Advertisement

Heterogeneity as a Key for Understanding Science and Technology Park Effects

Chapter
  • 222 Downloads
Part of the Palgrave Advances in the Economics of Innovation and Technology book series (PAEIT)

Abstract

Science and Technology Parks (STPs) have spread worldwide in recent decades. However, scientific evidence about their effect for on-park firms is mixed. This chapter draws on the literature to suggest that this is due, in part, to the fact that most studies do not consider the heterogeneous effects of on-park location. It is reasonable to expect some parks will be more effective and what is important is to understand why.

References

  1. Albahari, A., G. Catalano, and P. Landoni. 2013. Evaluation of National Science Park Systems: A Theoretical Framework and Its Application to the Italian and Spanish Systems. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 25: 599–614.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2013.785508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albahari, A., S. Perez-Canto, A. Barge-Gil, A. Modrego, S. Pérez-Canto, A. Barge-Gil, and A. Modrego. 2017. Technology Parks Versus Science Parks: Does the University Make the Difference? Technological Forecasting and Social Change 116: 13–28.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.11.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Albahari, A., A. Barge-Gil, S. Pérez-Canto, and A. Modrego. 2018a. The Influence of Science and Technology Park Characteristics on Firms’ Innovation Results. Papers in Regional Science 97: 253–279.  https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Albahari, A., M. Klofsten, and J.C. Rubio-Romero. 2018b. Science and Technology Parks: A Study of Value Creation for Park Tenants. The Journal of Technology Transfer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9661-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arthur, W.B. 1990. ‘Silicon Valley’ Locational Clusters: When Do Increasing Returns Imply Monopoly? Mathematical Social Sciences 19: 235–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beaudry, C., and A. Schiffauerova. 2009. Who’s Right, Marshall or Jacobs? The Localization Versus Urbanization Debate. Research Policy 38: 318–337.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.11.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bigliardi, B., A.I. Dormio, A. Nosella, and G. Petroni. 2006. Assessing Science Parks’ Performances: Directions from Selected Italian Case Studies. Technovation 26: 489–505.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2005.01.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cabral, R. 1998. Refining the Cabral-Dahab Science Park Management Paradigm. International Journal of Technology Management 16: 813–818.  https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.1998.002694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cadorin, E., M. Klofsten, A. Albahari, and H. Etzkowitz. 2019. Science Parks and the Attraction of Talents: Activities and Challenges. Triple Helix Journal 2019: 1–33.  https://doi.org/10.1163/21971927-00601002.
  10. Castells, M., and P. Hall. 1994. Technopoles of the World: The Making of the 21st Century Industrial Complexes. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Chan, K.Y.A., L.A.G. Oerlemans, and M.W. Pretorius. 2011. Innovation Outcomes of South African New Technology-Based Firms: A Contribution to the Debate on the Performance of Science Park Firms. The South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences 14: 361–378.Google Scholar
  12. Chen, C.J., and C.C. Huang. 2004. A Multiple Criteria Evaluation of High-Tech Industries for the Science-Based Industrial Park in Taiwan. Information Management 41: 839–851.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.02.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Colombo, M.G., and M. Delmastro. 2002. How Effective Are Technology Incubators? Evidence from Italy. Research Policy 31: 1103–1122.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(01)00178-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. del Castillo Hermosa, J., and B. Barroeta. 1998. The Technology Park at Beocillo: An Instrument for Regional Development in Castilla-León. Progress in Planning 49: 241–254.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-9006(98)00012-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dew, P., C. Leigh, R. Drew, D. Morris, and J. Curson. 1995. Collaborative Working Systems to Support User Interaction Within a Virtual Science Park. Information Services and Use 15: 213–227.  https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-1995-15305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Díez-Vial, I., and M. Fernández-Olmos. 2015. Knowledge Spillovers in Science and Technology Parks: How Can Firms Benefit Most? The Journal of Technology Transfer 40: 70–84.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-013-9329-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Diez-Vial, Isabel, and Marta Fernández-Olmos. 2017. The Effect of Science and Technology Parks on a Firm’s Performance: A Dynamic Approach Over Time. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 27 (3): 413–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Durand, R., and R. Coeurderoy. 2001. Age, Order of Entry, Strategic Orientation, and Organizational Performance. Journal of Business Venturing 16: 471–494.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(99)00061-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Durão, D., M. Sarmento, V. Varela, and L. Maltez. 2005. Virtual and Real-Estate Science and Technology Parks: A Case Study of Taguspark. Technovation 25: 237–244.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(03)00110-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Felsenstein, D. 1994. University-Related Science Parks – ‘Seedbeds‘ or ‘Enclaves’ of Innovation? Technovation 14: 93–110.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-4972(94)90099-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ferguson, R. 2004. Why Firms on Science Parks Should Not Be Expected to Show Better Performance – The Story of Twelve Biotechnology Firms. International Journal of Technology Management 28: 470–482.  