IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/regstd/v32y1998i5p391-403.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Japanese Research Parks: National Policy and Local Development

Author

Listed:
  • Steven Bass

Abstract

BASS S. J. (1998) Japanese research parks: national policy and local development, Reg. Studies 32 , 391-403. Many important regional high technology (RHT) initiatives have appeared since Japan's famous technopolis programme was enacted in 1983. This paper examines the evolution of Japanese RHT policy, discerning two complimentary trends: an apparent devolution of planning functions from the national to local governments; and the emergence of research parks as a key implementation strategy. The latter trend justifies the use of research park data to extend the policy analysis, which is done using a comprehensive database of Japanese research parks. The conclusion returns to the issue of decentralization and cautions against overstating the role of local governments in Japanese RHT planning. BASS S. J. (1998) Les technopoles japonaises: la politique nationale et le developpement local, Reg. Studies 32 , 391- 403. Depuis la mise en oeuvre du programme japonais en faveur des technopoles en 1983, nombreuses sont les initiatives regionales dans le domaine de la technologie de pointe. Cet article cherche a examiner le developpement de la politique japonaise portant sur la technologie de pointe regionale, d'ou deux tendances paralleles: une decentralisation apparente de certaines competences quant a la planification, et la naissance des technopoles en tant qu'un element-cle de la strategie. Cette derniere tendance justifie l'emploi des donnees sur les technopoles afin d'elargir l'analyse de la politique, ce qui se fait a partir d'une banque de donnees detaillee relative aux technopoles japonaises. La conclusion remet en question la decentralisation et souligne que l'exageration du role de l'administration locale dans le planning des initiatives regionales dans le domaine de la technologie de pointe au Japon devrait etre traitee avec circonspection. BASS, S. J. (1998) Japanische Forschungesgelande: Landespolitik und Ortliche Entwicklung, Reg. Studies 32 , 391-403. Dem Erlass des beruhmten japanischen Technopolisprogramm folgten viele bedeutende regionale Hochtechnologieninitiativen (Regional High Technology=RHT). Dieser Aufsatz untersucht die Entwicklung der japanischen RHT Politik, wobei zwei einander erganzende Tendenzen zu unterscheiden sind: eine offensichtliche Ubertragung der Planungsfunktionen von der Landesregierung auf die Ortsverwaltung, und die Schaffung von Forschungsgelanden als Hauptvollzugsstrategie. Letztere berechtigt die Benutzung von Forschungsgelandedaten zum Ausbau der Policyanalyse, die mittels einer umfassenden Datenbasis japanischer Forschungsgelande erreicht wird. Die Schlussfolgerung nimmt die Frage der Dezentralisierung wieder auf, und warnt vor einer Uberbetonung der Rolle der Ortsverwaltung bei der Planung japanischer RHT.

