Between vision and reality: Promoting innovation through technoparks in an emerging economy

Technovation

Volumn 29, Issue 10, 2009, Pages 645-656

  Radosevic, Slavo ^a   Myrzakhmet, Marat ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b L N GUMILYOV EURASIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Kazakhstan)

Author keywords

Economic restructuring; Industrial development; Innovation; Innovation policy; Kazakhstan; S T parks

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; ECONOMIC RESTRUCTURING; EMERGING ECONOMIES; INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT; INNOVATION POLICY; INNOVATION PROMOTION; KAZAKHSTAN; LOCAL MARKETS; OVERALL EFFECTIVENESS; POLICY OPTIONS; TECHNOLOGY-BASED; TECHNOPARK;

ECONOMICS; PARKS;

INNOVATION;

EID: 68649123794     PISSN: 01664972     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2009.04.001     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Alam A., Casero P.A., Faruk Khan, and Udomsaph C. Unleashing Prosperity. Property Growth in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union (2008), World Bank, Washington
2. Arnold, E.M., Bell, M., Bessant, J., Brimble, P., 2000. Enhancing Policy and Institutional Support for Industrial Technology Development of Thailand. The Overall Policy Framework and the Development of the Industrial Innovation System. Technopolis, Brighton, December.
3. Bakouros, