IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/presci/v97y2018i2p253-279.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The influence of science and technology park characteristics on firms' innovation results

Author

Listed:
  • Alberto Albahari
  • Andrés Barge‐Gil
  • Salvador Pérez‐Canto
  • Aurelia Modrego

Abstract

The effectiveness of Science and Technology Parks (STPs) as instruments of innovation policy has generated thriving debate among academics, practitioners and policy makers. A gap in the existing literature on STPs is that research mostly does not consider STPs' heterogeneity. The present paper aims at filling this gap, analysing the influence of different STP characteristics on their tenants' performance. Using data on 849 firms and 25 STPs from the 2009 Community Innovation Survey for Spain and a survey of STP managers respectively and after controlling for a wide set of firms characteristics, we find that: (i) firms located in very new or longer established STPs show better innovative performance; (ii) the size of the STP and its management company positively affects the innovative performance of tenants while services provision has no effect on firms' achieving better results; and (iii) firms in less technologically developed regions benefit more from location in an STP. Theoretical, policy and managerial contributions of our research are discussed in the paper. La eficacia de los Parques Científicos y Tecnológicos (PCyT) como instrumentos políticos de innovación ha generado un debate floreciente entre académicos, profesionales y responsables políticos. Un vacío en la literatura existente sobre los PCyT es que la mayoría de las investigaciones no consideran la heterogeneidad de los PCyT. El objetivo del presente artículo es llenar este vacío, mediante el análisis de la influencia de las diferentes características de los PCyT en el rendimiento de sus inquilinos. Mediante el uso de datos de 849 empresas y 25 PCyT de la Encuesta de la Comunidad sobre la Innovación de 2009 para España y una encuesta a los gerentes de PCyT, respectivamente, y después de controlar un amplio conjunto de características de las empresas, se encontró que: (i) las empresas ubicadas en PCyT muy nuevos o bastante establecidos muestran un mejor rendimiento en innovación; (ii) el tamaño del PCyT y la compañía que lo gestiona afecta positivamente al rendimiento en innovación de los inquilinos, mientras que la provisión de servicios no tiene ningún efecto en que las empresas logren mejores resultados; y (iii) las empresas en regiones menos desarrolladas tecnológicamente se benefician más de la ubicación en un PCyT. En el documento se discuten las contribuciones teóricas, políticas y de gestión de nuestra investigación. イノベーション政策の実行手段としてのサイエンス&テクノロジーパーク(Science and Technology Park:STP)の有効性については、研究者、政策実行者、政策立案者の間で盛んに議論がなされてきた。STPに関する既存研究の欠点は、STPの異質性がほとんど考慮されていないことである。本稿では、STPの様々な特性がテナント企業の実績に及ぼす影響を分析して、この欠点を補うことを目指す。2009年のスペインのコミュニティ・イノベーション調査(Community Innovation Survey)から得られた849社の企業データとSTPの経営者の調査から得られた25のSTPに関するデータを使用して分析を行い、広範な企業の特性で補正すると以下のことが分かる。1)設立から間もないSPT、または長く成功しているSPT内に立地する企業は、イノベーション・パフォーマンスがより優れている。2)SPTの規模とそのSPTの経営会社はテナント企業のイノベーション・パフォーマンスに正の影響を及ぼすが、サービスの提供は企業がより優れた実績を収めることには何の影響も与えていない。3)技術的発展が遅れている地域の企業は、STP内に立地することからより多くの恩恵を受ける。理論的、政策的、経営的な面での本研究の貢献について考察する。

