Clusters, human capital and economic development in Oxfordshire and Cambridgeshire

Oxfordshire and Cambridgeshire are two of the most high tech economies in the UK (see for example DTI, 2002 and Garnsey and Lawton Smith, 1998). They are home to world class research universities and public and private research laboratories as well as a full range of business and professional services which support the development of their clusters. Building on previous work (Lawton Smith and Waters, 2011) this paper draws on national datasets to review the continued development of these economies. The paper considers issues such as new firm formation, sectoral composition and gross value added and relates them to social inclusion and worklessness. The paper draws on literature which emphasises the endogeneity of processes within regions, but also on studies which show that there are different kinds of high tech regions with varying industrial structures. Conclusions are drawn on the extent to which the presence of successful clusters (Spencer et al, 2010) influences outcomes for the local economy more generally, and how Oxfordshire and Cambridgeshire have performed over the last ten years

Entrepreneurship, innovation and the triple helix model: evidence from Oxfordshire and Cambridgeshire

This paper focuses on how regions become entrepreneurial and the extent to which the actors in the triple helix model are dominant at particular stages in development. It uses the case studies of Oxfordshire and Cambridgeshire in the UK to explore this theme. Both can now be described as ‘regional triple helix spaces’ (Etzkowitz 2008), and form two points of the Golden Triangle of Oxford, Cambridge and London universities. As entrepreneurial regions, however, they differ in a number of respects. This is not surprising given their differing geo-historical contexts. However, by comparing the two similar counties but which have their own distinctive features we are able to explore different dynamics which lead to the inception, implementation, consolidation and renewal (Etzkowitz and Klofsten 2005) of regions characterised by very high levels of technology-based entrepreneurship

Universities, Innovation and the Economy

Universities are increasingly expected to be at the heart of networked structures contributing to society in meaningful and measurable ways through research, the teaching and development of experts, and knowledge innovation. While there is nothing new in universities’ links with industry, what is recent is their role as territorial actors. It is government policy in many countries that universities - and in some countries national laboratories - stimulate regional or local economic development. Universities, Innovation and the Economy explores the implications of this expectation. It sites this new role within the context of broader political histories, comparing how countries in Europe and North America have balanced the traditional roles of teaching and research with that of exploitation of research and defining a territorial role. Helen Lawton-Smith highlights how pressure from the state and from industry has produced new paradigms of accountability tha

Entrepreneurship policies and the development of regional innovation systems: theory, policy and practice

The regional innovation systems (RIS) approach tends to be short in the coverage of the importance of agency in the dynamics of economic change. This paper addresses this by putting the entrepreneur, which Schumpeter (Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Harper & Row, 1911/1934) placed at the heart of the analysis of economic change, as the driving force of regional innovation systems and associated policies. This is consistent with work by Feldman and Francis (Clusters and Regional Development, Routledge, 2006) who identified the entrepreneur as a regional agent of change. The paper provides an appraisal and synthesis of the regional innovation systems approach in relation to entrepreneurship policies. It addresses a number of areas where theoretical, empirical and policy-based issues are currently under-developed in relation to entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship policy. There are three major themes. The first is the agency of both entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship policies in an RIS. The second is the rationale for entrepreneurship policies in an RIS. The third relates to what do entrepreneurship policies look like in RIS and how they might be evaluated as contributing towards an RIS

The economic ecology of small businesses in Oxfordshire

Report by the Oxfordshire Economic Observatory (OEO) for the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB), Oxfordshire Branch

Does Mentoring Make a Difference for Women Academics? Evidence from the Literature and a Guide for Future Research

This paper aims at reviewing literature on mentoring in academia, with a focus on mentoring to enhance women’s careers. A significant gender imbalance in science persists, and mentoring has been recognized as an important instrument for fostering academic women’s careers and addressing such imbalance. However, often the benefits of mentoring are taken for granted. This review aims to unpack the concept of mentoring, understand which trends characterize the mentoring literature, and analyze the evidence; moreover, it aims to discover potential gaps and propose a model to guide future research. A systematic approach is undertaken: four relevant search engines, covering more disciplines, are browsed to look for empirical studies on mentoring academic women from 1990 to March 2017. The review shows that there are some problems. First, there is no agreement on the definition of mentoring. Then, often studies are poorly grounded from a theoretical and conceptual perspective. In addition to the dominating research stream, focused on the benefits for the mentee, three other streams are consolidating: impact on the mentors, the role of group mentoring, and mentoring as an instrument to change institutions. At the end, we propose a model to guide future studies built on a longitudinal perspective

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND INNOVATION: OXFORDSHIRE'S HIGH-TECH ECONOMY - FIRM SURVIVAL, GROWTH AND INNOVATION

