IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa06p762.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Geographical and Institutional Proximity of Scientific Collaboration Networks

Author

Listed:
  • Frank Van Oort
  • Roderik Ponds
  • Koen Frenken

Abstract

The geography of innovation has established itself as a central subject in economic geography. Geographical proximity to firms and organizations like universities is supposed to have a positive effect on a firms’ innovative performance. One of the reasons causing these positive agglomeration effects is the fact that collaboration is eased by geographical proximity. Although the role of proximity for collaboration is a well researched theme with regard to innovation, less is known about the role of proximity in scientific collaboration and how this affects the probability and nature of networking among research institutions. This is surprising given the fact that collaboration in science has become a central policy issue. In this paper we set out a number of theoretical considerations about the role of geography for innovation and see whether these apply for science as well. The empirical part will focus on the geography of collaboration in scientific knowledge production, testing the hypothesis that collaboration between different kinds of organizations is geographically more localized than collaboration between the same kinds of organizations due to institutional or organizational proximity. Besides this we will analyze the importance of spatial proximity for various forms of collaboration (such as university-university and university-firm collaboration) using the concept of the gravity model. Finally we will look at the spatial structure of these collaboration networks using insights from social network methodology. Based on co-publications, central nodes of collaborative interaction and network structures are analysed over time. On the network-level we conclude on differences in the fields of life- and physical sciences and on differences on the type of relations according to university-firm, university-university and university-governmental institution linkages. On the regional level we conclude on the centrality and spatial extent of scientific collaboration hubs over time

Suggested Citation

  • Frank Van Oort & Roderik Ponds & Koen Frenken, 2006. "The Geographical and Institutional Proximity of Scientific Collaboration Networks," ERSA conference papers ersa06p762, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa06p762
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa06/papers/762.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Etzkowitz, Henry & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 109-123, February.
    2. Jason Owen-Smith & Massimo Riccaboni & Fabio Pammolli & Walter W. Powell, 2002. "A Comparison of U.S. and European University-Industry Relations in the Life Sciences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 24-43, January.
    3. Iain M. Cockburn & Rebecca M. Henderson, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
    4. Attila Varga & Luc Anselin & Zoltan J. Acs, 2000. "research notes and comments: Geographic and sectoral characteristics of academic knowledge externalities," Papers in Regional Science, Springer;Regional Science Association International, vol. 79(4), pages 435-443.
    5. Cooke, Philip & Gomez Uranga, Mikel & Etxebarria, Goio, 1997. "Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organisational dimensions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 475-491, December.
    6. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    7. Breschi, Stefano & Lissoni, Francesco, 2001. "Knowledge Spillovers and Local Innovation Systems: A Critical Survey," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(4), pages 975-1005, December.
    8. Audretsch, David B & Feldman, Maryann P, 1996. "R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 630-640, June.
    9. Jaffe, Adam B, 1989. "Real Effects of Academic Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 957-970, December.
    10. Erik Canton & Debby Lanser & Joëlle Noailly & Marieke Rensman & Martijn van de Ven, 2005. "Crossing borders; when science meets industry," CPB Document 98, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    11. Cockburn, Iain M & Henderson, Rebecca M, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
    12. Muhammed Dalgin & Vitor Trindade & Devashish Mitra, 2008. "Inequality, Nonhomothetic Preferences, and Trade: A Gravity Approach," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 74(3), pages 747-774, January.
    13. Andre Torre & Alain Rallet, 2005. "Proximity and Localization," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 47-59.
    14. Liming Liang & Ling Zhu, 2002. "Major factors affecting China's inter-regional research collaboration: Regional scientific productivity and geographical proximity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 55(2), pages 287-316, August.
    15. Meric S. Gertler, 2003. "Tacit knowledge and the economic geography of context, or The undefinable tacitness of being (there)," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 75-99, January.
    16. Maryann Feldman, 1999. "The New Economics Of Innovation, Spillovers And Agglomeration: Areview Of Empirical Studies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1-2), pages 5-25.
    17. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    18. Nathan ROSENBERG, 2009. "Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 11, pages 225-234, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    19. Toby E. Stuart, 2000. "Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: a study of growth and innovation rates in a high‐technology industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(8), pages 791-811, August.
    20. Wolfgang Glänzel, 2001. "National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(1), pages 69-115, April.
    21. Cowan, Robin & Foray, Dominique, 1997. "The Economics of Codification and the Diffusion of Knowledge," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 595-622, September.
    22. Michelle Gittelman & Bruce Kogut, 2003. "Does Good Science Lead to Valuable Knowledge? Biotechnology Firms and the Evolutionary Logic of Citation Patterns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 366-382, April.
    23. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    24. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    25. Cohendet, Patrick & Meyer-Krahmer, Frieder, 2001. "The theoretical and policy implications of knowledge codification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1563-1591, December.
    26. repec:dau:papers:123456789/5023 is not listed on IDEAS
    27. Caroline S. Wagner, 2005. "Six case studies of international collaboration in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(1), pages 3-26, January.
    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. Rens L.J. Vandeberg & Ellen H.M. Moors, 2008. "A framework for interactive learning in emerging technologies," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-06, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Feb 2008.
    2. Rosamaria d’Amore & Roberto Iorio & Agnieszka Stawinoga, 2011. "Who and where are the co-authors? The relationship between institutional and geographical distance in scientific publications," Working Papers 2011.4, International Network for Economic Research - INFER.
    3. Broström, Anders, 2010. "Working with distant researchers--Distance and content in university-industry interaction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1311-1320, December.
    4. Rosamaria D'Amore & Roberto Iorio & Sandrine Labory & Agnieszka Stawinoga, 2012. "How Do the Institutions Involved in Scientific Collaboration Deal with Different Kinds of Distance? An Analysis of the Co-Autorships of Scientific Publications," Working Papers 3_222, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Statistiche, Università degli Studi di Salerno.
    5. Jarno Hoekman & Koen Frenken & Frank Oort, 2009. "The geography of collaborative knowledge production in Europe," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 43(3), pages 721-738, September.
    6. Michael Barber & Thomas Scherngell, 2011. "Is the European R&D network homogeneous? spatial interaction modeling of network communities determined using graph theoretic methods," ERSA conference papers ersa11p392, European Regional Science Association.
    7. Thomas Scherngell & Michael Barber, 2011. "Distinct spatial characteristics of industrial and public research collaborations: evidence from the fifth EU Framework Programme," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 46(2), pages 247-266, April.