Suggested Citation

  • Alberto Albahari & Andrés Barge‐Gil & Salvador Pérez‐Canto & Aurelia Modrego, 2018. "The influence of science and technology park characteristics on firms' innovation results," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(2), pages 253-279, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:presci:v:97:y:2018:i:2:p:253-279
    DOI: 10.1111/pirs.12253
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12253
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mariagrazia Squicciarini, 2008. "Science Parks’ tenants versus out-of-Park firms: who innovates more? A duration model," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 45-71, February.
    2. Fukugawa, Nobuya, 2006. "Science parks in Japan and their value-added contributions to new technology-based firms," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 381-400, March.
    3. Westhead, P. & Storey, D. J., 1995. "Links between higher education institutions and high technology firms," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 345-360, August.
    4. Storey, D. J. & Tether, B. S., 1998. "New technology-based firms in the European union: an introduction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(9), pages 933-946, April.
    5. Catherine Beaudry & Stefano Breschi, 2003. "Are firms in clusters really more innovative?," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 325-342.
    6. Link, Albert N. & Scott, John T., 2003. "U.S. science parks: the diffusion of an innovation and its effects on the academic missions of universities," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1323-1356, November.
    7. Wladimir Raymond & Pierre Mohnen & Franz Palm & Sybrand Loeff, 2006. "A Classification of Dutch Manufacturing based on a Model of Innovation," De Economist, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 85-105, March.
    8. Pierre Mohnen & Jacques Mairesse & Marcel Dagenais, 2006. "Innovativity: A comparison across seven European countries," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 391-413.
    9. Borje Johansson & Hans Loof, 2008. "Innovation Activities Explained By Firm Attributes And Location," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 533-552.
    10. Arthur, W. Brian, 1990. "'Silicon Valley' locational clusters: when do increasing returns imply monopoly?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 235-251, June.
    11. Evans, David S, 1987. "The Relationship between Firm Growth, Size, and Age: Estimates for 100 Manufacturing Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 567-581, June.
    12. Dahl, Michael S. & Pedersen, Christian O.R., 2004. "Knowledge flows through informal contacts in industrial clusters: myth or reality?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1673-1686, December.
    13. Kuo-Feng Huang & Chwo-Ming Yu & Dah-Hsian Seetoo, 2012. "Firm innovation in policy-driven parks and spontaneous clusters: the smaller firm the better?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 715-731, October.
    14. Feldman, Maryann P. & Kogler, Dieter F., 2010. "Stylized Facts in the Geography of Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.),Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 381-410, Elsevier.
    15. Lofsten, Hans & Lindelof, Peter, 2002. "Science Parks and the growth of new technology-based firms--academic-industry links, innovation and markets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 859-876, August.
    16. Siegel, Donald S & Westhead, Paul & Wright, Mike, 2003. "Science Parks and the Performance of New Technology-Based Firms: A Review of Recent U.K. Evidence and an Agenda for Future Research," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 177-184, March.
    17. Dirk Czarnitzki & Hanna Hottenrott, 2009. "Are Local Milieus The Key To Innovation Performance?," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 81-112, February.
    18. Colombo, Massimo G. & Delmastro, Marco, 2002. "How effective are technology incubators?: Evidence from Italy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1103-1122, September.
    19. Stephen Layson & Dennis Leyden & John Neufeld, 2008. "To Admit Or Not To Admit: The Question Of Research Park Size," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(7-8), pages 689-697.
    20. Catherine Beaudry & G. Swann, 2009. "Firm growth in industrial clusters of the United Kingdom," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 409-424, April.
    21. Folta, Timothy B. & Cooper, Arnold C. & Baik, Yoon-suk, 2006. "Geographic cluster size and firm performance," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 217-242, March.
    22. Ángela Vásquez-Urriago & Andrés Barge-Gil & Aurelia Rico & Evita Paraskevopoulou, 2014. "The impact of science and technology parks on firms’ product innovation: empirical evidence from Spain," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 835-873, September.
    23. Yang, Chih-Hai & Motohashi, Kazuyuki & Chen, Jong-Rong, 2009. "Are new technology-based firms located on science parks really more innovative?: Evidence from Taiwan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 77-85, February.
    24. Elena Huergo & Jordi Jaumandreu, 2004. "How Does Probability of Innovation Change with Firm Age?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 22(3_4), pages 193-207, April.
