The case for industrial policy : a critical survey

What are the underlying rationales for industrial policy? Does empirical evidence support the use of industrial policy for correcting market failures that plague the process of industrialization? To address these questions, the authors provide a critical survey of the analytical literature on industrial policy. They also review some recent industry successes and argue that only a limited role was played by public interventions. Moreover, the recent ascendance of international industrial networks, which dominate the sectors in which less developed countries have in the past had considerable success, implies a further limitation on the potential role of industrial policies as traditionally understood. Overall, there appears to be little empirical support for an activist government policy even though market failures exist that can, in principle, justify the use of industrial policy.Economic Theory&Research,ICT Policy and Strategies,Water and Industry,Industrial Management,Markets and Market Access

TECHNOLOGY PARKS (TP) STRATEGIC CAPACITY EVALUATION STRUCTURE: A FRAMEWORK PROPOSAL FOR IMPLEMENTATION IN LATIN AMERICA

This study relevance contributes an unprecedented manner with a proposal to investigate the strategic capacity evaluation structure of TPs in Latin America. This way, the following research question emerged: how to evaluate the strategic capability of the TPs in Latin America? This study objective is to present a framework proposal for review of the Strategic Capacity of Technological Parks in Latin America. The methodology used in this study is classified, by the objective, as exploratory and the technical procedure used was the literature review. The research approach used was qualitative and quantitative. As a research result, a 4 dimensions ensemble (Infrastructure, Scenarios, Corporate Governance and Strategic Performance) composed of 31 indicators that can corroborate with the TPs in Latin America was identified, after the MACBETH method application withsurvey dataapplied to10major decision makersof TPsin Latin America.The proposed index can serve as a comparative evaluation between several Latin America TPs. As further research suggestions, are larger exploration of the theoretical references cited and field research framework validation in others continents

The Structure of Intra-Group Ties: Innovation in Taiwanese Business Groups

Business groups are a network form of multi-business firm that play central economic and technological roles in many emerging economies. We draw from the technology studies literature, complemented by concepts from studies of organizational networks, to investigate how equity, director, and operating ties between firms within groups shape their innovation opportunities. Technology studies suggest that such ties create both opportunities and constraints that influence innovative activity by affiliates and, in aggregate, by a group as a whole - opportunities that arise from access to information, people, money, and other resources, but also constraints that arise from entrenched relationships among different actors. The network literature, in turn, suggests that centrality and density of ties between firms within a group will shape the benefits and constraints. We find that the overall density and individual centrality of the three types of ties affects affiliate and group innovativeness among about 2,000 firms within 263 business groups in Taiwan between 1982 and 2000. Groups that offer affiliates focused access to financial resources and operating knowledge, coupled with autonomy from intra-group competition and strategic interference, often generate fertile opportunities for innovative activity by some of their members. The results also offer implications for multi-business firm innovativeness.

