Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Technology transfer and entrepreneurship: cross-national analysis

  • Published:
The Journal of Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to improve our understanding of the links between technology transfer, entrepreneurship and the institutional setting in explaining both the competitiveness of firms and the economic performance of places, albeit a city, region, state or country. We accomplish this objective by presenting a framework for the cross-national analysis of different regional contexts. Finally, we introduce the papers included in this special issue in the International journal of Technology Transfer on ‘Technology Transfer and Entrepreneurship: Cross-National Analysis’.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acs, Z. J., Anselin, L., & Varga, A. (2002). Patents and innovation counts as measures of regional production of new knowledge. Research Policy, 31(7), 1069–1085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., & Armington, C. (2006). Entrepreneurship, geography, and American economic growth (pp. 1183–1211). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1988). Innovation in large and small firms: An empirical analysis. The American Economic Review, 78(4), 678–690.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1989). Small-firm entry in US manufacturing. Economica, 56(222), 255–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., Braunerjhelm, P., & Carlsson, B. (2003). The missing link: The knowledge filter and endogenous growth. Stockholm: Center for Business and Policy Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Carlsson, B. (1991). Flexible technology and firm size. Small Business Economics, 3(4), 307–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1994). R&D spillovers and innovative activity. Managerial and Decision Economics, 15(1994), 131–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Lehmann, E. E. (2013). The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 41(4), 757–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., Autio, E., & Szerb, L. (2014). National systems of entrepreneurship: Measurement issues and policy implications. Research Policy, 43(3), 476–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., Braunerhjelm, P., Audretsch, D. B., & Carlsson, B. (2009). The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 32(1), 15–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., Lee, S. Y., & Florida, R. (2004). Creativity and entrepreneurship. Regional Studies, 38, 879–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal, R., Audretsch, D., & Sarkar, M. B. (2007). The process of creative construction: Knowledge spillovers, entrepreneurship, and economic growth. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(3–4), 263–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almeida, P., & Kogut, B. (1999). Localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers in regional networks. Management Science, 45(7), 905–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amit, R., Glosten, L., & Muller, E. (1993). Challenges to theory development in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Management Studies, 1993(30), 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anselin, L., Varga, A., & Acs, Z. J. (2000). Geographical spillovers and university research: A spatial econometric perspective. Growth and Change, 31(4), 501–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K. (1962). Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), The rate and direction of inventive activity: Economic and social factors (pp. 609–625). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K. (1996). The rational foundations of economic behavior: Proceedings of the IEA conference held in Turin, Italy. London: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B. (1995). Innovation and industry evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B. (2005). The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship and economic growth. Research on Technological Innovation, Management and Policy, 9, 37–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B. (2007). Entrepreneurship capital and economic growth. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(1), 63–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., Bönte, W., & Keilbach, M. (2008). Entrepreneurship capital and its impact on knowledge diffusion and economic performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(6), 687–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., & Keilbach, M. (2007). The theory of knowledge spillover entrepreneurship. Journal of Management Studies, 44(7), 1242–1254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., & Keilbach, M. (2008). Resolving the knowledge paradox: Knowledge-spillover entrepreneurship and economic growth. Research Policy, 37(10), 1697–1705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., & Lehmann, E. E. (2005). Does the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship hold for regions? Research Policy, 34(8), 1191–1202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., & Lehmann, E. (2006). Entrepreneurial access and absorption of knowledge spillovers: Strategic board and managerial composition for competitive advantage. Journal of Small Business Management, 44(2), 155–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., Lehmannb, E. E., & Warning, S. (2005). University spillovers and new firm location. Research Policy, 34, 1113–1122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., Stephan, P. E. (1996). Company-scientist locational links: The case of biotechnology. The American Economic Review, 86(3), 641–652.

  • Audretsch, D. B., & Vivarelli, M. (1996). Firms size and R&D spillovers: Evidence from Italy. Small Business Economics, 8(3), 249–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanchflower, D. G. (2000). Self-employment in OECD countries. Labour Economics, 7(5), 471–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (1998). Entrepreneurship and the youth labour market problem: A report for the OECD. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, M. D., Sørensen, J. B., & Beckman, C. M. (2002). Coming from good stock: Career histories and new venture formation (Vol. 19, pp. 229–262). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.

