Too close to collaborate? How geographic proximity could impede entrepreneurship and innovation
Numerous studies focus on successful clusters to demonstrate that geographic proximity enables collaboration and innovation. Yet, practitioners still need to understand why some clusters fail to collaborate despite their geographic proximity. This longitudinal study investigates an ICT public–private innovation cluster that fails to collaborate and explores how geographic, institutional, organizational, cognitive and social proximities interplay. The findings show that: (1) social proximity is the most important proximity to achieving collaboration; (2) close geographic proximity can be a barrier to social proximity; and (3) geographic distance is seen as an accelerator of entrepreneurship and innovation. These findings contribute to the literature on clusters and innovation by arguing that contexts of high cognitive, organizational, institutional and geographic proximities do not facilitate communication and collaboration. Specifically, geographic proximity can have a negative impact on social proximity. Finally the paper illustrates that clusters created by economic policies are less prone to innovation compared to spontaneous ecosystems emerging from private entrepreneurial initiatives.
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 66 (2013)
Issue (Month): 10 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres|
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Belussi, Fiorenza & Sammarra, Alessia & Sedita, Silvia Rita, 2010.
"Learning at the boundaries in an "Open Regional Innovation System": A focus on firms' innovation strategies in the Emilia Romagna life science industry,"
Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 710-721, July.
- fiorenza belussi & silvia rita sedita & alessia sammarra, 2010. "Learning At The Boundaries In An “Open Regional Innovation System”: A Focus On Firms’ Innovation Strategies In The Emilia Romagna Life Science Industry," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0113, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
- Björn Alecke & Christoph Alsleben & Frank Scharr & Gerhard Untiedt, 2006. "Are there really high-tech clusters? The geographic concentration of German manufacturing industries and its determinants," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 40(1), pages 19-42, March.
- Christian Longhi, 1999. "Networks, Collective Learning and Technology Development in Innovative High Technology Regions: The Case of Sophia-Antipolis," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 333-342.
- Nooteboom, Bart & Van Haverbeke, Wim & Duysters, Geert & Gilsing, Victor & van den Oord, Ad, 2007. "Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 1016-1034, September.
- Nooteboom, B. & Vanheverbeke, W.P.M. & Duysters, G.M. & Gilsing, V.A. & Oord van den, A.J., 2005. "Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity," Working Papers 05.05, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
- Nooteboom, B. & Vanhaverbeke, W.P.M. & Duijsters, G.M. & Gilsing, V.A. & Oord, A., 2006. "Optimal Cognitive Distance and Absorptive Capacity," Discussion Paper 2006-33, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Ron Boschma & Koen Frenken, 2009. "Some Notes on Institutions in Evolutionary Economic Geography," Economic Geography, Clark University, vol. 85(2), pages 151-158, 04.
- Ron Boschma & Koen Frenken, 2008. "Some Notes on Institutions in Evolutionary Economic Geography," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 0817, Utrecht University, Section of Economic Geography, revised Oct 2008.
- Furman, Jeffrey L. & Porter, Michael E. & Stern, Scott, 2002. "The determinants of national innovative capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 899-933, August.
- Martina Kauffeld-Monz, 2005. "Knowledge spillovers within regional networks of innovation and the contribution made by public research," ERSA conference papers ersa05p440, European Regional Science Association.
- Ian R. Gordon & Philip McCann, 2005. "Innovation, agglomeration, and regional development," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(5), pages 523-543, October.
- Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
- Maskell, Peter & Malmberg, Anders, 1995. "Localized Learning and Industrial Competitiveness," UCAIS Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy, Working Paper Series qt66n1527h, UCAIS Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy, UC Berkeley.
- Gloria Parra-Requena & Francesc Xavier Molina-Morales & Pedro Manuel García-Villaverde, 2010. "The Mediating Effect of Cognitive Social Capital on Knowledge Acquisition in Clustered Firms," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 59-84.
- Lilach Nachum & Cliff Wymbs, 2005. "Product differentiation, external economies and MNE location choices: M&As in Global Cities," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 36(4), pages 415-434, July. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)