‘Created’ enclaves for enterprise: an empirical study of Singapore's industrial parks in Indonesia, Vietnam and China

Yeoh, Caroline; How, Wilfred Pow Ngee; Leong, Ai Lin

doi:10.1080/08985620500361115

Cited by 19 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Williams (2004) L. Williams & McGuire (2010) Wong, Ho, & Autio (2005) Wright et al (1994) Wright, Lockett, & Pruthi (2002) Wright, Manigart, Sapienza, Desbrieres, & Hommel (2004) Wright, Thompson, & Robbie (1992) Yamakawa, Peng, & Deeds (2008) Yeoh, How, & Leong (2005) Yusuf (1995) Zacharakis, McMullen, & Shepherd (2007) Zahra & Hayton (2008) Zerbinati & Souitaris (2005)…”

Section: Comparative International Entrepreneurship Articles Included In Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative International Entrepreneurship

Terjesen

Hessels

2013

Journal of Management

418

337

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review systematically examines comparative international entrepreneurship (CIE) research, analyzing 259 articles published in 21 leading journals from 1989 to 2010. We outline the importance of multi-country studies of entrepreneurial activity in enabling the comparison and replication of research and generating meaningful contributions to scholarship, practice, and policy. Our systematic review classifies research findings into four levels—individual, firm, industry, and country—each with respect to characteristics, antecedents, and outcomes of entrepreneurial activities as well as theory and methodology. Taken together, our review highlights the heterogeneous nature of entrepreneurship across countries and its role in explaining outcomes at firm (e.g., financial and export performance) and country (e.g., economic growth) levels as well as antecedents at the country level (e.g., culture). We find the CIE literature is highly fragmented with substantial knowledge gaps related to content, theory, and methodology, for which we outline a detailed future research agenda. Given the atheoretical nature of most published CIE research, we provide specific suggestions to extend the current dominant theoretical perspectives (institutions, culture, resource-based view, transaction cost economics, economic growth, and human capital); consider new lenses from management, international business, and entrepreneurship; and integrate and test multiple theories. From a content perspective, we outline the need to define and cross-reference prior studies of entrepreneurship and prioritize emerging phenomena that are critical to practice, and policy, and offer specific directives for integrated and multi-level studies of characteristics, antecedents, and outcomes. Methodological suggestions include theory-based rationale for the selection of countries, greater attention to data collection and sample selection equivalence, and the solutions to the ecological fallacy problem. We urge scholars to work together and across countries, cooperating with interested agencies and associations to develop new longitudinal, multi-level data sets and introduce dual qualitative/quantitative approaches and new diverse, sophisticated analytical tools.

show abstract

Section: Comparative International Entrepreneurship Articles Included In Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative International Entrepreneurship

Terjesen

Hessels

2013

Journal of Management

418

337

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1990s saw Suzhou on a fast track by developing the Economic Development Zone (EDZ) and implementing a FDI (Foreign Direct Investment)-oriented regional policy. In particular the establishment of China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park (SIP) in 1994 by the Chinese and Singaporean governments with involvement of their agencies and various private sector organizations aimed at establishing a world-class industrial park to transfer advanced technologies, industrial projects as well as management experience from Singapore to China (Yeoh, Pow Ngee How, & Lin Leong, 2005). Even though Wuxi also endeavored to attract FDI by establishing Wuxi New District, it was lagged behind by Suzhou.…”

Section: Research Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

University capability as a micro-foundation for the Triple Helix model: The case of China

Liu

Huang

2018

Technovation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to advance our understanding of the Triple Helix model from a microfoundational perspective by articulating the notion of university capability. From an external evaluative viewpoint we suggest that university capability consists of (1) resource base, (2) motivation/objective, (3) resource allocation and coordination mechanisms, and (4) regional outcomes. Based on qualitative data collected from two leading cities in innovation and regional development in China, our study unpacks university capability by distinguishing resources and capabilities. Furthermore, this paper empirically elucidates two different approaches to deal with university capability. Our conceptualization of university capability may be a useful analytical tool to better understand the role of 'university' and its relationship with the other actors in the Triple Helix model.

show abstract

“…Research carried out during the early period of the Growth Triangle confirmed these processes as well as SIJORI as: (1) a regionalised integrated manufacturing complex; (2) an industry and corporate construct based on the complementarity of production factors located in close proximity; (3) a strategic construct from Singapore's perspective that allowed the retention of industries and firms in the region while ‘moving up’ the value chain; (4) increased production linkages as well as a core/non‐core division of labour linking the three territories, and (5) a space where non‐core parts have assumed a subordinate position (Grundy‐Warr et al ; How and Yeoh ; Lee ; Pereira ; Smith ; Sparke et al ; Toh and Low ; Yeoh and Wong ; Yeoh et al , , , ).…”

Section: The Eande Industry In Southeast Asia and The Emergence Of Sijorimentioning

confidence: 87%

Industry dynamics in Growth Triangles: the E&E industry in SIJORI 25 years on

Hutchinson

Grunsven

2018

Asian-Pac Economic Lit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Launched in 1989 and encompassing Singapore, the Malaysian state of Johor, and Batam Island in Indonesia, the SIJORI Growth Triangle sought to market these territories as a ‘single investment destination’ offering differing factor endowments in close proximity. Singapore was the ‘core’ of the region; Johor and Batam occupied the land, labour, and resource‐intensive ‘non‐core’ spaces. During the 1990s, investment flows into the three territories, particularly in the electrical and electronics (E&E) industry, mirrored this division of labour. Through scrutinising trends in E&E firm entries, nationality, and industry branch in Singapore, Johor, and Batam for the 1993–2012/14 period, this article sheds light on the recent evolution of the E&E sector in the Growth Triangle. We document an increasing disconnect between the three nodes that has substantially reduced SIJORI's significance as an integrated industrial cross‐border region.

show abstract

‘Created’ enclaves for enterprise: an empirical study of Singapore's industrial parks in Indonesia, Vietnam and China

Cited by 19 publications

References 22 publications

Comparative International Entrepreneurship

Comparative International Entrepreneurship

University capability as a micro-foundation for the Triple Helix model: The case of China

Industry dynamics in Growth Triangles: the E&E industry in SIJORI 25 years on

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About