IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/regstd/v43y2009i1p33-42.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is Geographical Proximity Necessary for Knowledge Spillovers within a Cooperative Technological Network? The Case of the French Biotechnology Sector

Author

Listed:
  • Emilie-Pauline Gallie

Abstract

Gallie E.-P. Is geographical proximity necessary for knowledge spillovers within a cooperative technological network? The case of the French biotechnology sector, Regional Studies. The models of the geography of innovation do not take into account the channels for spillovers diffusion. The main interest of this paper is to introduce cooperation as a channel of spillovers directly into the knowledge production function. This enables one to test if geographic proximity is a necessary condition for diffusion or if the development of a cooperative network, whatever the distance between partners, also allows this transmission. The main result is that the distance separating French or European partners does not constitute a barrier to knowledge flows. However, intra sector-based spillovers are found from surrounding areas, but not from further areas, when they are measured by an external stock of knowledge. These spillovers are localized as suggested by the literature. [image omitted] Gallie E.-P. La proximite geographique est-elle necessaire aux retombees de savoir dans un reseau technologique cooperatif? Le cas du secteur francais des biotechnologies, Regional Studies. Les modeles de la geographie de l'innovation ne prennent pas en compte les circuits de diffusion des externalites. Le principal interet de cet article est d'introduire la cooperation comme vecteur de externalites dans la fonction de production de savoir. Ceci nous permet de verifier si la proximite geographique est une condition necessaire de la diffusion ou si le developpement d'un reseau cooperatif, quelle que soit la distance entre les partenaires, permet egalement cette transmission. Le principal resultat est que la distance separant les partenaires francais ou europeens ne constitue pas un obstacle aux flux de connaissance. De plus, les resultats montrent qu'il y a des externalities intra-sectorielles, provenant des zones limitrophes, mais pas des zones plus eloignees, lorsqu'elles sont mesurees par un stock externe de connaissance exterieur. Ces retombees sont localisees, comme le suggere la litterature. Externalites Diffusion spatiale Cooperation Biotechnologie Donnees de comptage Gallie E.-P. Ist geografische Nahe fur Wissensubertragungen innerhalb eines kooperativen technologischen Netzwerks notwendig? Der Fall des Biotechnologiesektors in Frankreich, Regional Studies. In den Modellen der Geografie der Innovation werden die Kanale fur eine Diffusion der Wissensubertragung nicht berucksichtigt. Der wichtigste Schwerpunkt dieses Beitrags liegt darin, die Zusammenarbeit als Vektor der Wissensubertragung direkt in die Funktion der Wissensproduktion einzufuhren. Auf diese Weise lasst sich uberprufen, ob die geografische Nahe eine notwendige Bedingung zur Diffusion darstellt oder ob die Entwicklung eines kooperativen Netzwerks unabhangig von der Entfernung zwischen den Partnern eine solche Ubertragung ebenfalls zulasst. Das wichtigste Ergebnis lautet, dass die Entfernung, die franzosische oder europaische Partner voneinander trennt, kein Hindernis fur einen Wissensstrom darstellt. Allerdings stellen wir innerhalb eines Sektors Ubertragungen aus angrenzenden Gebieten fest, nicht jedoch aus weiter entfernt liegenden Gebieten, wenn sie an einem externen Wissensvorrat gemessen werden. Diese Ubertragungen sind wie von der Literatur nahegelegt lokalisierter Art. Ubertragungen Raumliche Diffusion Zusammenarbeit Biotechnologie Zahldaten Gallie E.-P. ¿Es la proximidad geografica necesaria para los desbordamientos de conocimiento en un red tecnologica de cooperacion? El ejemplo del sector biotecnologico en Francia, Regional Studies. Los modelos de la geografia de innovacion no tienen en cuenta los canales para la difusion de los desbordamientos. En este articulo nos interesa principalmente introducir la cooperacion como un vector de desbordamientos directamente en la funcion de la produccion de conocimientos. Esto nos permite comprobar si la proximidad geografica es una condicion necesaria para la difusion o si el desarrollo de una red cooperativa, independientemente de la distancia entre socios, tambien permite esta transmision. El principal resultado es que la distancia que separa a socios franceses o europeos no representa un obstaculo para los flujos de conocimiento. Sin embargo, observamos desbordamientos intrasectoriales desde areas adyacentes pero no desde zonas mas lejanas cuando se miden en funcion de una provision externa de conocimientos. Tal como se indica en la literatura, estos desbordamiento estan localizados. Desbordamientos Difusion espacial Cooperacion Biotecnologia Datos de recuento

