Clustering, long distance partnerships and the SME: A study of the French biotechnology sector

International Journal of Technology Management

Volumn 27, Issue 8, 2004, Pages 791-808

  Mytelka, Lynn K ^a  

^a INTECH   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Biotechnology; Cluster; France; Innovation system; Knowledge flows; R D partnerships; SME; Strategic alliance

Indexed keywords

BIOTECHNOLOGY; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; PUBLIC POLICY; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS; STRATEGIC PLANNING; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

FRANCE; INNOVATION SYSTEMS; KNOWLEDGE FLOWS; R AND D PARTNERSHIPS; SME; STRATEGIC ALLIANCE;

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT;

EID: 4444319485     PISSN: 02675730     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1504/IJTM.2004.004994     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Freeman, C. (1992) 'Formal scientific and technical institutions in the national systems of innovation', in Lundvall, B.A. (Ed.): National Systems of Innovation. Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, Pinter Publishers, UK.
2. Kline, S.J. and Rosenberg, N. (1986) 'An overview of innovation in national academy of engineering', The Positive Sum Strategy: Harnessing Technology for International Growth, The National Academy Press, Washington DC, pp.275-305.
3. Nelson, R. and Winter, S. (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
4. Lundvall, B-A. (1988) 'Innovation as an interactive process: from user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation', in Dosi, G., Freeman, C., Nelson, R., Silverberg, G. and Soete, L. (Eds.): Technical Change and Economic Theory, Pinter Publishers, UK, pp.349-369.
5. Metcalfe, S. (1997) 'Technology systems and technology policy in an evolutionary framework', in Archibugi, D. and Michie, J. (Eds.): Technology, Globalisation and Economic Performance, Cambridge University Press, UK, pp.268-296.
6. Malerba, F. and Orsenigo, L. (1996) The dynamics and evolution of industries', Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp.51-88.
7. Malerba, F. (1999) 'Sectoral systems of innovation and production', paper presented at the DRUID Meeting in Rebild, 9-12 June.
8. Pyka, A and Saviotti, P. (2001) Innovation Networks in the Biotechnology-Based Sectors, INRA, Grenoble.
9. Cantwell, J.A. and Piscitello, L. (2000) 'Accumulating technological competence: its changing impact on corporate diversification and internationalisation', Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp.21-51.
10. Mytelka, L.K. (2000) 'Local systems of innovation in a globalised world economy', Industry and Innovation, Vol. 7, No. 1, June, pp. 15-32.
11. Saxenian, A. (1994) Regional Advantage: Competition and Cooperation in Silicon Valley and Route 128, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
12. Storper, M. (1995) 'The resurgence of regional economies, ten years later: the region as a nexus of untraded interdependencies', European Urban and Regional Studies, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 191-221.
13. Maskell, P. (2001) 'Growth and the territorial configuration of economic activity', paper presented to the DRUID Summer Conference, Aalborg, 12-15 June.
14. Maskell, P. and Malmberg, A. (1999) 'Localised learning and industrial competitiveness', Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 23, pp.167-185.
15. Mytelka, L.K. and Farinelli, F. (2000) Clusters, Innovations Systems and Sustained Competitiveness, UNU/INTECH discussion paper #2005, Maastricht, October (WWW.intech.unu.edu).
16. Smith, K. (1999) 'Industrial structure, technology intensity and growth: issues for policy', paper prepared for the DRUID Conference on National Innovation systems, Industrial Dynamics and Innovation Policy, Rebild, Denmark, June 9-12.
17. Autant-Bernard, C. (2001) 'Science and knowledge flows: evidence from the French case', Research Policy, Vol. 30, pp.1069-1078.
18. Segal, Quince and Wicksteed (2000) The Cambridge Phenomenon Revisted: Part One, Cambridge.
19. Segal, Quince and Wicksteed (2000) The Cambridge Phenomenon Revisted: Part Two, Cambridge.
20. UK (1999) Biotechnology Clusters, Report of a team led by Lord Sainsburgy, Minister for Science, August.
21. Vavakova, B. (2001) La Science de la Nation? Les paradoxes politiques de la logique economique, Harmattan, Paris.
22. Gransrand, O., Hakanson, L. and Sjolander, S. (Eds.) (1992) Technology Management and International Business: Internationalisation of R&D and Technology, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.
23. Hagedoorn, J. (1995) 'Strategic technology partnering during the 1980s: trends, networks and corporate patterns in non-core technologies', Research Policy, Vol. 24, pp.207-231.
24. Hood, N. and Young, S. (2000) The Globalization of Multinational Enterprise Activity and Economic Development, Macmillan, UK.
25. National Science Foundation, Science & Engineering Indicators (2002).
26. Digital switching in the communications industry, for example, is not an incremental extension of earlier electro-mechanical switching technology, nor are compact discs based on laser technology derive logically from earlier phonograph records.
27. Mytelka, L.K. and Delapierre, M. (1999) 'Strategic partnerships and the rise of knowledge-based networked oligopolies' (with Michel Delapierre), in Cutler, C., Haufler, V. and Porter, T. (Eds.): Private Authority and International Affairs, Suny University Press, Binghamton, pp.129-149.
