Determinants of biotechnology utilization by the Canadian industry

Research Policy

Volumn 32, Issue 10, 2003, Pages 1719-1735

  Traore, Namatie ^a   Rose, Antoine ^a  

^a STATISTICS CANADA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Absorptive capacity; Biotechnology utilization; Canadian industry; Learning; Relational capital

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURE; FOOD PROCESSING; HEALTH CARE; INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH; STATISTICAL METHODS;

ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY (AC); BIOPROCESSING; RATIONAL CAPITAL;

BIOTECHNOLOGY;

EID: 0344899004     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0048-7333(03)00081-7     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Adams, S., 1999. Previous practice effects on educator adoption of dynamically continuous innovation ( http://www.anzmac99.unsw.edu.au/anzmacfiles/a/adams.pdf ).
2. Artz, W., Kendall, R., Duane I., Michael, A.H., 1999. International Diversity by Entrepreneurial Firms: Cooperative Relationships, Core Competencies and Performance. Hankamer School of Business, Baylor University, Waco, TX, USA.
3. Arundel, A., 1999. Diffusion of biotechnology in Canada: results from the survey of biotechnology use in Canadian industries 1996. Working Paper #06, Science Innovation and, Electronic Information Division (SIEID), Statistics Canada.
4. Arundel A., Rose A. The diffusion of environmental biotechnology in Canada: adoption strategies and cost offsets. Technovation. 19:1999;551-560.
5. Beyer J.M., Trice H.M. The utilization process: a conceptual framework and synthesis of empirical findings. Administrative Science Quarterly. 27:1982;591-622.
6. Brown J.S., Duguid P. Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science. 2:1991;40-57.
7. Buxton M., Hanney S. How can pay-back from health services be assessed. Journal of Health Resource Policy. 1:1996;35-46.
8. Caplan N. The two communities theory and knowledge utilization. American Behavioral Scientist. 22:1979;459-470.
9. Cohen W., Levinthal D.A. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly. 35(1):1990;128-152.
10. Contact Canada, 1998. Canadian Biotechnology 1998. Fred Haynes.
11. Cronbach, L.J., 1970. Essentials of Psychology Testing. Harper & Row, New York.
12. Devine M., Thomas J., Thimoty A. Government supported industry-university research centers: issues for successful technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer. 12:1987;27-35.
13. Dickerson M.D., Gentry J.W. Characteristics of adopters and non-adopters of home computers. Journal of Consumer Research. 10:1983;225-235.
14. Dyer J.H., Singh H. The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review. 23:1998;660-679.
15. Eisenhardt K., Schoohoven C. Resource based view of strategic alliance formation: strategic and social effects of entrepreneurial firms. Organization Science. 7:1996;136-150.
16. Eliasson, G., 2000. The industrial potential of biotechnology: a competence bloc analysis. In: de la Mothe, J., Niosi, J. (Eds.), The Economic and Social Dynamics of Biotechnology. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston/Dordrecht/London, pp. 29-52.
17. Eliasson G., Eliasson A. The biotechnological competence bloc. Revue d'Economie Industrielle. 78:1996;7-26.
18. Engelbrecht, H.-J., 1996. Absorptive capacity, international R&D spillovers and productivity in OECD economies. Discussion paper #96.4, School of Applied and International Economics, Massey University.
19. Ernst and Young, 1997. In: Goudey, J., Nath, D. (Eds.), Canadian Biotech'97: Coming of Age. Fourth Report on the Canadian Biotechnology Industry.
20. Fountain, J.E., 1997. In: Fountain, J.E. (Ed.), Social Capital: A Key Enabler of Innovation in Science and Technology. Politics research group. Working Papers, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
21. Frambach R.T. An integrated model of organizational adoption and diffusion of innovations. European Journal of Marketing. 27(5):1993;22-41.
22. Frambach R.T., Barkema H.G., Nooteboom B., Wedel M. Adoption of service innovation in the business market: an empirical test of supply-side variables. Journal of Business Research. 41:1998;161-174.
