Star-scientist linkages to firms in APEC and European countries: indicators of regional institutional differences affecting competitive advantage

International Journal of Biotechnology

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 119-131

  Zucker, Lynne G ^a   Darby, Michael R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Geographic agglomeration; human capital; scientific breakthroughs; scientific collaborations; technology transfer

Indexed keywords

COMPETITION; INDUSTRY; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERNATIONAL TRADE; PUBLIC POLICY; SOCIAL ASPECTS; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

BIOSCIENTIST; COMMERCIALIZATION; CULTURES; EUROPEAN COUNTRIES; GEOGRAPHIC AGGLOMERATION; HUMAN CAPITAL; PUBLICATIONS; SCIENTIFIC BREAKTHROUGHS; SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATIONS;

BIOTECHNOLOGY;

EID: 0033366062     PISSN: 09636048     EISSN: 17415020     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1504/IJBT.1999.004479     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Zucker, Lynne G., and Darby, Michael R. (1996) ‘Star scientists and institutional transformation: patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 12 Nov. 1996, 93 (23): 12, 709-12, 716.
2. See particularly, Zucker, Darby and Brewer, Marilynn B. [3] and Zucker, Darby and Armstrong, Jeff [4]. The former contains an extensive data appendix describing in detail how the star scientists were identified.
3. Zucker, Lynne G., Darby, Michael R. and Brewer, Marilynn B. (1998) ‘Intellectual human capital and the birth of US biotechnology enterprises’, American Economic Review, March, 88(1): pp.290–306.
4. Zucker, Lynne G., Darby, Michael R. and Armstrong, Jeff (1994) ‘Intellectual human capital and the firm: the technology of geographically localized knowledge spillovers’, Economic Inquiry, Jan., 36 (1): pp.65–86.
5. The distinction between affiliated and linked may be more form than substance: in some cases stars always list their university affiliation even though they are known to us to be simultaneously employed by or a principal in an enterprise. In Zucker, Darby and Armstrong [4] our database was restricted to Californian firms and we considered only linkages between firms and local academics. In subsequent work for the USA and Japan, we have found both local and non-local linked academics to contribute significantly to determining a NBE’s success. In those papers we measure the strength of a star’s ties to a NBE by the number of articles published by the star while affiliated, locally, or non-locally linked.
6. Darby, Michael R. and Zucker, Lynne G., (1996) ‘Star scientists, institutions, and the entry of Japanese biotechnology enterprises’, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper, No. 5795, October.
7. Griliches, Zvi (1957) ‘Hybrid corn: an exploration in the economics of technological change’, Econometrica, October, Vol. 25, No. 4: pp.501–522.
8. Nelson, Richard R., (1959) ‘The simple economics of basic scientific research’, Journal of Political Economy, June, Vol. 67, No. 3: pp.297–306.
9. Arrow, Kenneth J. (1962) ‘Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention’, in Richard R. Nelson, (Ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, N.B.E.R. Special Conference Series vol. 13, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
10. Arrow, Kenneth J. (1974) The Limits of Organization, New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.
11. Nelson, Richard R., and Winter, Sidney, G., (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12. Rosenberg, Nathan, (1982) Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Cohen, Stanley, Chang, A., Boyer, Herbert, and Helling, R. (1973)‘Construction of biologically functional bacterial plasmids in vitro’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 70: pp.3240–3244.
14. Although they have made some important and early discoveries, bioscientists in the UK and other parts of Europe often have had difficulty funding their research adequately and utilizing it effectively in firms.
15. Senker, Jacqueline, Joly, Pierre-Benoit and Reinhard, Michael (1995) ‘Overseas Biotechnology Research by Europe’s Chemical/Pharmaceuticals Multinationals: Rationale and Implications’, paper presented at the International Seminar on Biotechnology in the European Union: Technology, Industrial Structures, and Competition, sponsored by the Commission of the European Communities, Château de Sassenage, Grenoble, France, December 7-8.
16. Cantley, Mark F., (1995) ‘The regulation of modern biotechnology: a historical and European perspective,” in H.J. Rehm and G. Reed in cooperation with A. Pühler and P. Stader, Biotechnology, 2nd ed., Vol. 12: Legal, Economic and Ethical Dimensions (D. Brauer, vol. ed.), Weinheim, Germany: VCH, pp.505–681.
17. Zomzely-Neurath, Claire E. (1989) ‘Biotechnology in Europe and Israel’, ESN Information Bulletin No. 89-06, European Office, Office of Naval Research, US Navy.
18. Aghion, Philippe, and Tirole, Jean, (1994)‘The management of innovation’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, November, Vol. 109 No. 4: pp.1185–1209.
19. See Darby and Zucker [6] on the variety of work-arounds used by Japanese NBSs and professors to deal with conflict-of-interest rules in the Japanese universities.
20. We had originally expected that commercial involvement of the best scientists would reduce their contribution to the advancement of science, but reported for both USA and world data in Zucker and Darby [1], the rate of article publication in fact is maintained while the stars are working with firms and the citations per article about doubles compared to before or afterwards. We believe that the combination of additional resources and closely aligned scientific and commercial goals explains this surprising positive effect of commercial involvement on scientific productivity.
21. GenBank, Release 65.0, machine readable database, Palo Alto, CA: IntelliGentics, Inc., September 1990.