## 4 Results  
Table 3 shows the values of the different resources and capabilities in Gran Canaria and Tenerife. As each indicator has a different measurement unit, they should be unified on a 100 basis. For each indicator, the value 100 is assigned to the maximum ranked territory, while an equivalent value is given to the remaining ones [19]. In the case where the variables are a combination of indicators, a weight is assigned to each of them, taking into account the opinion of industry and academic experts interviewed and by using a Saaty matrix [61]. This procedure is based on a square matrix with the indicators to be weighted. In this way, a comparison matrix between pairs of indicators is established, comparing the importance of one against the others. Subsequently, the priority vector and the weights of each indicator are determined. The weights obtained are rounded to multiples of five. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Variables** & **GC** & **TF** & **GC** & **TF** & **Weights (\%)** & **GC** & **TF** \\ \hline \multicolumn{8}{c}{**Basic resources**} \\ ATR & 6473 & 8853 & 73.11 & 100.00 & 100 & 73.11 & 100.00 \\ \multicolumn{8}{c}{**Complementary resources**} \\ Market growth & 3.44 & 4.95 & 69.49 & 100.00 & 15 & \\ Human capital1 & 30.9 & 19.3 & 100.00 & 62.46 & 25 & 95.42 & 64.84 \\ Human capital2 & 312 & 178 & 100.00 & 57.05 & 60 & \\ \hline \multicolumn{8}{c}{Potential of resources:} \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Standardized values of resources capabilities in Gran Canaria (GC) and Tenerife (TF). Finally, combining the weights with the indicator values, an assessment for each one of the resources and capabilities is obtained. The results in Table 3 show that, although the two islands have a similar potential of resources (GC: 168.53; TF: 164.84), Tenerife has a better available territorial resource for the development of wind power, while Gran Canaria has more complementary resources, mainly due to its better endowment of human capital. As far as the capabilities are concerned, Table 3 shows that Gran Canaria has a higher potential of capabilities than Tenerife (GC: 386.07; TF: 274.78). Specifically, Gran Canaria shows a better performance in the proportion of renewable energy over the total electrical energy, as well as in innovative behavior indicators. Tenerife enjoys better governance because, although Gran Canaria outperforms Tenerife in terms of management efficiency and promotion of the industry by the insular government, the latter has received more funds for the development of the sector and it also reaches a sounder coordination between the administration and industry firms. Concerning the total potential of resources and capabilities, Tenerife only possess 79.26% of those of Gran Canaria. With this evaluation, we draw a radial graph that defines a polygon for each island analyzed. Taking as a reference the national diamond [32], it is assumed that the critical factors of territory competitiveness are related to each other with a mutual influence. Thus, \" [...] their relationship is better characterized by a multiplicative combination than by an additive combination. A country in which all four determining factors show an average value is more competitive than a country where two values are high and two are low\" [16]. In this case, the measure of the competitiveness for each island is done with a six-vertex polygon which represents the combination of its resources and capabilities (Figure 6). The territory resources and capabilities assessment is then calculated as a ratio between the polygon area that represents each island and the maximum polygon area, with a rank of 100 in all the factors [19], as shown in Table 4. These results reveal that Gran Canaria achieves better resources and capabilities assessment (100.00) compared to Tenerife (63.12). Table 5 shows the values of the outcomes in Gran Canaria and Tenerife. Again, as each indicator has a different measurement unit, the indicators should be unified on a 100 basis.