23. Freeman C. The national system of innovation in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics. 19(1):1995a;5-24.
24. Freeman, C., 1995b. History, co-evolution and economic growth. IIASA Working Paper 95-76, IIASA, Laxenberg.
25. Griffith, R., Redding, S., van Reenen, J., 2000. R&D and absorptive capacity: from theory to data. Working Paper 01/03, The Institute for Fiscal Studies.
26. Hall G., Loucks S., Rutherford W., Nerlove B. Levels of use of innovation: a framework for analyzing innovation adoption. Journal of Teacher Education. 26(1):1975;52-56.
27. Huberman M. Linkage between researchers and practitioners: a qualitative study. American Educational Research Journal. 27(2):1990;363-391.
28. Huberman M. Research utilization: the state of the art. Knowledge and Policy. 7(4):1994;13-21.
29. Johnson K. Stimulating evaluation by integrating academia and practice. Knowledge. 2(2):1980;237-262.
30. Knott J., Wildavsky A. If dissemination is the solution, what is the problem? Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization. 1(4):1980;537-578.
31. Lamari, M., Landry, R. Amara, N., 2001. Apprentissage et innovation: une analyse économétrique á partir des données d'enquêtes dans les entreprises des régions de Québec et de Chaudiére-Appalaches. Canadian Journal of Regional Science XXIV, 57-80.
32. Landry R., Amara N., Lamari M. Utilization of social science knowledge in Canada. Research Policy. 30:2001a;333-349.
33. Landry R., Amara N., Lamari M. Climbing the ladder of research utilization: evidence from social science research. Science Communication. 22(4):2001b;397-422.
34. Larsen, J.K., 1982. Information Utilization and Non-Utilization. American Institute for Research in the Behavioral Sciences, Palo Alto, CA.
35. Larson, A., Lembre, P., Meldahl, C., 1998. Science parks and industrial development - a competence bloc analysis of Swedish, Taiwanian and US Industrial Districts. Short version of Masters thesis, KTH, Stockholm.
36. Lester J.P. The utilization of policy analysis by state agency officials. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization. 14(3):1993;267-290.
37. Lester J.P., Wilds L.J. The utilization of public policy analysis: a conceptual framework. Evaluation and Program Planning. 13:1990;313-319.
38. Levina, N., 1999. Knowledge and Organizations Literature Review. Sloan School of Management, MIT.
39. Levinthal A.D., March J.G. The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal. 14:1994;95-112.
40. Liebeskind, P.J., Zucker, L.G., Oliver, A.L., Brewer, M.B., 1995. Social networks, learning, and flexibility: sourcing scientific knowledge in new biotechnology firms. NBER Working Paper Series, Working Paper 5320.
41. Lohr, L.S., 1999. Sampling: Design and Analysis. Duxbury Press, Albany, NY, USA.
42. Lundvall, B.-A., 1997a. Competition and industrial dynamics in a small open economy. Paper presented at the DRUID Summer on Competition and Industrial Dynamics, June 1-3, 1997, Skagen.
43. Lundvall, B.A., 1997b. Development strategies in the learning innovation. Paper submitted at STEPI's 10th Anniversary Conference in Seoul, May 26-29, 1997.
44. Mandell M.B., Sauter V.L. Approaches to the study of information utilization in public agencies. Journal of Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization. 6(2):1984;145-163.
45. McNiven, C., 2001a. Biotechnology Use and Development 1999. Working Paper #7, Science Innovation and, Electronic Information Division (SIEID), Statistics Canada.
46. McNiven, C., 2001b. Practices and activities of Canadian biotechnology firms: results from the Biotechnology Use and Development Survey 1999. Working Paper #11, Science Innovation and, Electronic Information Division (SIEID), Statistics Canada.
47. Nelson, R.R., Winter, S., 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
48. Niosi, J., 2000. Explaining rapid growth in Canadian biotechnology firms. Research Paper #8, Statistics Canada, SIEID.
49. Niosi J., Bas T.G. The competencies of regions: Canada's clusters in biotechnology. Small Business Economics. 17:2001;31-42.
50. Oh C.H., Rich R.F. Explaining use of knowledge in public policymaking. Knowledge and Policy. 9(1):1996;3-35.