https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtm.2004.005305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Folta, T.B., A.C. Cooper, and Y.S. Baik. 2006. Geographic Cluster Size and Firm Performance. Journal of Business Venturing 21: 217–242.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.04.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Freeman, J., G.R. Carroll, and M.T. Hannan. 1983. The Liability of Newness: Age Dependence in Organizational Death Rates. American Sociological Review 48: 692.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2094928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fukugawa, N. 2006. Science Parks in Japan and Their Value-Added Contributions to New Technology-Based Firms. International Journal of Industrial Organization 24: 381–400.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2005.07.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Glaeser, E.L., H.D. Kallal, J.A. Scheinkman, and A. Shleifer. 1992. Growth in Cities. Journal of Political Economy 100: 1126–1152.  https://doi.org/10.1086/261856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hansson, F., K. Husted, and J. Vestergaard. 2005. Second Generation Science Parks: From Structural Holes Jockeys to Social Capital Catalysts of the Knowledge Society. Technovation 25: 1039–1049.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2004.03.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hommen, L., D. Doloreux, and E. Larsson. 2006. Emergence and Growth of Mjärdevi Science Park in Linköping, Sweden. European Planning Studies 14: 1331–1361.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310600852555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hu, A.G. 2007. Technology Parks and Regional Economic Growth in China. Research Policy 36: 76–87.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.08.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hu, T.-S. 2008. Interaction Among High-Tech Talent and Its Impact on Innovation Performance: A Comparison of Taiwanese Science Parks at Different Stages of Development. European Planning Studies 16: 163–187.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310701814462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Huang, K.F., C.M.J. Yu, and D.H. Seetoo. 2012. Firm Innovation in Policy-Driven Parks and Spontaneous Clusters: The Smaller Firm the Better? The Journal of Technology Transfer 37: 715–731.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-012-9248-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Huergo, E., and J. Jaumandreu. 2004. How Does Probability of Innovation Change with Firm Age? Small Business Economics 22: 193–207.  https://doi.org/10.1023/b:sbej.0000022220.07366.b5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Leyden, D.P., A.N. Link, and D.S. Siegel. 2008. A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis of the Decision to Locate on a University Research Park. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 55: 23–28.  https://doi.org/10.1109/tem.2007.912810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Liberati, D., M. Marinucci, and G.M. Tanzi. 2016. Science and Technology Parks in Italy: Main Features and Analysis of Their Effects on the Firms Hosted. The Journal of Technology Transfer 41: 694–729.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9397-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Link, A.N. 2009. Understanding Research, Science and Technology Parks: Global Best Practices: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  35. Link, A.N., and J.T. Scott. 2005. Opening the Ivory Tower’s Door: An Analysis of the Determinants of the Formation of U.S. University Spin-off Companies. Universities and the Entrepreneurship Ecosystem 34: 37–43.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.05.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. ———. 2006. U.S. University Research Parks. Journal of Productivity Analysis 25: 43–55.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-006-7126-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Löfsten, H., and P. Lindelöf. 2002. Science Parks and the Growth of New Technology-Based Firms – Academic-Industry Links, Innovation and Markets. Research Policy 31: 859–876.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00153-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. ———. 2003. Determinants for an Entrepreneurial Milieu: Science Parks and Business Policy in Growing Firms. Technovation 23: 51–64.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(01)00086-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Macdonald, S. 1987. British Science Parks – Reflections on the Politics of High Technology. R and D Management 17: 25–37.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.1987.tb00045.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Malairaja, C., and G. Zawdie. 2008. Science Parks and University-Industry Collaboration in Malaysia. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 20: 727–739.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09537320802426432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Malecki, E.J. 2012. Regional Social Capital: Why It Matters. Regional Studies 46: 1023–1039.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2011.607806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Massey, D., and D. Wield. 1992. Science Parks: A Concept in Science, Society, and “Space” (A Realist Tale). Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 10: 411–422.  https://doi.org/10.1068/d100411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Minguillo, D., R. Tijssen, and M. Thelwall. 2015. Do Science Parks Promote Research and Technology? A Scientometric Analysis of the UK. Scientometrics 102: 701–725.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1435-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Montoro-Sánchez, Á., M. Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado, and E.M. Mora-Valentín. 