Technology campuses and cities

This thesis examines the development of technology campuses as built environments and their role  in stimulating innovation. Technology campuses entail a variety of built environments developed to accommodate technology-driven research activities of multiple organisations. The science park is the most common type of technology campus. Other types include the campuses of universities  of technology and corporate R&D parks.In industrialised countries, the demand for developing  technology  campuses  to  stimulate innovation has been growing in line with the attention given to knowledge in global, national and regional policies. There are over 700 technology campuses worldwide occupying hundred thousands  of hectares in- and around cities. This type of built environments have emerged and developed during critical periods of technological advancements throughout the 20th century, to support technology-based development in industrialised countries. With the adoption of the knowledge- based economy, governments in many countries have encouraged research as an essential activity in their science, technology and innovation policies. The infrastructure that supports research is also gaining momentum. The number of registered science parks is steadily increasing since the late 1990s. The number of programmes supporting research infrastructure is growing in the European policy agenda. Municipalities are formally engaged with other public and private parties in the development of urban areas targeted to stimulate innovation. Governments, universities and R&D companies are investing billions of euros in developing the infrastructure that will not only support their core processes, but will help them to remain competitive by attracting and retaining the best talent. Part of these investments are targeted to develop new buildings or entire areas that often result in campuses as we know them: a concentration of buildings accommodating organisations, people, and their activities in a (green) field.The assumption that the concentration of research activities in one location stimulates innovation is promoting the development of technology campuses in many places. However, the  capacity  of these built environments to support the different processes associated with innovation is not well understood – i.e. Technology campuses are urban areas in the inner city and peripheral locations that have the capacity to support the processes of knowledge creation and diffusion, as well as of attracting and retaining knowledge workers. The existent knowledge about the relationship between the built environment and innovation at the area level is limited. This knowledge gap may lead to inefficient use of the resources employed to develop technology campuses including capital, land, and time. Also, this lack of understanding can have the opposite effect, because technology campuses could easily become problematic areas dealing with vacancy, poor spatial quality, and connectivity issues frustrating the societal goal of attracting and retaining talent in the knowledge economy. A potential way to address these problems is outlining the ways in which the built environment stimulates innovation in technology campuses.In this context, this research addresses as main question ‘How does the built environment stimulate innovation in technology campuses?’ This research is grounded in the field of corporate real estate management and its theoretical assumption that the built environment is a resource managed to support the goals of organisations. Research in this field has focused on the practice of real estate management from the end user’s view. Campus development is a comprehensive form of this practice, because it deals with activities that vary from developing real estate strategies, developing building projects, up to maintaining and managing the portfolio of an organisation. The relationship between innovation and the built environment has been addressed before in theories of corporate real estate management in a broad sense. Empirically, this has been explored on the supply side at the level of the workplace rather than at the urban scale. Although the contemporary discussion of innovation in complementary research fields focus on the urban level. Onthe demand side, the involvement of public and private parties in the development of these areas moves forward the organisational scope in corporate real estate management beyond the end-users in large scale built environments.This research provides an understanding of the relationship between the built environment and innovation at the area level. This research developed knowledge clarifying such relationship in the form of a conceptual model and recommendations for practitioners involved in the practice of campus development. This knowledge developed mainly throughout an inductive approach in two core studies. The first study is an exploratory research that uncovers and positions the link between innovation and the built  environment by using inputs from theory (literature  review) and empirical evidence (qualitative survey of 39 technology campuses). In this stage, the link between innovation and the built environment is provided in a form of a conceptual framework containing the proposition that the built environment is a catalyst for innovation. The second study is an explanatory research that clarifies the relationship between innovation and the built environment based on empirical evidence in the practice of campus development (theory building from case studies). In this stage, the theoretical constructs of the conceptual framework are applied and revised through the in- depth study of two cases in particular contexts (i.e. High Tech Campus Eindhoven in the Netherlands and the Massachusetts Institute of technology campus in the United States). As a result, the preliminary knowledge from the exploratory research was developed into a conceptual model bearing  a hypothesis and five propositions closely linked to empirical evidence. The answer to the main research question is that the built environment is a catalyst for innovation in technology campuses demonstrated by location decisions and interventions facilitating five interdependent conditions required for innovation. The following propositions explain how the built environment facilitates each of the five conditions for innovation: Location decisions and area development facilitate the long-term concentration of innovative organisations in cities and regions. Interventions enabling the transformation of the built environment at area and building levels facilitate the climate for adaptation along changing technological trajectories over time. Large-scale real estate interventions facilitate the synergy among university, industry and governments. Location decisions and interventions supporting image and accessibility define the innovation area by emphasising its distinct identity, scale and connectivity features. Real estate interventions enabling access to amenities increase the diversity of people & chances for social interaction regardless the distinct geographical settings in which the concentration of innovative activities takes place. This research acknowledges that the location decisions of some technology-driven organisations have coincidentally determined the concentration of innovative research activities in  particular places. Over the years, the accommodation of  the  research  activities  of these organisations has co-evolved  with  particular socio-economic processes in their hosting cities creating unique conditions for innovation. The concentration of innovative organisations can be considered as a primal condition enabling the co-existence of the other four conditions for innovation. Similarly, this research acknowledges the following interventions facilitating conditions for innovation at the area level and depending on the particular location characteristics in which each campus has developed: Transforming areas through urban renewal and redevelopment, Building, adapting and re-using flexible facilities, Implementing the shared use of facilities accommodating different functions and users, Developing physical infrastructure enabling access to amenities and connection between functions Developing representative facilities and area concepts that support image. The empirical evidence supporting the propositions in the model is structured and converted into information available to decision makers involved in the development of technology campuses in the form of tools. The so-called ‘campus decision maker toolbox’ provides instruments that can guide planners, designers and managers during different stages of campus development. The tool for planners comprises campus models to frame the campus vision during the initiation of the campus based on location characteristics. The tool for designers consists of alternatives to enhance the campus brief during the preparation of the campus. And the tool for managers contains an information map to steer the campus strategy during the use of the campus. This knowledge contributes to the existing understanding of  the  relationship  between  innovation and the built environment in theory and practice. In theory, this research adds to existing theoretical concepts connecting the fields of corporate real estate management, urban studies in the knowledge- based economy and economic geography. The conceptual model proposed a new combination of existing theoretical concepts addressing a new way to look at the relationship between innovation and the built environment. In practice, this understanding is expected to encourage the efficient and effective use of the many resources required to develop technology campuses. Particularly, by providing information that can help decision makers to steer such resources towards strategic decisions and interventions that -under certain conditions- facilitate innovation. The knowledge developed in this research clarifies a relationship between innovation and the built environment at urban area level, in which the built environment facilitates conditions for innovation

Science and technology parks: an annotated and analytical literature review

This paper summarizes the extant literature on science and technology parks in an effort to provide a foundation to stimulate additional research in this globally important topic. We find from our review of published scholarship over the past 30 years that attention to science and technology parks has indeed increased, but it has not yet exploded. We also find that the current distribution of the country focus of this research is skewed toward China, the United Kingdom, Spain, and the United States. Emphasis on studies related to UK and US parks has been primarily due to data availability; in China and Spain the emphasis has been primarily on case studies