51. Ostlund O.L. Perceived innovation attributes as predictors of innovativeness. Journal of Consumer Research. 1:1974;23-29.
52. Powell W.W. Learning from collaboration: knowledge and networks in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. California Management Review. 40(3):1998;228-240.
53. Powell W.W., Koput K.W., Smith-Doerr L. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly. 41:1996;116-145.
54. Rocha, F., 1997. Inter-firm technological cooperation: effects of absorptive capacity, firm-size and specialization. Discussion Paper Series #9707, Institute for New Technologies, The United Nations University.
55. Rose, A., 1998. Biotechnology Use by Canadian Industry 1996. Working Paper #05, Science Innovation and, Electronic Information Division (SIEID), Statistics Canada.
56. Rothwell R.F. Issues in user-producer relations in the innovation process: the role of government. International Journal of Technology Management. 9:1994;329-337.
57. Saviotti, P.P., 1998. Industrial structure and the dynamics of knowledge generation in biotechnology. In: Senker, J. (Ed.), Biotechnology and Competitive Advantage: Europe's Firms and the US Challenge. Edward Elgar Publishing Inc., Massachusetts, UK, pp. 19-43.
58. Senker, J., Bénoît, P., Reinhard, M., 1998. Biotechnology and Europe's chemical/pharmaceutical multinationals. In: Senker, J. (Ed.), Biotechnology and Competitive Advantage: Europe's Firms and the US Challenge. Edward Elgar Publishing Inc., Massachusetts, UK, pp. 110-129.
59. Song, J., Almeida, P., Wu, G., 2001. Learning by Hiring: When is Mobility Useful? http://www.google.com/search?q=jaeyongsongpdf .
60. Sorensen J.B., Stuart T.E. Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly. 45:2000;81-112.
61. Statistics Canada, 1997. Science and Technology Redesign Project, Biotechnology Firm Survey, 1997.
62. Statistics Canada, 2001. Biotechnology Research and Development (R&D) in Canada Industry, 1998. Science Statistics Service Bulletin 25 (4).
63. Traoré, N., 2001. Canadian biotechnology industrial activities: features from the 1997 Biotechnology Survey. Research Paper #12, Statistics Canada, SIEID.
64. Van de Vall M., Bolas C. Using social policy research for reducing social problems: an empirical analysis of structure and function. Journal of Applied Behavioral Scientist. 18:1982;49-67.
65. Van Vliet, R., 1998. Introduction. In: Senker, J. (Ed.), Biotechnology and Competitive Advantage: Europe's Firms and the US Challenge. Edward Elgar Publishing Inc., Massachusetts, UK, pp. 1-5.
66. Webber D.J. Legislators use of policy information. American Behavioral Scientist. 18:1987;49-67.
67. Weiss C.H. The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Review. 29:1979;49-67.
68. Weiss C.H. Knowledge creep and decision making accretion. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization. 1:1980;381-404.
69. Wilensky H. Social science and the public agenda: reflection on the relation of knowledge to policy in the United States and abroad. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law. 22(5):1997;1241-1263.
70. Wingnean, D., Lun, E., 2001. The Canadian biotechnology and health care industry. A subsidiary of the Toronto-Dominion Bank, TD Securities Inc.
71. Yin R.K., Moore G.B. Lessons on the utilization of research from nine case experiences in the natural hazards field. Knowledge and Policy: The International Journal of Knowledge Transfer. 1:1988;25-44.
72. Zahra A.S., George G. Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review. 27(2):2002;185-203.
73. Zander U., Kogut B. Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: an empirical test. Organization Science. 6:1995;76-92.
74. Zucker, G.L., Darby, M.R., Armstrong, J., 1994. Intellectual capital and the firm: the technology of geographically localized knowledge spillovers. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series, Working Paper 4946.
75. Zucker, G.L., Darby, M.R., Brewer, M.B., Peng, Y., 1995. Collaboration structure and information dilemmas in biotechnology: organizational boundaries as trust production. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 5199.