IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v48y2019i3p719-732.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards a segmentation of science parks: A typology study on science parks in Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Ng, Wei Keat Benny
  • Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne
  • Cloodt, Myriam
  • Arentze, Theo

Abstract

Although science parks are established globally for decades as an innovation policy instrument to foster growth and networking, there is limited attention given towards research into possible types within these real estate objects. Prior attempts in categorising science parks are characterised by the limited number of cases and/or variables. Science parks are believed to enhance innovation, entrepreneurship, and economic value for firms and regions. Past academic research showed mixed results on these performances and it is reasoned that distinct types within science parks exist that might explain these unclear results. We argue that before we can grasp what science parks can do, we should know what they are. Therefore, a survey on science park characteristics was completed by 82 science park managers in Europe. A cluster analysis was conducted which grouped the 82 participating science parks in three types; ‘research’, ‘cooperative’, and ‘incubator’ locations. Next, differences and similarities of these three types within science parks in Europe were analysed as a basis for advancing the academic debate. The types provide further understanding of science parks and offer researchers, practitioners, and policy-makers a means to compare, market, and benchmark science parks more adequately.

Suggested Citation

  • Ng, Wei Keat Benny & Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne & Cloodt, Myriam & Arentze, Theo, 2019. "Towards a segmentation of science parks: A typology study on science parks in Europe," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 719-732.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:3:p:719-732
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.11.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733318302750
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2018.11.004?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. Jan Annerstedt, 2006. "Science Parks and High-Tech Clustering," Chapters, in: Patrizio Bianchi & Sandrine Labory (ed.), International Handbook on Industrial Policy, chapter 14, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Marko Sarstedt & Erik Mooi, 2014. "The Market Research Process," Springer Texts in Business and Economics, in: A Concise Guide to Market Research, edition 2, chapter 2, pages 11-23, Springer.
    3. 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.
    4. Francesco Lamperti & Roberto Mavilia & Simona Castellini, 2017. "The role of Science Parks: a puzzle of growth, innovation and R&D investments," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 158-183, February.
    5. Edler, Jakob & Georghiou, Luke, 2007. "Public procurement and innovation--Resurrecting the demand side," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 949-963, September.
    6. Clarysse, Bart & Wright, Mike & Bruneel, Johan & Mahajan, Aarti, 2014. "Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1164-1176.
    7. 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.
    8. Roberta Capello & Andrea Morrison, 2009. "Science Parks and Local Knowledge Creation: A Conceptual Approach and an Empirical Analysis in Two Italian Realities," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Charlie Karlsson & Ake E. Andersson & Paul C. Cheshire & Roger R. Stough (ed.), New Directions in Regional Economic Development, chapter 0, pages 221-245, Springer.
    9. 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.
    10. Link, Albert N. & Scott, John T., 2011. "Research, Science, and Technology Parks: Vehicles for Technology Transfer," UNCG Economics Working Papers 11-22, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.
    11. Järvi, Kati & Almpanopoulou, Argyro & Ritala, Paavo, 2018. "Organization of knowledge ecosystems: Prefigurative and partial forms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1523-1537.
    12. Autio, Erkko & Kenney, Martin & Mustar, Philippe & Siegel, Don & Wright, Mike, 2014. "Entrepreneurial innovation: The importance of context," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1097-1108.
    13. Danilo Liberati & Marco Marinucci & Giulia Martina Tanzi, 2016. "Science and technology parks in Italy: main features and analysis of their effects on the firms hosted," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 694-729, August.
    14. Vásquez-Urriago, Ángela Rocío & Barge-Gil, Andrés & Modrego Rico, Aurelia, 2016. "Science and Technology Parks and cooperation for innovation: Empirical evidence from Spain," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 137-147.
    15. 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.
    16. Morlacchi, Piera & Martin, Ben R., 2009. "Emerging challenges for science, technology and innovation policy research: A reflexive overview," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 571-582, May.
    17. Patrizio Bianchi & Sandrine Labory (ed.), 2006. "International Handbook on Industrial Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3451.
    18. 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.
    19. Link, Albert N & Link, Kevin R, 2003. "On the Growth of U.S. Science Parks," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 81-85, January.
    20. Richard Shearmur & David Doloreux, 2000. "Science Parks: Actors or Reactors? Canadian Science Parks in Their Urban Context," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(6), pages 1065-1082, June.
    21. Dan Trudeau, 2013. "A typology of New Urbanism neighborhoods," Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(2), pages 113-138, July.
    22. 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.
    23. Charlie Karlsson & Ake E. Andersson & Paul C. Cheshire & Roger R. Stough (ed.), 2009. "New Directions in Regional Economic Development," Advances in Spatial Science, Springer, number 978-3-642-01017-0, Fall.
    24. 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.
    25. Marko Sarstedt & Erik Mooi, 2014. "A Concise Guide to Market Research," Springer Texts in Business and Economics, Springer, edition 2, number 978-3-642-53965-7, July.
    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. Silva, Sergio Evangelista & Venâncio, Ana & Silva, Joaquim Ramos & Gonçalves, Carlos Alberto, 2020. "Open innovation in science parks: The role of public policies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    2. Rammal, Hussain G. & Rose, Elizabeth L. & Ferreira, João J., 2023. "Managing cross-border knowledge transfer for innovation: An introduction to the special issue," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(2).
    3. Isabelle Soares & Claudia Yamu & Gerd Weitkamp, 2020. "The Relationship between the Spatial Configuration and the Fourth Sustainable Dimension Creativity in University Campuses: The Case Study of Zernike Campus, Groningen, The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, November.
    4. Klofsten, Magnus & Lundmark, Erik & Wennberg, Karl & Bank, Megan, 2019. "Incubator specialization and size: divergent paths towards operational scale," Ratio Working Papers 326, The Ratio Institute.
    5. Ng, Wei Keat Benny & Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne & Cloodt, Myriam & Arentze, Theo, 2022. "Exploring science park location choice: A stated choice experiment among Dutch technology-based firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    6. Ng, Wei Keat Benny & Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne & Cloodt, Myriam & Arentze, Theo, 2021. "Perceptual measures of science parks: Tenant firms’ associations between science park attributes and benefits," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).