  • Caiazza, R. (2013). The Italian system of innovation: Strengths and weaknesses. Journal of Chinese Entrepreneurship, 5(2), 161–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caiazza, R. (2014a). Factors affecting spin-off creation: Macro, meso and micro level analysis. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 8(2), 103–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caiazza, R. (2014b). Benchmarking of business incubators. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 21(6), 1062–1069. ISSN: 1463-5771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caiazza, R. (2014c). What drives firms to operate in south Mediterranean countries? World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 10(4), 519–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caiazza, R. (2015). Explaining innovation in mature industries: Evidences from Italian SMEs. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management. ISSN: 0953-7325 (print), 1465-3990 (online).

  • Caiazza, R., & Audretsch, D. (2013). A general framework for classifying spin-offs. International Review of Entrepreneurship, 11(1), 15–30.

  • Caiazza, R., & Audretsch, D. B. (2015). Can a sports mega-event support hosting city’s economic, socio-cultural and political development? Tourism Management Perspective, 14, 1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caiazza, R., Audretsch, D., Volpe, T., & Singer, D. J. (2014a). Policy and institutions facilitating entrepreneurial spin-offs: USA, Asia and Europe. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, 3(2), 186–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caiazza, R., Richardson, A., & Audretsch, D. B. (2015). Knowledge effects on competitiveness: From firms to regional advantage. The Journal of Technology Transfer. doi:10.1007/s10961-015-9425-8.

  • Caiazza, R., & Volpe, T. (2014). Main rules and actors of Italian system of innovation: How to become competitive in spin-off activity. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 8(3), 188–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caiazza R., & Volpe, T. (2015a). M&A process: A literature review and research agenda. Business Process Management Journal, 21(1), 205–220.

  • Caiazza, R., & Volpe, T. (2015b). Interaction despite of diversity: Is it possible? Journal of Management Development, 34(6), 743–750.

  • Caiazza, R., Volpe, T., & Audretsch, D. (2014b). Innovation in agro-food chain: Policies, actors and activities. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 8(3), 180–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callejón, M., & Segarra, A. (1999). Business dynamics and efficiency in industries and regions: The case of Spain. Small Business Economics, 13(4), 253–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caniëls, M. C. (2000). Knowledge spillovers and economic growth: Regional growth differentials across Europe. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar.

  • Capello, R. (2001). Urban innovation and collective learning: Theory and evidence from five metropolitan cities in Europe. In M. M. Fischer & J. Fröhlich (Eds.), Knowledge, complexity and innovation systems (pp. 181–208). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Carree, M. A., & Thurik, A. R. (1999). Industrial structure and economic growth (pp. 86–110). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coe, D. T., & Helpman, E. (1995). International R&D spillovers. European Economic Review, 39(5), 859–887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1991). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(1), 7–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Djankov, S., La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2002). The regulation of entry. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(1), 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorfman, N. S. (1983). Route 128: The development of a regional high technology economy. Research Policy, 12(6), 299–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fritsch, M. (2001). Co-operation in regional innovation systems. Regional Studies, 35(4), 297–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gartner, W. B. (1988). Who is an entrepreneur? Is the wrong question. American Journal of Small Business, 12(4), 11–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gatti, C., Volpe, L., & Vagnani, G. (2015). Interdependence among productive activities: Implications for exploration and exploitation. Journal of Business Research, 68(3), 711–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghio, N., Guerini, M., Lehmann, E. E., & Rossi-Lamastra, Cristina. (2015). The emergence of the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 44(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, B. A., McDougall, P. P., & Audretsch, D. B. (2008). Clusters, knowledge spillovers and new venture performance: An empirical examination. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(4), 405–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 109–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z. (1992). The search for R&D spillovers (No. w3768). National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Hagedoorn, J. (1993). Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences. Strategic Management Journal, 14(5), 371–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M. (2001). The rise of anthropological theory: A history of theories of culture. AltaMira Press.

  • Jaffe, A. B. (1986). Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: Evidence from firms’ patents, profits and market value. National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Jaffe, A. B. (1989). Real effects of academic research. The American Economic Review, 79(5), 957–970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klepper, S. (2007). Disagreements, spinoffs, and the evolution of Detroit as the capital of the US automobile industry. Management Science, 53(4), 616–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klepper, S., & Sleeper, S. (2005). Entry by spinoffs. Management Science, 51(8), 1291–1306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer, M., & Asakawa, K. (2004). Pushing scientists into the marketplace: Promoting science entrepreneurship. California Management Review, 46(3), 55–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levie, J., & Autio, E. (2011). Regulatory burden, rule of law, and entry of strategic entrepreneurs: An international panel study. Journal of Management Studies, 48(6), 1392–1419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liebeskind, J. P. (1996). Knowledge, strategy, and the theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 93–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., & Siegel, D. S. (2005). Generating science-based growth: An econometric analysis of the impact of organizational incentives on university–industry technology transfer. European Journal of Finance, 11(3), 169–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, A., Siegel, D., Wright, M., & Ensley, M. D. (2005). The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: Managerial and policy implications. Research Policy, 34(7), 981–993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Louis, K., Jones, L. M., Anderson, M. S., Blumenthal, D., & Campbell, E. G. (2001). Entrepreneurship, secrecy, and productivity: A comparison of clinical and non-clinical life sciences faculty. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(3), 233–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Low, M. B., & MacMillan, I. C. (1988). Enterprenership: Past research and future challenges. Journal of Management, 14(2), 139–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maurseth, P. B., & Verspagen, B. (1998). Knowledge spillovers in Europe and its consequences for systems of innovation.

  • Moran, P., & Ghoshal, S. (1999). Markets, firms, and the process of economic development. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 390–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of US universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994–1009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1996). Competitive advantage, agglomeration economies, and regional policy. International Regional Science Review, 19(1–2), 85–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, F. M. (1982). Inter-industry technology flows and productivity growth. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 64(4), 627–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schildt, H. A., Maula, M. V., & Keil, T. (2005). Explorative and exploitative learning from external corporate ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 493–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle (Vol. 55). Transaction.

  • Shane, S. (2001). Technology regimes and new firm formation. Management Science, 47(9), 1173–1190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S., & Stuart, T. (2002). Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science, 48(1), 154–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorenson, O., & Audia, P. G. (2000). The social structure of entrepreneurial activity: Geographic concentration of footwear production in the United States, 1940–19891. American Journal of Sociology, 106(2), 424–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorenson, O., & Baum, J. A. (2003). Editors’introduction: Geography and strategy: The strategic management of space and place (Vol. 20, pp. 1–19). Emerald Group.

  • Spence, A. (1984). Cost reduction, competition, and industry performance. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 52(1), 101–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, U., & Uhlaner, L. M. (2010). Performance-based vs socially supportive culture: A cross-national study of descriptive norms and entrepreneurship. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(8), 1347–1364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storey, D. J., & Jones, A. M. (1987). New firm formation—A labour market approach to industrial entry. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 34(1), 37–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 27–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szulanski, G. (2003). Sticky knowledge: Barriers to knowing in the firm. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P., & Fox-Kean, M. (2005). Patent citations and the geography of knowledge spillovers: A reassessment. American Economic Review, 95(1), 450–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, A. C. (1999). A mathematical framework for the key characteristic process. Research in Engineering Design, 11(3), 145–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thurik, A. R. (1999). Entrepreneurship, industrial transformation and growth. The Sources of Entrepreneurial Activity, 11, 29–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vagnani, G. (2012). Exploration and long-run organizational performance the moderating role of technological interdependence. Journal of Management. doi:10.1177/0149206312466146.

  • Van de Ven, H. (1993). The development of an infrastructure for entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(3), 211–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varga, A. (2000). Local academic knowledge transfers and the concentration of economic activity. Journal of Regional Science, 40(2), 289–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Indiana University, 1315 E. 10th Street, Suite 201, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA

    David Audretsch

  2. Parthenope University, 13, Generale Parisi Street, Suite 415, 80132, Naples, Italy

    Rosa Caiazza

Authors
  1. David Audretsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rosa Caiazza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rosa Caiazza.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Audretsch, D., Caiazza, R. Technology transfer and entrepreneurship: cross-national analysis. J Technol Transf 41, 1247–1259 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9441-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9441-8

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation