接受的城市发展议程的明确联系。中介组织缺乏影响力，私营部门不参与。这些发现表明需要重新思考关于决定城市发展优先事项的参与者配置的假设。