28. Prior to the revolution in molecular biology, the pharmaceutical industry was largely chemical based and little in the nature of the underlying research gave rise to congruence in the interests of seed companies and pharmaceutical firms. During the 1990s this led to a number of mergers and then demergers across industry boundaries.
29. Data provided by Thomson Financial data services from their strategic partnering database, for example, also showed that biotechnology came second to information and communications technology and well ahead of energy and automobiles in all years from 1994-1999. The exception to this generalization is in the research joint venture database compiled by Nick Vonortas from among RJVs registered in the US over the years 1985-1995. Biotechnology, even when combined with pharmaceutical RJVs came well behind such sectors as environment, advanced materials and energy [30].
30. Vonortas, N. (1997) 'Research joint ventures in the United States', Research Policy, Vol. 26, pp.577-595.
31. Clinical testing and marketing, moreover, were activities in which the large, integrated pharmaceutical companies had acquired considerable experience [32,33].
32. Senker, J. and Sharp, M. (1997) 'Organizational learning in cooperative alliances: some case studies in biotechnology', Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp.35-51.
33. Orsenigo, L., Pammolli, F. and Rioccaboni, M. (2001) 'Technological change and network dynamics lessons from the pharmaceutical industry', Research Policy, Vol. 30, pp.485-508.
34. Schumpeter, J.A. (1934) Theory of Economic Development, Trans, Reduces Opic, Cambridge, Mass.
35. Chandler, A. Jr. (1990) Scale and Scope, The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism, Cambridge, Mass, The Belknap Press and Harvard University Press.
36. Ernst and Young (2001) Life Sciences in France-2001 ' Where Creativity Meets Business'.
37. Hagedoorn, J. (2002) 'Inter-firm R&D partnerships - an overview of major trends and paterns since 1960', Research Policy, Vol. 31, No. 4(5), pp.477-492.
38. Hagedoorn, J. and Roijakkers, N. (2001) 'Small entrepreneurial firms and large companies in inter-firm R&D networks - the international biotechnology industry', in Hitt, M., Ireland, R.D., Camp, S.M. and Sexton, D.L. (Eds.): Strategic Entrepreneurship Creating a New Mindset, Blackwell Publishing, UK, pp.223-252.
39. This depends upon the indicator used. Of the 71,609 researchers in public sector institutions in 1996, Ile de France, for example, accounted for 32.7%, Rhones-Alpes for 10.6%, PACA for 8.7%, Midi-Pyrenees for 7.1%; Languedoc-Rousillon for 5.5% and Alsace for 3.3% [40]. In terms of biotechnology - related publications, Ile de France accounted for only 25.5% of the French total in 1997, a decline of 10% points since 1985 as other regions became important biotechnology centres [40].
40. OST (2000) Science and Technologie Indicateurs Edition 2000, sous la direction de Remi Barre, Economica, Paris.
41. The Genepole created in 1998 at Evry in the southern part of the Ile de France region is perhaps the best known of the biotechnology-based technopoles in this region.
42. For a description of this database see [43].
43. Caloghirou, Y., Tsakanikas, A. and Vonortas, N.S. (2001) 'University-industry cooperation in the context of the European framework programmes', Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 26, pp.153-161.
44. The French equivalent of the Nasdaq.
45. (2000) 'Sociétés de biotech: le dynamisme est aux commandes', Pharmaceutiques, No. 81, November, p.53.
46. A list of the firms interviewed for this study is contained in Appendix 1.
47. Originally created as a research subsidiary of Pasteur Merieux, they became independent in 1997 and were subsequently acquired by a French firm.
48. Rhobio was created as a joint venture between Rhone-Poulenc, now Aventis, and Biogemma, itself the research arm of a group of seed companies (Limagrain, Pau-Euralis, Unigrains and Sofiproteol).
49. HLA-G, a subsidiary of Parteurop Development linked to Pasteur Merieux Connaught.
50. Interview, Kappa Biotech S.A.Joulouse, 05/03/01.
51. Interview, HLA-G, Lyon, 11/06/01.
52. Interviews with Biocytex, Appligene/Qbiogene, Kappa Biotech, Innate Pharma, Trophos and Ipsogen.
53. Public sector research institutes in the regions that are heavily engaged in research on biotechnology include those belonging to the Centre National de Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) and to, the Institut national de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (INSERM).
54. This is a particular problem in Luminy where a struggle pits environmentalists against further expansion into the adjacent national park and those desirous of staying on or close to the campus.
55. Herve Brailly, CEO of Innate Pharma referred to it as part of a 'Triangle d'Or', a 'Luminy Virtuel' (Interview, Innate Pharma, Marseille, 12/01/01).
56. Intel-views: Immunotech, Marseille, 19/12/01.
57. Ancori, B., Bureth, A. and Cohendet, P. (2000) 'The economics of knowledge: the debate about codification and tacit knowledge', Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp.255-287.
58. Saviotti, P.P. (1998) "Industrial structure and the dynamics of knowledge generation in biotechnology', in Senker, J. and Van Vliet, R. (Eds.): Biotechnology and Competitive Advantage: Europe's Firms and US Advantage, E. Elgar, UK, pp. 19-43.