Zusammenfassung
Kooperationen werden allgemeinhin als vorteilhaft für Forschungs- und Entwicklungsaktivitäten und damit als positiv für den langfristigen Erfolg von Unternehmen angesehen. Entsprechend ist die Unterstützung von Kooperations- und Netzwerkaktivitäten zu einem populären Instrument der Innovationspolitik geworden.
Der vorliegende Beitrag diskutiert dieses Instrument aus Sicht des Proximity-Ansatzes. Es wird dabei kritisch hinterfragt, wann eine solche Förderung gerechtfertigt ist und in welchen Situationen sie wahrscheinlich den größten Nutzen stiftet. Hierauf aufbauend werden beispielhaft die traditionelle Clusterpolitik und die EU-Forschungsrahmenprogrammme aus theoretischer Sicht bewertet und praktische Implikationen für die Innovationspolitik abgeleitet.
Notes
- 1.
Wir konzentrieren uns im Folgenden auf Kooperationen als eine Art der Wissensaustauschbeziehungen. Die gleiche Argumentation kann aber auf andere Interaktionen, bei denen es zu kollektiven Lernprozessen kommt, übertragen werden.
Literatur
Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 425–455.
Autant-Bernard, C., Billand, P., Frachisse, D., & Massard, N. (2007). Social distance versus spatial distance in R&D cooperation: Empirical evidence from European collaboration choices in micro and nanotechnologies. Papers in Regional Science, 86(3), 495–519. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1435-5957.2007.00132.x.
Balland, P.-A. (2011). Proximity and the evolution of collaborative networks: Evidence from R&D projects within the GNSS industry. Regional Studies, 46(6), 741–756.
Balland, P.-A., Boschma, R., & Frenken, K. (2014). Proximity and innovation: From statics to dynamics. Regional Studies, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2014.883598.
Barajas, A., & Huergo, E. (2010). International R&D cooperation within the EU framework programme: Empirical evidence for Spanish firms. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 19(1), 87–111.
Bathelt, H., Malmberg, A., & Maskell, P. (2004). Clusters and knowledge: Local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography, 28(1), 31–56. https://doi.org/10.1191/0309132504ph469oa.
BMBF. (2014). Bundesbericht Forschung und Innovation 2014. Berlin: Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF).
Boschma, R. A. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61–74.
Boschma, R., Neffke, F., & Henning, M. (2010). How do regions diversify over time? Industry relatedness and the development of new growth paths in regions, 0095. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ron_Boschma/publication/46454619_How_do_regions_diversify_over_time_Industry_relatedness_and_the_development_of_new_growth_paths_in_regions/links/00b7d522efd6244bd9000000/How-do-regions-diversify-over-time-Industry-rel.
Brakman, S., & Van Marrewijk, C. (2013). Reflections on cluster policies. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 6(2), 217–231. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rst001.
Brenner, T., & Schlump, C. (2011). Policy measures and their effects in the different phases of the cluster life-cycle. Regional Studies, 45(10), 1363–1386. https://doi.org/10.1080/02652030601135936.
Breschi, S., & Cusmano, L. (2004). Unveiling the texture of a European research area: Emergence of oligarchic networks under EU framework programmes. International Journal of Technology Management, 27(8), 747–772.
Breschi, S., & Lenzi, C. (2015). The role of external linkages and gatekeepers for the renewal and expansion of US cities’ knowledge base, 1990–2004. Regional Studies, 49(5), 782–797. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2014.954534.
Breschi, S., & Lissoni, F. (2009). Mobility of skilled workers and co-invention networks: An anatomy of localized knowledge flows. Journal of Economic Geography, 9(4), 439–468.
Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., & Malerba, F. (2003). Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification. Research Policy, 32(January 2001), 69–87.
Broekel, T. (2012). Collaboration intensity and regional innovation efficiency in Germany – A conditional efficiency approach. Industry and Innovation, 19(2), 155–179. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13662716.2012.650884.
Broekel, T. (2013). Do cooperative Research and Development (R&D) subsidies stimulate regional innovation efficiency? Evidence from Germany. Regional Studies, (September), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2013.812781.
Broekel, T. (2015). The co-evolution of proximities – A network level study. Regional Studies, 49(6), 921–935. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2014.1001732.
Broekel, T. (2016). Wissens- und Innovationsgeographie in der Wirtschaftsförderung – Grundlagen für die Praxis. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler.