This paper is about how entrepreneurial landscapes change over time through the survival, growth and innovative activities of high-tech firms. It explores how the Oxfordshire high-tech economy has evolved over time. It takes as its benchmark the 1980s, when the first study of Oxfordshire's high-tech economy was undertaken (Lawton Smith 1990). The literature of the 1980s, the period at which our analysis begins, was concerned with techno-economic changes (Freeman and Perez 1988) associated with the fifth Kondratieff wave, in which entrepreneurship was a key component. This view emphasized the reduced importance of scale economies, emergence of new industries with new organizational forms associated niches for small firms, and limited consolidation (Radosevic 2007). The paper will report on a follow-up to the first Oxfordshire study. It revisits the 182 companies identified as 'advanced technology' i.e. firms that undertake R&D in one or more of science, computer science and engineering. It will present a breakdown on survival and growth, by sector, by origin of firm e.g. university spin-offs, and by patent and licensing data as indicators of innovation and technological advance. It will thereby provide evidence on the size distribution of surviving firms (and where possible on ones that have ceased trading), markets that firms operate in (niche or mainstream) and the extent of consolidation through merger and acquisition. The study will therefore provide an understanding of processes of change, and where particular locations fit into broader systems of entrepreneurship and innovation

Knowledge and capabilities for products/services development: the UK spin-off firms context

Purpose – This article explores and investigates the skills and capabilities required in developing products and services within UK university spin-offs (USOs) by considering the model of products/services development (Verona, 1999). Design/methodology approach – mixed methods of 20 in-depth interviews and questionnaire survey with 204 founders of USOs. Findings – The findings contribute in filling the literature gap by demonstrating key knowledge and capabilities required to develop products/services within the unique and non-commercial context, in which USOs are created by academics who do not necessarily have entrepreneurial or business experience. Originality/value – This research contributes to studies of product/service development by adapting and modifying elements within the existing theoretical model to be applicable to the specific firm and country context, such as USOs in the UK. Further, the study extends knowledge on the interplay between knowledge management and product development. The applications of the findings are that they can inform academic entrepreneurs on the capabilities significant in the development process. They can also act as indicators to Technology Transfer Office (TTOs) in what is needed for the provision of appropriate support and training to academic founders/entrepreneurs in order to foster and enhance other entrepreneurial activities

‘Islands of Innovation’ and diversities of innovation in the UK and France

This paper explores diverging patterns of innovation and regional development in two ‘islands of innovation’. In the early 2000s the growth trajectories of Grenoble and Oxfordshire were compared (Lawton Smith 2003). The focus was on national laboratories as territorial actors in the clustering of high-tech firms. Building on longitudinal data collected since 2003 the theme shifts in this study to the forms that government intervention takes through investments in knowledge organisations in high tech economies and how that leads to particular specialisations of technological advance. While there are many similarities, there are differences in starting points and structures, leading to diversities in innovation. The analysis shows how both are embedded in their national situations and opportunities for development. We focus on two key elements in sustaining clusters of innovation, those of highly skilled labour and networks. We show that in Grenoble, the clusters are orchestrated information and project-based while in Oxfordshire they are labour market dominated and organic. We demonstrate complementary relationships between the national and regional level policy formation and implementation. In both cases importance of place is sustained over time but for different reasons

The 'third mission' of universities and the region: comparing the UK, Sweden and Austria

There is a broad and growing literature on the changing role of universities in regional development. What is still missing, however, is a precise understanding of the "third function" of universities in regions. The aim of this paper is to contribute to a nuanced view of the role of universities in regional development. Based on a literature review and a comparison of different conceptual approaches we intend to enrich our knowledge about the multifaceted activities performed by universities at the regional level. Four conceptualisations of the "third function" of universities and regions are considered. In the first, the university "third function" is conceptualised as part of the changing nature of knowledge production and innovation. In this conceptualisation, universities are seen as producers of new types of "Mode 2" knowledge which is trans-disciplinary and generated with a variety of stakeholders in a context of application. In the second, the university is conceptualised as having a changing role in regional economic development. In this view, universities are seen as central in the emergence, growth, and anchoring of local industry and in local knowledge transfer. In the third set of approaches, the university is viewed as having a social and environmental role, as societal beneficiary providing direct services for the region via, for example, training relevant to immediate communities and considering local environmental sustainability. In the fourth, the "third function" is conceptualised as an emergent evolutionary process of interactions arising from differing conditions, actors, operations and outcomes over time. In this view, the "third function" is conceptualised as an outcome of dynamically evolving "Triple Helix" interactions, where overlapping interests, organisations, and networks between academia, government and industry create conditions for new networks and dynamics with changing degrees of determinism over time. Drawing on an analysis of the theoretical and empirical literature, we will highlight that the four approaches outlined above differ strongly with respect to (i) the conceptual explanations they provide for increasing levels of universities' engagement in regional development; (ii) the specific mechanisms and activities by which universities are seen to contribute to regional growth and innovation; (iii) the identification of potential beneficiaries of such activities; and (iv) the main driving forces and barriers to "third function" activities and related policy implications. Taken together, these approaches allow for a view of universities in regions which captures a broad range of old and new functions, interactions, cumulative processes, actors, unpredictability and contextual specificities in line with an evolutionary view