Suggested Citation

  • Emilie-Pauline Gallie, 2009. "Is Geographical Proximity Necessary for Knowledge Spillovers within a Cooperative Technological Network? The Case of the French Biotechnology Sector," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 33-42.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:regstd:v:43:y:2009:i:1:p:33-42
    DOI: 10.1080/00343400701652818
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00343400701652818
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00343400701652818?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. Barak S. Aharonson & Joel A.C. Baum & Maryann P. Feldman, 2004. "Industrial Clustering and the Returns to Inventive Activity Canadian Biotechnology Firms, 1991-2000," DRUID Working Papers 04-03, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    2. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Jeff Armstrong, 1994. "Intellectual Capital and the Firm: The Technology of Geographically Localized Knowledge Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 4946, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Stefano Breschi & Francesco Lissoni, 2003. "Mobility and Social Networks: Localised Knowledge Spillovers Revisited," KITeS Working Papers 142, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Mar 2003.
    4. James D. Adams, 2002. "Comparative localization of academic and industrial spillovers," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(3), pages 253-278, 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. Manuel Acosta & Joaqu�n M. Azagra-Caro & Daniel Coronado, 2016. "Access to Universities' Public Knowledge: Who is More Regionalist?," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(3), pages 446-459, March.
    2. Mariacristina Piva & Massimiliano Tani & Marco Vivarelli, 2018. "Business visits, knowledge diffusion and productivity," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 31(4), pages 1321-1338, October.
    3. Justin Doran & Declan Jordan & Eoin O’Leary, 2012. "The effects of the frequency of spatially proximate and distant interaction on innovation by Irish SMEs," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(7-8), pages 705-727, September.
    4. Piva, Mariacristina & Tani, Massimiliano & Vivarelli, Marco, 2017. "Labour mobility through business visits as a way to foster productivity," MERIT Working Papers 2017-004, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    5. Zafer Sonmez, 2018. "Interregional inventor collaboration and the commercial value of patented inventions: evidence from the US biotechnology industry," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 61(2), pages 399-438, September.
    6. Stefan Luethi & Alain Thierstein & Michael Bentlage, 2011. "Interlocking firm networks in the German knowledge economy. On local networks and global connectivity," ERSA conference papers ersa10p120, European Regional Science Association.
    7. Piva, Mariacristina & Tani, Massimiliano & Vivarelli, Marco, 2017. "The Productivity Impact of Business Mobility: International Evidence," GLO Discussion Paper Series 14, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    8. Frank Lasch & Frank Robert & Frédéric Roy, 2013. "Regional determinants of ICT new firm formation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 671-686, April.
    9. Christian Omobhude & Shih-Hsin Chen, 2019. "The Roles and Measurements of Proximity in Sustained Technology Development: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-30, January.
    10. Kroll, Henning, 2009. "Spillovers and proximity in perspective: a network approach to improving the operationalisation of proximity," Working Papers "Firms and Region" R2/2009, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    11. Gurrieri, Antonia Rosa, 2013. "Networking entrepreneurs," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 193-204.

    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. Rosina Moreno & Jordi Suriñach, 2014. "Innovation adoption and productivity growth: evidence for Europe," EKONOMIAZ. Revista vasca de Economía, Gobierno Vasco / Eusko Jaurlaritza / Basque Government, vol. 86(02), pages 62-87.
    2. Autant-Bernard, Corinne & Fadairo, Muriel & Massard, Nadine, 2013. "Knowledge diffusion and innovation policies within the European regions: Challenges based on recent empirical evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 196-210.
    3. Julien Pénin, 2005. "Three Consequences of Considering Innovation as a Collective Process and Knowledge as a Collective Good," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(01), pages 15-27.
    4. Lee, Chang-Yang, 2009. "Do firms in clusters invest in R&D more intensively? Theory and evidence from multi-country data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1159-1171, September.
    5. Wang, Yuandi & Hu, Ruifeng & Liu, Meijun, 2017. "The geotemporal demographics of academic journals from 1950 to 2013 according to Ulrich’s database," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 655-671.
    6. Emilie-Pauline Gallie & Diego Legros, 2007. "How Do Spatial Spillovers Diffuse In Science-Industry Interactions? The Case Of French Biotech Sector," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(8), pages 635-652.
    7. Slavtchev, Viktor & Fritsch, Michael, 2005. "The Role of Regional Knowledge Sources for Innovation: An Empirical Assessment," Freiberg Working Papers 2005/15, TU Bergakademie Freiberg, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    8. David C. Mowery & Arvids A. Ziedonis, 2001. "The Geographic Reach of Market and Non-Market Channels of Technology Transfer: Comparing Citations and Licenses of University Patents," NBER Working Papers 8568, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Michael Fritsch & Viktor Slavtchev, 2005. "The Role of Regional Knowledge for Innovation," ERSA conference papers ersa05p623, European Regional Science Association.
    10. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby, 1996. "Costly Information in Firm Transformation, Exit, or Persistent Failure," NBER Working Papers 5577, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Saul Lach & Mark Schankerman, 2008. "Incentives and invention in universities," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(2), pages 403-433, June.
    12. Olav Sorenson & Jasjit Singh, 2007. "Science, Social Networks and Spillovers," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 219-238.
    13. Steven Casper & Cornelia Storz, 2017. "Bounded careers in creative industries: Surprising patterns in video games," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 213-248, April.
    14. Ron A. Boschma & Anet B.R. Weterings, 2005. "The effect of regional differences on the performance of software firms in the Netherlands," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(5), pages 567-588, October.
    15. MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki & ZHAO Qiuhan, 2023. "University as a Knowledge Source of Innovation: A spatial analysis of the impact on local high-tech startup creation," Discussion papers 23027, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    16. Lee, Jongkwan, 2021. "The Role of a University in Cluster Formation: Evidence from a National Institute of Science and Technology in Korea," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    17. World Bank, 2012. "Pakistan - Strategic Environmental, Poverty and Social Assessment of Trade and Transport Sector Reforms," World Bank Publications - Reports 12316, The World Bank Group.
    18. Eliana Scialabba & Mariano Carpineti, 2014. "Recursos naturales y desarrollo local: el complejo oleaginoso argentino y la producción de biodiesel," Revista Finanzas y Politica Economica, Universidad Católica de Colombia, vol. 6(1), pages 95-114, April.
    19. Corinne Autant‐Bernard & Pascal Billand & David Frachisse & Nadine Massard, 2007. "Social distance versus spatial distance in R&D cooperation: Empirical evidence from European collaboration choices in micro and nanotechnologies," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 86(3), pages 495-519, August.
    20. Cantner, Uwe & Graf, Holger, 2006. "The network of innovators in Jena: An application of social network analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 463-480, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    JEL classifications; L2; O1; R1;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • O1 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development
    • R1 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics

    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:taf:regstd:v:43:y:2009:i:1:p:33-42. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CRES20 .

    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.