Broekel, T., & Boschma, R. (2012). Knowledge networks in the Dutch aviation industry: The proximity paradox. Journal of Economic Geography, 12(2), 409–433. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbr010.
Broekel, T., & Graf, H. (2012). Public research intensity and the structure of German R&D networks : A comparison of 10 technologies. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 21(4), 345–372.
Broekel, T., Fornahl, D., & Morrison, A. (2015). Another cluster premium: Innovation subsidies and R&D collaboration networks. Research Policy, 44(8), 1431–1444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.05.002.
Buisseret, T. J., Cameron, H. M., & Georghiou, L. (1995). What difference does it make? Additionality in the public support of R&D in large firms. International Journal of Technology Management, 10, 587–600.
Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Cantner, U., & Graf, H. (2006). The network of innovators in Jena: An application of social network analysis. Research Policy, 35(4), 463–480.
Cantner, U., & Meder, A. (2007). Technological proximity and the choice of cooperation partners. Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, 2(1), 45–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11403-007-0018-y.
Cassi, L., & Plunket, A. (2013). Research collaboration in co-inventor networks: Combining closure, bridging and proximities. Regional Studies, (October 2014), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2013.816412.
Cassiman, B., & Veugelers, R. (2002). {R&D} cooperation and spillovers: Some evidence from Belgium. The American Economic Review, 92(4), 1169–1184.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.
Colombo, M. G. (1995). Firm size and cooperation: The determinants of cooperative agreemetns in information technology industries. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 2(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/758521094.
Crespo, J., Suire, R., & Vicente, J. (2016). Network structural properties for cluster long-run dynamics: Evidence from collaborative R&D networks in the European mobile phone industry. Industrial and Corporate Change, 25(2), 261–282. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtv032.
Czarnitzki, D., Doherr, T., Fier, A., Licht, G., Rammer, C., & Niggemann, H. (2002). Öffentliche Förderung der Forschungs- und Innovationsaktivitäten von Unternehmen in Deutschland. (November).
David, P. A., Hall, B. H., & Toole, A. A. (2000). Is public R&D a complement or a substitute for private R&D? A review of econometric evidence. Research Policy, 29(4–5), 497–529.
Dohse, D. (2000). Technology policy and the regions – The case of the BioRegio contest. Research Policy, 29(9), 1111–1133. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00077-3.
Duranton, G. (2011). California dreamin’: The feeble case for cluster policies. Review of Economic Analysis, 3, 3–45.
Edler, J., Cunningham, P., Gök, A., & Shapira, P. (2016). Handbook of innovation policy impact (Eu-SPRI forum on science, technology and innovation policy series). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Schoonhoven, C. B. (1996). Resource-based view of strategic alliance formation: Strategic and social effects in entrepreneurial firms. Organization Science, 7(2), 136–150.
Ejermo, O., & Karlsson, C. (2006). Interregional inventor networks as studied by patent coinventorships. Research Policy, 35, 412–430.
Engel, D., Eckl, V., & Rothgang, M. (2017). R&D funding and private R&D: Empirical evidence on the impact of the leading-edge cluster competition. Journal of Technology Transfer, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9609-5.
Expertenkomission Forschung und Innovation (EFI). (2017). Gutachten 2017 zu Forschung, Innovation und technologischer Leistungsfähigkeit Deutschlands. Efi.
Feldman, M. P., & Florida, R. (1994). The geographic sources of innovation: Technological infrastructure and product innovation in the United States. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 84(2), 210–229.
Feldman, M. P., & Kogler, D. F. (2010). Stylized facts in the geography of innovation. Handbook of the economics of innovation (Bd. 1). Amsterdam/Boston/Heidelberg: Elsevier B.V. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7218(10)01008-7.
Fier, A., & Harhoff, D. (2002). Die Evolution der bundesdeutschen Forschungs- und Technologiepolitik: Rückblick und Bestandsaufnahme. Perspektiven Der Wirtschaftspolitik, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2516.00092.
Fisher, R., Polt, W., & Vonortas, N. (2009). The impact of publicly funded research on innovation. CE. https://doi.org/10.2769/14877.
Fontagné, L., Koenig, P., Mayneris, F., & Poncet, S. (2013). Cluster policies and firm selection: Evidence from france. Journal of Regional Science, 53(5), 897–922. https://doi.org/10.1111/jors.12050.