2011. Effects of Knowledge Spillovers on Innovation and Collaboration in Science and Technology Parks. Journal of Knowledge Management 15: 948–970.  https://doi.org/10.1108/13673271111179307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Motohashi, K. 2013. The Role of the Science Park in Innovation Performance of Start-up Firms: An Empirical Analysis of Tsinghua Science Park in Beijing. Asia Pacific Business Review.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13602381.2012.673841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Phan, P.H., D.S. Siegel, and M. Wright. 2005. Science Parks and Incubators: Observations, Synthesis and Future Research. Journal of Business Venturing 20: 165–182.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2003.12.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Phillimore, J. 1999. Beyond the Linear View of Innovation in Science Park Evaluation – An Analysis of Western Australian Technology Park. Technovation 19: 673–680.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0166-4972(99)00062-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Quintas, P., D. Wield, and D. Massey. 1992. Academic-Industry Links and Innovation: Questioning the Science Park Model. Technovation 12: 161–175.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-4972(92)90033-e.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Radosevic, S., and M. Myrzakhmet. 2009. Between Vision and Reality: Promoting Innovation Through Technoparks in an Emerging Economy. Technovation 29: 645–656.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2009.04.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rowett, S., P.M. Dew, S. Saunders, E.J. Foster, and C.M. Leigh. 1996. A Virtual Science Park to Support Enriched Distance Learning. IEE Colloquium on Learning at a Distance: Developments in Media Technologies: 5–5.  https://doi.org/10.1049/ic:19960878.
  51. Salvador, E. 2011. Are Science Parks and Incubators Good “Brand Names” for Spin-Offs? The Case Study of Turin. The Journal of Technology Transfer 36: 203–232.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-010-9152-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Siegel, D.S., P. Westhead, and M. Wright. 2003a. Science Parks and the Performance of New Technology-Based Firms: A Review of Recent UK Evidence and an Agenda for Future Research. Small Business Economics 20: 177–184.  https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1022268100133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. ———. 2003b. Assessing the Impact of University Science Parks on Research Productivity: Exploratory Firm-Level Evidence from the United Kingdom. International Journal of Industrial Organization 21: 1357–1369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Squicciarini, M. 2008. Science Parks’ Tenants Versus Out-of-Park Firms: Who Innovates More? A Duration Model. The Journal of Technology Transfer 33: 45–71.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-007-9037-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. ———. 2009. Science Parks: Seedbeds of Innovation? A Duration Analysis of Firms’ Patenting Activity. Small Business Economics 32: 169–190.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-007-9075-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Stinchcombe, A. 1965. Social Structure and Organizations. In The Handbook of Organizations, ed. J.G. March, 142–193. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  57. Storey, D.J., and B.S. Tether. 1998. Public Policy Measures to Support New Technology-Based Firms in the European Union. Research Policy 26: 1037–1057.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(97)00058-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Vásquez-Urriago, Á.R., A. Barge-Gil, A. Modrego Rico, and E. Paraskevopoulou. 2014. The Impact of Science and Technology Parks on Firms’ Product Innovation: Empirical Evidence from Spain. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 24: 835–873.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-013-0337-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Vásquez-Urriago, Á.R., A. Barge-Gil, and A. Modrego Rico. 2016. Which Firms Benefit More from Being Located in a Science and Technology Park? Empirical Evidence for Spain. Research Evaluation 25: 107–117.  https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvv033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Vedovello, C. 1997. Science Parks and University-Industry Interaction. Technovation 17: 491–531.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(97)00027-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Westhead, P. 1997. R&D “Inputs” and “Outputs” of Technology-Based Firms Located on and off Science Parks. R and D Management 27: 45–62.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9310.00041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Westhead, P., and S. Batstone. 1998. Independent Technology-Based Firms: The Perceived Benefits of a Science Park Location. Urban Studies 35: 2197–2219.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098983845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Westhead, P., and D.J. Storey. 1995. Links Between Higher Education Institutions and High Technology Firms. Omega, International Journal of Management Science 23: 345–360.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(95)00021-F.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Yang, C.-H., K. Motohashi, and J.-R. Chen. 2009. Are New Technology-Based Firms Located on Science Parks Really More Innovative? Evidence from Taiwan. Research Policy 38: 77–85.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.09.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Zhang, H., and T. Sonobe. 2011. Development of Science and Technology Parks in China, 1988–2008. Economics: The Open Access Open-Assessment E-Journal 5: 1–25.  https://doi.org/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2011-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universidad de Málaga – School of Industrial EngineeringMálagaSpain

Personalised recommendations