Cluster policy: insights from the German leading edge cluster competition

Rothgang, Michael; Cantner, Uwe; Dehio, Jochen; Engel, Dirk; Fertig, Michael; Graf, Holger; Hinzmann, Susanne; Linshalm, Enikö; Ploder, Michael; Scholz, Anne-Marie; Töpfer, Stefan

doi:10.1186/s40852-017-0064-1

Cited by 29 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(19 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Different survey methods have been applied to projects, firms, research institutes and the cluster managements (see Rothgang et al, 2015 for the project report).…”

Section: Appendixmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cluster ambidexterity towards exploration and exploitation: strategies and cluster management

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in AbstractCluster studies have shown that innovation can be understood as the result of an interorganizational process, where a division of labor with regard to exploration and exploitation exists among the actors inside the cluster. A cluster is ambidextrous if it manages to balance innovative activities that exploit existing competencies and is open to novel technological approaches by means of exploration. In this context we are interested in the supportive role of cluster management, assuming that a cluster organization can only persist sustainably if exploitation and exploration are pursued in an appropriate balance. Our analysis is based on surveys that have been conducted between 2011 and 2012 with 10 cluster managements and their respective cluster firms of the first two rounds of the German Leading Edge Cluster Competition. Our results indicate that the demand for services offered by the cluster management depends on companies' strategies with respect to exploration, exploitation and ambidexterity. In turn, the priorities set by the cluster management can be explained by the firm' needs. Accordingly, we argue that the cluster management acts as a service provider helping the cluster companies to become ambidextrous which in turn makes the cluster as a whole ambidextrous.

show abstract

“…Different survey methods have been applied to projects, firms, research institutes and the cluster managements (see Rothgang et al, 2015 for the project report).…”

Section: Appendixmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cluster ambidexterity towards exploration and exploitation: strategies and cluster management

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It covers regional open innovation [38], complex innovation eco-systems [39], open sustainable innovation [40], global innovation network and territorial innovation system [41,42], globalization of collaborative R & D [43], etc. Open innovation can enhance networking innovative stakeholders and regional R&D activity [44], conquer the growth limits of capitalism [45], facilitate interconnections between countries and make progress in regional innovation policy and entrepreneurial eco-systems [46]. These benefits of open innovation have been recognized by China and ASEAN.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Key Driving Forces for Geo-Economic Relationships between China and ASEAN Countries

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:With the rise of China and the implementation of the "21st Century Maritime Silk Road" strategy, research on geo-economics between China and ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) countries has become increasingly important. Current studies mainly focus on influencing factors, while there is little consideration about how these influencing factors act on geo-economic relationships. Therefore, this paper explores the key driving forces for geo-economic relationships between China and ASEAN countries by use of the structural equation modeling based on Partial Lease Squares. There are three main findings: (1) Economic factors have the greatest impact on geo-economic relationships and the total path effect is 0.778. Geo-location, geopolitics and geo-culture act on geo-economic relationships directly and indirectly. Their total path effects are 0.731, 0.645 and 0.513, respectively. (2) Indirect effects of geo-location, geopolitics and geo-culture impacting geo-economic relationships are far greater than direct effects. Geo-culture, in particular, has a vital mediating effect on geo-economic relationships. (3) Economic drivers promote geo-economic relationships through market, industrial policy, technical, network and benefit-sharing mechanisms. Political drivers improve geo-economic relationships through cooperation, negotiation, coordination and institutional mechanisms. Cultural drivers enhance geo-economic relationships through transmission mechanism. Location drivers facilitate geo-economic relationships through selection mechanism. We provide new insights on the geo-economic relationships through quantitative analysis and enrich the existing literature by revealing the key driving forces and mechanisms for geo-economic relationships.

show abstract

“…These entities cover the whole value chain of aviation and complete life cycle of an aircraft: from the development, manufacturing, and assembly, to the air transportation system, maintenance, repair, and overhaul, to final recycling. In 2008, Hamburg Aviation won the title of Leading-Edge Cluster (LEC), and is since benefitting from wide-ranging research support (Cantner et al, 2015;Rothgang et al, 2017). In 2014, it received the GOLD Label for Cluster Management Excellence by the European Commission, thereby ranking as one of the 'Top 40 clusters in Europe' .…”

Section: Hamburg Aviation Cluster-findings and Interpretations Of Thementioning

confidence: 99%

Unpacking the provision of the industrial commons in Industry 4.0 cluster

Götz

2019

EBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper argues that provision of industrial commons (IC), might be considered as a crucial factor of a cluster's attractiveness in digital transformation, e.g. in Industry 4.0 (I4.0) time. By drawing on the qualitative case study method of Hamburg Aviation cluster (HAv), it aims at exploring the nature of IC in the leading German I4.0 cluster. Proximity emerges, even if sometimes not explicitly, as the recurring topic facilitating the provision of IC, along with the advancement of I4.0. As Industry 4.0 stipulates much uncertainty, the closeness featuring in clusters, seems to bring various benefits, which can help address challenges associated with I4.0, and faced mainly by small and medium firms (SMEs). The vicinity to key actors and the gains of networking, reflect the importance of (un)articulated proximity. 3

show abstract

Cluster policy: insights from the German leading edge cluster competition

Cited by 29 publications

References 23 publications

Cluster ambidexterity towards exploration and exploitation: strategies and cluster management

Cluster ambidexterity towards exploration and exploitation: strategies and cluster management

The Key Driving Forces for Geo-Economic Relationships between China and ASEAN Countries

Unpacking the provision of the industrial commons in Industry 4.0 cluster

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About