Foray, D. (2004). The economics of knowledge. Cambridge/Massachusetts/London: MIT Press.
Fornahl, D., Broekel, T., & Boschma, R. (2011). What drives patent performance of German biotech firms? The impact of R&D subsidies, knowledge networks and their location. Papers in Regional Science, 90(2), 395–418. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1435-5957.2011.00361.x.
Frenken, K., van Oort, F. G., & Verburg, T. (2007). Related variety, unrelated variety and regional economic growth. Regional Studies, 41(5), 685–697.
Fritsch, M., & Graf, H. (2011). How sub-national conditions affect regional innovation systems: The case of the two Germanys. Papers in Regional Science, 90(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1435-5957.2011.00364.x.
Giuliani, E. (2011). Role of technological gatekeepers in the growth of industrial clusters : Evidence from chile role of technological gatekeepers in the growth of industrial clusters: Evidence from chile, (March 2012), 37–41.
Giuliani, E., & Bell, M. (2005). The micro-determinants of meso-level learning and innovation: Evidence from a Chilean wine cluster. Research Policy, 34(1), 47–68. http://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v34y2005i1p47-68.html.
Grabher, G. (Hrsg.). (1993). The weakness of strong ties: The lock-in of regional development in the Ruhr area. In The embedded firm – On the socioeconomics of industrial networks (S. 255–277). Routledge, London/New York, Reprinted in 1994.
Graf, H. (2011). Gatekeepers in regional networks of innovators. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 35(1), 173–198. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/beq001.
Graf, H., & Krüger, J. J. (2011). The performance of gatekeepers in innovator networks. Industry and Innovation, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2010.528932.
Hagedoorn, J. (2002). Inter-firm R&D partnerships: An overview of major trends and patterns since 1960. Research Policy, 31(4), 477–492.
Hagedoorn, J., Link, A. N., & Vonortas, N. S. (2000). Research partnerships. Research Policy, 29(4–5), 567–586. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00090-6.
Heidenreich, M. (1997). Zwischen Innovation und Institutionalisierung. Die soziale Strukturierung technischen Wissens. In B. Blättel-Mink & O. Renn (Hrsg.), Zwischen Akteur und System. Die Organisierung von Innovation (S. 177–206). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Hinzmann, S., Cantner, U., & Graf, H. (2017). The role of geographical proximity for project performance: Evidence from the German leading-edge cluster competition. Journal of Technology Transfer, 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9600-1.
Hippel, E. von (1987). Cooperation between Rivals: Informal know-how trading. Research Policy, 16(6), 291–302.
Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), 577–598.
Kesteloot, K., & Veugelers, R. (1995). Stable R&D cooperation with spillover. Journal of Economics and Management, 4, 651–672.
Kogler, D. F., Rigby, D. L., & Tucker, I. (2013). Mapping knowledge space and technological relatedness in US cities. European Planning Studies, 21(9), 1374–1391. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.755832.
Luukkonen, T. (2000). Additionality of EU framework programmes. Research Policy, 29(6), 711–724.
Maggioni, M. A., Nosvelli, M., & Uberti, T. E. (2007). Space versus networks in the geography of innovation: A European analysis. Papers in Regional Science, 86(3), 471–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1435-5957.2007.00130.x.
Marín, P. L., & Siotis, G. (2008). Public policies towards research joint venture: Institutional design and participants’ characteristics. Research Policy, 37(6–7), 1057–1065. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.03.007.
Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2003). Deconstructing clusters: Chaotic concept or policy panacea. Journal of Economic Geography, 3(1), 5–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/3.1.5.
Martin, P., Mayer, T., & Mayneris, F. (2011). Public support to clusters: A firm level study of French „Local Productive Systems“. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 41(2), 108–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2010.09.001.
Moodysson, J., & Zukauskaite, E. (2014). Institutional conditions and innovation systems : On sectors institutional conditions and innovation systems: On the impact of regional policy on firms in different sectors, (February), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2011.649004.
Morrison, A. (2008). Gatekeepers of knowledge within industrial districts : Who they are, How they interact, (789545737). https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400701654178.
Mukherjee, S., Romero, D. M., Jones, B., & Uzzi, B. (2017). The nearly universal link between the age of past knowledge and tomorrow’s breakthroughs in science and technology: The hotspot. Science Advances, 3(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1601315.