    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. Anna Giunta & Filippo M. Pericoli & Eleonora Pierucci, 2016. "University–Industry collaboration in the biopharmaceuticals: the Italian case," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 818-840, August.
    2. Koen Frenken & Roderik Ponds & Frank Van Oort, 2010. "The citation impact of research collaboration in science‐based industries: A spatial‐institutional analysis," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 89(2), pages 351-271, June.
    3. Rakas, Marija & Hain, Daniel S., 2019. "The state of innovation system research: What happens beneath the surface?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    4. Leten, Bart & Landoni, Paolo & Van Looy, Bart, 2014. "Science or graduates: How do firms benefit from the proximity of universities?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1398-1412.
    5. Eleonora Pierucci, 2015. "University-industry linkages. Among italian regions: a supply-demand analysis," RIVISTA DI ECONOMIA E STATISTICA DEL TERRITORIO, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2015(2), pages 5-33.
    6. Lorenzo Cassi & Andrea Morrison & Roberta Rabellotti, 2015. "Proximity and Scientific Collaboration: Evidence from the Global Wine Industry," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 106(2), pages 205-219, April.
    7. Der-Shiuan Lee & Breandán Ó Huallacháin, 2012. "Spatial Network-based and Regional Proximity in US Biotechnology," Chapters, in: Marina van Geenhuizen & Peter Nijkamp (ed.), Creative Knowledge Cities, chapter 12, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Riccardo Crescenzi & Andrea Filippetti & Simona Iammarino, 2017. "Academic inventors: collaboration and proximity with industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 730-762, August.
    9. Roderik Ponds, 2009. "The limits to internationalization of scientific research collaboration," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 76-94, February.
    10. Agrawal, Ajay & Cockburn, Iain, 2003. "The anchor tenant hypothesis: exploring the role of large, local, R&D-intensive firms in regional innovation systems," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1227-1253, November.
    11. Nola Hewitt-Dundas, 2013. "The role of proximity in university-business cooperation for innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 93-115, April.
    12. Christophe Carrincazeaux & Frédéric Gaschet, 2006. "Knowledge and the diversity of innovation systems: a comparative analysis of European regions," Post-Print hal-00257384, HAL.
    13. Fiorenza Belussi & Silvia R. Sedita, 2012. "Industrial Districts as Open Learning Systems: Combining Emergent and Deliberate Knowledge Structures," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(2), pages 165-184, April.
    14. Roberto Camerani & Daniele Rotolo & Nicola Grassano, 2018. "Do Firms Publish? A Multi-Sectoral Analysis," SPRU Working Paper Series 2018-21, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    15. Marina Van Geenhuizen & Pieter Stek, 2015. "Mapping innovation in the global photovoltaic industry: a bibliometric approach to cluster identification and analysis," ERSA conference papers ersa15p697, European Regional Science Association.
    16. Fitjar, Rune Dahl & Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés, 2013. "Firm collaboration and modes of innovation in Norway," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 128-138.
    17. Rens L.J. Vandeberg & Ellen H.M. Moors, 2008. "A framework for interactive learning in emerging technologies," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-06, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Feb 2008.
    18. Maryann Feldman & Dieter Kogler & David Rigby, 2013. "rKnowledge: The Spatial Diffusion of rDNA Methods," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1311, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2013.
    19. Benjamin Montmartin & Ludovic Dibiaggio & Lionel Nesta, 2018. "Regional Alignment and Productivity Growth," SciencePo Working papers Main halshs-01948337, HAL.
    20. Paola Cardamone & Valeria Pupo & Fernanda Ricotta, 2016. "Do Firms Benefit from University Research? Evidence from Italy," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 2(3), pages 445-471, November.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa06p762. 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: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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.