IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v31y2004i3p185-197.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biosciences and the rise of regional science policy

Author

Listed:
  • Philip Cooke

Abstract

This paper focuses on biosciences and the manner in which R&D-led clustering concentrates key resources such as basic research funding, research infrastructure and innovative businesses in a few clusters where even large pharmaceuticals firms are nowadays often learners (from academia) rather than research leaders, as in the past. Because biosciences and healthcare are strongly intertwined, and huge increases in healthcare R&D and general expenditure mean that some 20% of gross domestic product is accounted for by the broad sector, regions that have missed out on this future ‘knowledge economy’ bonanza are desperately seeking to remedy things. Examples are provided of new regional science policy instruments for redistribution of such knowledge economy advantages that moves beyond mere innovation support. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip Cooke, 2004. "Biosciences and the rise of regional science policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(3), pages 185-197, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:31:y:2004:i:3:p:185-197
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154304781779994
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ben R. Martin, 2015. "R&D Policy Instruments: A Critical Review of What We Do & Don't Know," Working Papers wp476, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    2. Rhiannon Pugh, 2018. "Questioning the implementation of smart specialisation: Regional innovation policy and semi-autonomous regions," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(3), pages 530-547, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:31:y:2004:i:3:p:185-197. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.