    25. Paul Westhead & Stephen Batstone, 1999. "Perceived benefits of a managed science park location," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 129-154, April.
    26. Mariagrazia Squicciarini, 2009. "Science parks: seedbeds of innovation? A duration analysis of firms’ patenting activity," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 169-190, February.
    27. McCann, Brian T. & Folta, Timothy B., 2011. "Performance differentials within geographic clusters," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 104-123, January.
    28. Bresnahan, Timothy F & Gambardella, Alfonso & Saxenian, AnnaLee, 2001. "'Old Economy' Inputs for 'New Economy' Outcomes: Cluster Formation in the New Silicon Valleys," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(4), pages 835-860, December.
    29. Siegel, Donald S. & Westhead, Paul & Wright, Mike, 2003. "Assessing the impact of university science parks on research productivity: exploratory firm-level evidence from the United Kingdom," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1357-1369, November.
    30. Albert Link & John Scott, 2006. "U.S. University Research Parks," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 43-55, April.
    31. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    32. Hu, Albert Guangzhou, 2007. "Technology parks and regional economic growth in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 76-87, February.
    33. Frenz, Marion & Ietto-Gillies, Grazia, 2009. "The impact on innovation performance of different sources of knowledge: Evidence from the UK Community Innovation Survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1125-1135, September.
    34. Link, Albert N. & Scott, John T., 2005. "Opening the ivory tower's door: An analysis of the determinants of the formation of U.S. university spin-off companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1106-1112, September.
    35. Durand, Rodolphe & Coeurderoy, Regis, 2001. "Age, order of entry, strategic orientation, and organizational performance," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 471-494, September.
    36. Jose-Luis Hervas-Oliver & Jose Albors-Garrigos, 2009. "The role of the firm's internal and relational capabilities in clusters: when distance and embeddedness are not enough to explain innovation," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 263-283, March.
    37. Andrés Barge-Gil & Aurelia Modrego, 2011. "The impact of research and technology organizations on firm competitiveness. Measurement and determinants," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 61-83, February.
    38. Luuk Klomp & George Van Leeuwen, 2001. "Linking Innovation and Firm Performance: A New Approach," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 343-364.
    39. Tsai, Kuen-Hung, 2009. "Collaborative networks and product innovation performance: Toward a contingency perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 765-778, June.
    40. Storey, D. J. & Tether, B. S., 1998. "Public policy measures to support new technology-based firms in the European Union," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(9), pages 1037-1057, April.
    41. Izushi, Hiro, 2003. "Impact of the length of relationships upon the use of research institutes by SMEs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 771-788, May.
    42. Zucker, Lynne G & Darby, Michael R & Brewer, Marilynn B, 1998. "Intellectual Human Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 290-306, March.
    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. Albahari, Alberto & Pérez-Canto, Salvador & Barge-Gil, Andrés & Modrego, Aurelia, 2017. "Technology Parks versus Science Parks: Does the university make the difference?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 13-28.
    2. Guadix, José & Carrillo-Castrillo, Jesús & Onieva, Luis & Navascués, Javier, 2016. "Success variables in science and technology parks," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 4870-4875.
    3. Corrocher, Nicoletta & Lamperti, Francesco & Mavilia, Roberto, 2019. "Do science parks sustain or trigger innovation? Empirical evidence from Italy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 140-151.
    4. Bai, Xue-Jie & Yan, Wen-Kai & Chiu, Yung-Ho, 2015. "Performance evaluation of China's Hi-tech zones in the post financial crisis era — Analysis based on the dynamic network SBM model," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 122-134.
    5. Tangwei Teng & Yi Zhang & Yuefang Si & Jiayi Chen & Xianzhong Cao, 2020. "Government support and firm innovation performance in Chinese science and technology parks: The perspective of firm and sub‐park heterogeneity," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 749-770, June.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L0 - Industrial Organization - - General
    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • L38 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Public Policy
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • O39 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Other

    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:bla:presci:v:97:y:2018:i:2:p:253-279. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley Content Delivery). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1056-8190 .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.