Which Model of Technology Transfer for Nanotechnology? A Comparison with Biotech and Microelectronics
AbstractNanotechnologies are often presented as breakthrough innovations, where technology transfer and knowledge-bridging will play a pivotal role in the industrial dynamics. This article investigates the model of knowledge transfer in the nanotechnologies in depth, by comparing it with the models of two recently emerged technologies: biotech and microelectronics. Our results show that the nanotechnology transfer model is very different from that involved in biotechnology evolution: while small-medium firms play a valuable technology-bringing role, the central function of "translating" new knowledge between public research and industry is carried by the larger firms, just as it was in the early stages of the microelectronics sector. These results suggest that specific policy initiatives to facilitate biotech's transfer are inappropriate to boost the diffusion of nanotechnology.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by HAL in its series Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) with number hal-00749152.
Date of creation: 2012
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published, Technovation, 2012, 32, 3-4, p. 205-215
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: http://hal.grenoble-em.com/hal-00749152
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/
Nanotechnology; Biotechnology; Microelectronics; Technology transfer;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2012-12-15 (All new papers)
- NEP-INO-2012-12-15 (Innovation)
- NEP-KNM-2012-12-15 (Knowledge Management & Knowledge Economy)
- NEP-SBM-2012-12-15 (Small Business Management)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Orsenigo, L. & Pammolli, F. & Riccaboni, Massimo, 2001. "Technological change and network dynamics: Lessons from the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 485-508, March.
- Niosi, Jorge & Reid, Susan E., 2007. "Biotechnology and Nanotechnology: Science-based Enabling Technologies as Windows of Opportunity for LDCs?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 426-438, March.
- Mogoutov, Andrei & Kahane, Bernard, 2007. "Data search strategy for science and technology emergence: A scalable and evolutionary query for nanotechnology tracking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 893-903, July.
- Vincent Mangematin & Khalid Errabi & Caroline Gauthier, 2011.
"Large Players In The Nanogame: Dedicated Nanotech Subsidiaries Or Distributed Nanotech Capabilities?,"
Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print)
- Vincent Mangematin & Khalid Errabi & Caroline Gauthier, 2011. "Large players in the nanogame: dedicated nanotech subsidiaries or distributed nanotech capabilities?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 640-664, December.
- Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2008. "Mapping the nanotechnology enterprise: a multi-indicator analysis of emerging nanodistricts in the US South," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 209-223, April.
- Mangematin, Vincent & Lemarie, Stephane & Boissin, Jean-Pierre & Catherine, David & Corolleur, Frederic & Coronini, Roger & Trommetter, Michel, 2003. "Development of SMEs and heterogeneity of trajectories: the case of biotechnology in France," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 621-638, April.
- Greis, Noel P. & Dibner, Mark D. & Bean, Alden S., 1995. "External partnering as a response to innovation barriers and global competition in biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 609-630, July.
- Gambardella,Alfonso, 1995. "Science and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521451185, December.
- Zucker, Lynne G. & Darby, Michael R. & Furner, Jonathan & Liu, Robert C. & Ma, Hongyan, 2007.
"Minerva unbound: Knowledge stocks, knowledge flows and new knowledge production,"
Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 850-863, July.
- Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Jonathan Furner & Robert C. Liu & Hongyan Ma, 2006. "Minerva Unbound: Knowledge Stocks, Knowledge Flows and New Knowledge Production," NBER Working Papers 12669, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Rothaermel, Frank T. & Thursby, Marie, 2007. "The nanotech versus the biotech revolution: Sources of productivity in incumbent firm research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 832-849, July.
- Mowery, David C., 1983. "Innovation, market structure, and government policy in the American semiconductor electronics industry: A survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 183-197, August.
- Vincent Mangematin & Khalid Errabi, 2012. "The determinants of science-based cluster growth: the case of nanotechnology," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 30(1), pages 128-146, February.
- Bradley, Samantha R. & Hayter, Christopher S. & Link, Albert N., 2013. "Models and Methods of University Technology Transfer," Working Papers 13-10, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (CCSD).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.