Technology-Based Firms Located on Science Parks: The Applicability of Bullock's 'Soft-Hard' Model

Westhead, Paul; Batstone, Stephen; Martin, Frank

doi:10.1080/14632440050119550

Cited by 28 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 82 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Beginning with the trend for the establishment of UK science parks in the early 1980s, and culminating with the recent enthusiasm for incubators and clusters throughout the 1990s and into the new millennium (particularly fostered by the work of Michael Porter (Porter, 1998)), a set of nested geographical policies based partly on the advantages of external localised R&D networking to internal R&D management has been established. While the principle of a proximity-based development policy has merit, as the reality that HTSFs readily cluster is well established (Oakey, 1985;Saxenian, 1985;Porter, 1998), the notion that such clusters deliver enhanced R&D collaboration through networking is, however, a proposition that is difficult to substantiate, as it is often found by empirical studies to be absent (Oakey, 1985a;Massey et al, 1992;Westhead et al, 2000). It is common for practitioners, charged with the task of promoting HTSF regional development, to encourage firms to cluster and to view the medium-term development of HTSF clusters in terms of stages of development in which there is a relationship between the age of the firm and size of the cluster that is locationally appropriate, ranging from the incubator when nascent, through the science park when entering production and on a local sub-regional cluster when established.…”

Section: Htsf Randd Collaboration and Spatial Proximitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, for a plethora of other logistical reasons associated with time scales, level of commitment and economic risk, academic R&D support to science park firms has been observed to be rare (Oakey, 1984;Massey et al, 1992;Lindholm-Dahlstrand and Klofsten, 2002). Moreover, studies concerned with the overall benefits of a science park location, when compared with off-park sites, have shown that a science park location does not offer any major measurable advantages within which an absence of meaningful local R&D collaboration was a major disappointment (Westhead and Cowling, 1995;Westhead et al, 2000), thus rendering a science park location of marginal utility, when compared with 'off-park' sites that frequently charge lower rents.…”

Section: Science Parksmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clustering and the R&D management of high‐technology small firms: in theory and practice

Oakey¹

2007

R & D Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much of the policy assistance for high‐technology small firms (HTSFs) over recent years has been directed at encouraging their research and development (R&D) collaboration through local networking and technology transfer. Following a consideration of why HTSFs are formed, and how they perform R&D in order to cope with the competitive environment, this paper explores the value of external collaborative R&D to internal R&D management, inside geographically concentrated incubators, science parks or clusters. It is concluded that, although R&D collaboration with external partners occurs in limited instances, much HTSF R&D is highly confidential, competitive and wholly internalised. This tendency, as far as it relates to R&D management, is significant in that it minimises the likelihood that local management collaboration between co‐located firms will improve the performance of R&D projects.

show abstract

Section: Htsf Randd Collaboration and Spatial Proximitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Science Parksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clustering and the R&D management of high‐technology small firms: in theory and practice

Oakey¹

2007

R & D Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…High-tech developments in China mainly concentrate on the production of high-tech goods rather than upgrading the innovation system (Westhead et al, 2000). Consequently, many parks function as the distribution, processing and trading centres for foreign technology firms instead of technology hubs (Cao, 2004).…”

Section: Industrial Policy and Firm Location In Chinamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Particularly, SPs provide tenant firms with privileged (geographical and organisational) access to knowledge (universities, research institutes or knowledge-based firms) (Westhead et al, 2000). Establishing at a SP would thus be considered to be beneficial for high-tech SMEs, which may be in urgent need of those resources and a platform to interact with other firms and universities, suppliers and customers.…”

Section: The Role Of Science Parksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Science Parks and the Co-location of High-tech Small- and Medium-sized Firms in China’s Shenzhen

Cheng¹,

Oort

Geertman

et al. 2013

Urban Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science parks (SPs) have received special attention as a policy tool to facilitate localised economic growth by attracting high-tech firms, especially small-and mediumsized enterprises (SMEs). The effectiveness of this strategy has been called into question. Empirical studies suggest that the benefits of SPs for high-tech firms are limited. While this debate is mainly concentrated in the US and Europe, this paper sheds light on the role of SPs in China. It is found that, despite the presence of alternatives, the locations of high-tech SMEs in the region of Shenzhen are determined by hierarchically structured and governed SPs. This finding supports the notion that SPs can play a positive role in attracting high-tech SMEs. Moreover, these effects occur in the relatively unexplored Chinese context of increasingly liberalised but governed market circumstances, where a mature innovation system is still lacking.

show abstract

“…Science Parks (or technology parks) allow the creation of a setting favorable to the management and the spread of innovation, to giving value to the results of research, to the transfer of technology and to the participation in the processes of interaction and communication at a regional, national and international level (Vedovello 1997 ;Vedovello and Conceição 1997 ;Walker et al 1997 ;Westhead et al 2000 ).…”

Section: Putting Learning Into Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

New Business Creation, Entrepreneurial Will and Need of Achievement

Carayannis

2014

Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In conceiving of a possible model of new business creation we have seen that the causal explanation of the creation of a new personal initiative is connected to the creative will of a subject (promoting subject) who considers it the instrument or method of achieving his own objectives. In this way, we have identifi ed how the fi rst element of any start-up process is the presence of an "entrepreneurial vocation" and a creative "will of the entrepreneur" (Te Velde 2004 ;Casson 2010 ;Schienstock 2011 ).For this reason we believe that the universities and research centers, directly and indirectly infl uencing the behavioral, motivational, psychological and social variables that characterize the entrepreneur, are able to stimulate the two factors just mentioned.Often in the course of this work we have identifi ed a positive correlation between the creative will of an entrepreneur and the context within which he grows and matures. As one of the natural places of formation and maturation of the personality and of the system of values of a potential entrepreneur, the university, like the family setting (Zimmerer et al. 2002 ), can infl uence his propension and will to start a new economic activity.The strong system of incentives for new enterprises offered by universities, on the one hand stimulates the development and the commercialization of new products (in most cases of the result specifi c research activity) and on the other legitimizes and encourages entrepreneurial action (Krueger and Carsrud 1993 ;Krueger et al. 2000 ).

show abstract

Technology-Based Firms Located on Science Parks: The Applicability of Bullock's 'Soft-Hard' Model

Cited by 28 publications

References 82 publications

Clustering and the R&D management of high‐technology small firms: in theory and practice

Clustering and the R&D management of high‐technology small firms: in theory and practice

Science Parks and the Co-location of High-tech Small- and Medium-sized Firms in China’s Shenzhen

New Business Creation, Entrepreneurial Will and Need of Achievement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About