Suggested Citation

  • Steven Bass, 1998. "Japanese Research Parks: National Policy and Local Development," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(5), pages 391-403.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:regstd:v:32:y:1998:i:5:p:391-403
    DOI: 10.1080/00343409850116808
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00343409850116808
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00343409850116808?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aldrich, Howard E. & Sasaki, Toshihiro, 1995. "R&D consortia in the United States and Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 301-316, March.
    2. Eto, Hajime & Fujita, Mamoru, 1989. "Regularities in the growth of high technology industries in regions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 135-153, June.
    3. T Kawashima & W Stöhr, 1988. "Decentralized Technology Policy: The Case of Japan," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 6(4), pages 427-439, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Alberto Albahari & Andrés Barge-Gil & Salvador Pérez-Canto & Paolo Landoni, 2023. "The effect of science and technology parks on tenant firms: a literature review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1489-1531, August.
    2. Laura Lecluyse & Mirjam Knockaert & André Spithoven, 2019. "The contribution of science parks: a literature review and future research agenda," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 559-595, April.
    3. Albahari, Alberto & Pérez-Canto, Salvador & Landoni, Paolo, 2010. "Science and Technology Parks impacts on tenant organisations: a review of literature," MPRA Paper 41914, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Xiao-Hai Weng & Yu-Ming Zhu & Xiao-Yu Song & Naveed Ahmad, 2019. "Identification of Key Success Factors for Private Science Parks Established from Brownfield Regeneration: A Case Study from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-17, April.
    5. T. Theeranattapong & D. Pickernell & C. Simms, 2021. "Systematic literature review paper: the regional innovation system-university-science park nexus," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 2017-2050, December.
    6. Robert Hassink, 2002. "Regional Innovation Support Systems: Recent Trends in Germany and East Asia," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 153-164, March.
    7. Appold, Stephen J., 2004. "Research parks and the location of industrial research laboratories: an analysis of the effectiveness of a policy intervention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 225-243, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sakakibara, Mariko, 1997. "Evaluating government-sponsored R&D consortia in Japan: who benefits and how?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 447-473, December.
    2. Hayashi, Takayuki, 2003. "Effect of R&D programmes on the formation of university-industry-government networks: comparative analysis of Japanese R&D programmes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1421-1442, September.
    3. James Hayton & Saloua Sehili & Vida Scarpello, 2010. "Why do firms join consortial research centers? An empirical examination of firm, industry and environmental antecedents," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(5), pages 494-510, October.
    4. Delcamp, Henry & Leiponen, Aija, 2014. "Innovating standards through informal consortia: The case of wireless telecommunications," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 36-47.
    5. Arie Shachar & Daniel Felsenstein, 1992. "Urban Economic Development and High Technology Industry," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 29(6), pages 839-855, August.
    6. Amalya L. Oliver, 2022. "Holistic ecosystems for enhancing innovative collaborations in university–industry consortia," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1612-1628, October.
    7. Sternberg, Rolf G., 1996. "Government R & D expenditure and space: empirical evidence from five industrialized countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 741-758, August.
    8. Mao, Chongfeng & Yu, Xianyun & Zhou, Qing & Harms, Rainer & Fang, Gang, 2020. "Knowledge growth in university-industry innovation networks – Results from a simulation study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    9. Xiaoli Yin & Jianfeng Wu & Wenpin Tsai, 2012. "When Unconnected Others Connect: Does Degree of Brokerage Persist After the Formation of a Multipartner Alliance?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(6), pages 1682-1699, December.
    10. Jackie Krafft & Marie-Antoinette Maupertuis, 1999. "Coopération et concurrence: le cas des consortia de R&D," Post-Print hal-00212297, HAL.
    11. Vivek Mande & Richard G. File & Wikil Kwak, 2000. "Income Smoothing and Discretionary R&D Expenditures of Japanese Firms," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 263-302, June.
    12. Vonortas, Nicholas S., 1997. "Research joint ventures in the US," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 577-595, December.
    13. Carlsson , Bo, 2016. "Industrial Dynamics: A Review of the Literature 1990-2009," Papers in Innovation Studies 2016/3, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    14. Bruno Cassiman, 1998. "The organization of research corporations and researcher ability," Economics Working Papers 327, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    15. Mathews, John A., 2002. "The origins and dynamics of Taiwan's R&D consortia," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 633-651, May.
    16. Duso, Tomaso & Pennings, Enrico & Seldeslachts, Jo, 2010. "Learning dynamics in research alliances: A panel data analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 776-789, July.
    17. William Comanor & Patrick Rey, 1997. "Competition Policy towards Vertical Restraints in Europe and the United States," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 24(1), pages 37-52, January.
    18. Kim, Ji-hyun & Bae, Sung Joo & Yang, Jae-Suk, 2014. "Government roles in evaluation and arrangement of R&D consortia," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 202-215.
    19. Walsh, John P. & Lee, You-Na & Nagaoka, Sadao, 2016. "Openness and innovation in the US: Collaboration form, idea generation and implementation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1660-1671.
    20. J. Jeffrey Morris & Eric Schniter, 2018. "Black Queen markets: commensalism, dependency, and the evolution of cooperative specialization in human society," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 69-105, April.

    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:taf:regstd:v:32:y:1998:i:5:p:391-403. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CRES20 .

    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.