IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Management of Cluster Policies: Case Studies of Japanese, German, and French Bio-clusters

  • Okamuro, Hiroyuki
  • Nishimura, Junichi

This paper provides a detailed comparison of the following five cases of Japanese and European clusters in biotechnology: (1) Kobe Biomedical Innovation Cluster (KBIC) in Kobe (Japan), (2) Fuji Pharma Valley Cluster in Shizuoka Prefecture (Japan), (3) BioM Biotech Cluster in Munich (Germany), (4) BioRegion Rhine-Neckar in Heidelberg (Germany), and (5) Alsace BioValley Cluster in Strasbourg (France). We pay special attention to the cluster policy and its management by each region's core cluster management organization. Information on the focal clusters and the management of cluster policies has been obtained through interviews with the cluster directors and core staff in 2010 and 2011. We find several similarities and differences among the five cases of Japanese and European clusters. We also discuss how the management of cluster policies by the core management organizations may be related with the performance of regional clusters.

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.

File URL: http://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/rs/bitstream/10086/19419/1/wp2011-7.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Center for Economic Institutions, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University in its series CEI Working Paper Series with number 2011-7.

as
in new window

Length: 27, 12 p.
Date of creation: Oct 2011
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:hit:hitcei:2011-7
Contact details of provider: Postal: 2-1 Naka, Kunitachi, Tokyo 186-8603
Phone: 042-580-8405
Fax: 042-580-8333
Web page: http://cei.ier.hit-u.ac.jp/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

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.:

as in new window
  1. 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.
  2. Martin, Philippe & Mayer, Thierry & Mayneris, Florian, 2008. "Spatial Concentration and Firm-Level Productivity in France," CEPR Discussion Papers 6858, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  3. Martin, Philippe & Mayer, Thierry & Mayneris, Florian, 2011. "Public support to clusters: A firm level study of French "Local Productive Systems"," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 108-123, March.
  4. Ron Martin & Peter Sunley, 2002. "Deconstructing Clusters: Chaotic Concept or Policy Panacea," ESRC Centre for Business Research - Working Papers wp244, ESRC Centre for Business Research.
  5. Michele Cincera, 2007. "Geographic and Technological R&D spillovers within the Triad: Micro evidence from US patents," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/147173, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  6. Dirk Dohse, 2007. "Cluster-Based Technology Policy—The German Experience," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 69-94.
  7. Franz Tödtling & Michaela Trippl, 2004. "One size fits all? Towards a differentiated policy approach with respect to regional innovation systems," SRE-Disc sre-disc-2004_01, Institute for Multilevel Governance and Development, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
  8. Falck, Oliver & Heblich, Stephan & Kipar, Stefan, 2010. "Industrial innovation: Direct evidence from a cluster-oriented policy," Munich Reprints in Economics 20542, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
  9. Junichi Nishimura & Hiroyuki Okamuro, 2011. "R&D productivity and the organization of cluster policy: an empirical evaluation of the Industrial Cluster Project in Japan," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 117-144, April.
  10. Eickelpasch, Alexander & Fritsch, Michael, 2005. "Contests for Cooperation: A New Approach in German Innovation Policy," Freiberg Working Papers 2005,03, TU Bergakademie Freiberg, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
  11. 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.
  12. Ronde, Patrick & Hussler, Caroline, 2005. "Innovation in regions: What does really matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1150-1172, October.
  13. Jeffrey L. Furman & Margaret K. Kyle & Iain Cockburn & Rebecca M. Henderson, 2010. "Public and Private Spillovers: Location and the Productivity of Pharmaceutical Research," NBER Chapters, in: Contributions in Memory of Zvi Griliches, pages 165-188 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  14. OKUBO Toshihiro & TOMIURA Eiichi, 2010. "Industrial Relocation Policy and Heterogeneous Plants Sorted by Productivity: Evidence from Japan," Discussion papers 10016, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
  15. Jeffrey L. Furman & Margaret K. Kyle & Iain M. Cockburn & Rebecca Henderson, 2006. "Public & Private Spillovers, Location and the Productivity of Pharmaceutical Research," NBER Working Papers 12509, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  16. David Audretsch & Erik Lehmann & Susanne Warning, 2004. "University Spillovers and New Firm Location," Working Papers of the Research Group Heterogenous Labor 04-13, Research Group Heterogeneous Labor, University of Konstanz/ZEW Mannheim.
  17. Rumen Dobrinsky, 2009. "The Paradigm of Knowledge-Oriented Industrial Policy," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 273-305, December.
  18. Nishimura, Junichi & Okamuro, Hiroyuki, 2012. "Subsidy and networking: The effects of direct and indirect support programs of the cluster policy," Working Paper Series 22, Center for Interfirm Network, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
  19. Dohse, Dirk, 2000. "Technology policy and the regions -- the case of the BioRegio contest," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1111-1133, December.
  20. Viktor Vanberg & Wolfgang Kerber, 1994. "Institutional competition among jurisdictions: An evolutionary approach," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 193-219, March.
  21. Spence, Michael, 1984. "Cost Reduction, Competition, and Industry Performance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(1), pages 101-21, January.
  22. Frank McDonald & Dimitrios Tsagdis & Qihai Huang, 2006. "The development of industrial clusters and public policy," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 525-542, November.
  23. Fritsch, Michael & Franke, Grit, 2004. "Innovation, regional knowledge spillovers and R&D cooperation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 245-255, March.
  24. Desrochers, Pierre, 2001. " Geographical Proximity and the Transmission of Tacit Knowledge," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 25-46, March.
  25. Anselin, Luc & Varga, Attila & Acs, Zoltan, 1997. "Local Geographic Spillovers between University Research and High Technology Innovations," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 422-448, November.
  26. Teece, David J., 1993. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 112-113, April.
  27. 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.
  28. Acs, Zoltan J. & Anselin, Luc & Varga, Attila, 2002. "Patents and innovation counts as measures of regional production of new knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1069-1085, September.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hit:hitcei:2011-7. 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: (Reiko Suzuki)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.