Neffke, F., & Henning, M. (2013). Skill relatedenss and firm diversification. Strategic Management Journal, 34, 297–316.
Nishimura, J., & Okamuro, H. (2011). Subsidy and networking: The effects of direct and indirect support programs of the cluster policy. Research Policy, 40(5), 714–727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.01.011.
Njøs, R., & Jakobsen, S. E. (2016). Cluster policy and regional development: Scale, scope and renewal. Regional Studies, Regional Science. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681376.2015.1138094.
Nooteboom, B. (1999). Innovation and inter-firm linkages: New implications for policy. Research Policy, 28, 793–805.
Nooteboom, B. (2000a). Learning and innovation in organizations and economics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nooteboom, B. (2000b). Learning by interaction: Absorptive capacity, cognitive distance and governance. Journal of Management and Governance, 4, 69–92.
Nooteboom, B., Van Haverbeke, W., Duysters, G., Gilsing, V., & van den Oord, A. (2007). Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 36, 1016–1034.
Paier, M., & Scherngell, T. (2010). Determinants of collaboration in European R & D networks : Empirical evidence from a discrete choice model determinants of collaboration in European R & D networks: Empirical evidence from a discrete choice model, (September 2011), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2010.528935.
Ponds, R., van Oort, F., & Frenken, K. (2007). The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration. Papers in Regional Science, 86(3), 423–443.
Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review. https://doi.org/10.1042/BJ20111451.
Porter, M. E. (2000). Location, competition, and economic development: Local clusters in a global economy. Economic Development Quarterly, 14(1), 15–34.
Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 71–102.
Rothgang, M., Cantner, U., Dehio, J., Engel, D., Fertig, M., Graf, H., Töpfer, S., et al. (2017a). Cluster policy : Insights from the German leading edge cluster competition, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40852-017-0064-1.
Rothgang, M., Dehio, J., & Lageman, B. (2017b). Analysing the effects of cluster policy: What can we learn from the German leading-edge cluster competition? The Journal of Technology Transfer. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9616-6.
Scherngell, T., & Barber, M. J. (2009). Spatial interaction modeling of cross-region R&D collaboration. Empirical evidence from the 5th EU framework programme. Papers in Regional Science, 88(3), 531–546.
Scherngell, T., & Barber, M. J. (2011). Distinct spatial characteristics of industrial and public research collaborations: Evidence from the fifth EU framework programme. Annals of Regional Science, 46(2), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-009-0334-3.
Singh, J. (2005). Collaborative networks as determinants of knowledge diffusion patterns. Management Science, 51(5), 756–770. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0349.
Ter Wal, A. L. J. (2013). The dynamics of the inventor network in german biotechnology: Geographic proximity versus triadic closure. Journal of Economic Geography, 14(3), 589–620. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbs063.
Töpfer, S., Cantner, U., & Graf, H. (2017). Structural dynamics of innovation networks in German Leading-Edge Clusters. Journal of Technology Transfer. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9642-4.
Torre, A., & Rallet, A. (2005). Proximity and localization. Regional Studies, 39(1), 47–59.
Uyarra, E., & Ramlogan, R. (2016). The impact of cluster policy on innovation. In J. Edler, P. Cunningham, A. Gök & P. Shapira (Hrsg.), Handbook of innovation policy impact (S. 196–225). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American Sociological Review, 61(4), 674–698.
Witt, U., Broekel, T., & Brenner, T. (2012). Knowledge and its economic characteristics: A conceptual clarification. Handbook of knowledge and economics. Cheltenham/Northampton. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781001028.00024.
Woolthuis, R. K., Hillebrand, B., Nooteboom, B., & Klein, R. (2005). Organization studies trust, contract and relationship development. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840605054594.
Zúñiga-Vicente, J. A., Alonso Borrego, C., Forcadell, F. J., & Galàn, J. I. (2012). Assessing the effect of public subsidies on firm R&D investment: A survey. Journal of Economic Surveys. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6419.2012.00738.x.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature
About this entry
Cite this entry
Brökel, T., Graf, H. (2019). Innovationspolitik und Netzwerke. In: Stember, J., Fink, A., Pongratz, P., Vogelgesang, M. (eds) Handbuch Innovative Wirtschaftsförderung . Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-21597-2_28-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-21597-2_28-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-21597-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-21597-2
eBook Packages: Springer Referenz Wirtschaftswissenschaften