‘The Biosciences Knowledge Value Chain and Comparative Incubation Models’

Cooke, Philip; Kaufmann, Dan; Levin, Chen; Wilson, R. J.

doi:10.1007/s10961-005-5025-3

Cited by 45 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This conceptual combination of knowledge spillovers (NEG) and firm collaboration (Schumpeterian) can be seen in other work on the geography of biotech innovation (e.g. Cooke et al. 2003; Frenken and van Oort 2004; Rickne 2004).…”

Section: Spatial Processes In Biotechnologymentioning

confidence: 75%

Knowledge, Space and Biotechnology

Birch

2007

Geography Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article outlines and reviews the trends in research on the biotechnology industry over the last 20 years, drawing a distinction between theories that emphasise knowledge processes and those that focus on spatial processes. It covers research in strategic management, innovation studies, political economy, new economic geography, cluster theory, regional studies and economic geography. In reviewing these two strands of literature, it develops a synthesis of the two perspectives called the knowledge‐space dynamic, which seeks to combine insights from both to better explain and situate biotechnology innovation.

show abstract

Section: Spatial Processes In Biotechnologymentioning

confidence: 75%

Knowledge, Space and Biotechnology

Birch

2007

Geography Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While biotechnology clusters have been extensively researched (Shohet, 1998) there has been much less research into biotechnology incubators. Cooke et al (2006) studied biotechnology incubators in the US, Israel and Europe. They found the regional context was crucial and significantly more important than governance-related issues, in terms of an incubator's ability to nurture start-up firms.…”

Section: Biotechnology Incubatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Beyond the golden triangle’: Biotechnology incubation in the East Midlands region of the UK

Smith

Ehret

2012

Local Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Policy changes by the UK Government in the 1990s led to the setting up of a large number of technology incubators specializing in biotechnology. A feature of these biotechnology incubators is that they were not confined to established life science intensive regions like the South East and East Anglia (Sainsbury, 1999), but spread across the UK. This study presents an in-depth case study of one of these biotechnology incubators. It provides insights into the contribution of incubators to the development of the biotechnology sector in the regions outside the 'golden triangle' (Mueller et al., 2012;Mullins, 2005) of Cambridge-London-Oxford. It identifies servicebased business models as an attractive entry-mode for start-up firms in these regions and shows services to be the main contributor to job creation. The study contributes to closing some of the gaps in research into the relationship between technology incubation and economic development. In particular it identifies local factors conditioning the performance of local economies, business models, and incubation, particularly in the context of policies designed to promote the growth of technology-based start-up and spin-off companies as avenues for economic development and transformation.

show abstract

“…Thus, it is reasonable to assume that life sciences will enjoy a greater proportion of technological and business development in the future than it does today. Cooke et al (2006) recently proposed an interesting idea of creating a "co-incubations across borders". This idea will enable innovations in one country (or location) to penetrate other markets thus benefiting the home country.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Incubators and Project Initiatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public versus Private Technological Incubator Programmes: Privatizing the Technological Incubators in Israel

Frenkel

Shefer

Miller

2008

European Planning Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Private technological incubators began operating in Israel in 2000, and developed thanks to the rapidly growing private (venture) capital (VC) sector, which traditionally had not funded such projects. The present study examines the differences and similarities between two types of technological incubators-public and private. It addresses the question whether the need still exists for the Public Technological Incubators Programme (PTIP). Based on our empirical analysis and findings, the main conclusion is that private incubators cannot fully replace public incubators; even after the entry of the private sector into the area of technological incubator activity, there is still justification for the continuation of the PTIP. Private incubators tend to concentrate in selected fields, whereas public incubators sponsor a large variety of activities. The PTIP was found to provide answers to advancing national objectives, such promoting peripheral regions and providing special incentives to selected population groups (e.g. new immigrants) for whom such activities would otherwise be out of reach.

show abstract

‘The Biosciences Knowledge Value Chain and Comparative Incubation Models’

Cited by 45 publications

References 13 publications

Knowledge, Space and Biotechnology

Knowledge, Space and Biotechnology

‘Beyond the golden triangle’: Biotechnology incubation in the East Midlands region of the UK

Public versus Private Technological Incubator Programmes: Privatizing the Technological Incubators in Israel

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About