    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. Ng, Wei Keat Benny & Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne & Cloodt, Myriam & Arentze, Theo, 2021. "Perceptual measures of science parks: Tenant firms’ associations between science park attributes and benefits," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    2. Ng, Wei Keat Benny & Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne & Cloodt, Myriam & Arentze, Theo, 2022. "Exploring science park location choice: A stated choice experiment among Dutch technology-based firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Kelsi G. Hobbs & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2017. "Science and technology parks: an annotated and analytical literature review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 957-976, August.
    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. 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.
    7. Wei Keat Benny Ng & Robin Junker & Rianne Appel-Meulenbroek & Myriam Cloodt & Theo Arentze, 2020. "Perceived benefits of science park attributes among park tenants in the Netherlands," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1196-1227, August.
    8. Eva-María Mora-Valentín & Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado & Juan-José Nájera-Sánchez, 2018. "Mapping the conceptual structure of science and technology parks," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1410-1435, October.
    9. Fernando Ubeda & Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado & Eva-María Mora-Valentín, 2019. "Do firms located in science and technology parks enhance innovation performance? The effect of absorptive capacity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 21-48, February.
    10. 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.
    11. Marisa Ramírez-Alesón & Marta Fernández-Olmos, 2018. "Unravelling the effects of Science Parks on the innovation performance of NTBFs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 482-505, April.
    12. Taiane Quaresma Leite & André Luis Silva & Joaquim Ramos Silva & Sérgio Evangelista Silva, 2023. "A Multilevel Analysis of the Interaction Between Science Parks and External Agents: a Study in Brazil and Portugal," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(2), pages 1790-1829, June.
    13. Alberto Albahari & Magnus Klofsten & Juan Carlos Rubio-Romero, 2019. "Science and Technology Parks: a study of value creation for park tenants," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1256-1272, August.
    14. Marina van Geenhuizen & Danny P. Soetanto & Victor Scholten, 2012. "Science Parks: Changing Roles and Changing Approaches in their Evaluation," Chapters, in: Marina van Geenhuizen & Peter Nijkamp (ed.), Creative Knowledge Cities, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Laura Lecluyse & Mirjam Knockaert & Annelore Huyghe, 2023. "It is not because it is offered that it is used: an investigation into firm-level determinants of use intensity of buffering services in science parks," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 85-104, June.
    16. Kholekile L. Gwebu & Jeffrey Sohl & Jing Wang, 2019. "Differential performance of science park firms: an integrative model," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 193-211, January.
    17. Margarida Madaleno & Max Nathan & Henry Overman & Sevrin Waights, 2022. "Incubators, accelerators and urban economic development," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 59(2), pages 281-300, February.
    18. 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.
    19. Hülya Ünlü & Serdal Temel & Kristel Miller, 2023. "Understanding the drivers of patent performance of University Science Parks in Turkey," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 842-872, June.
    20. 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.

    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:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:3:p:719-732. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.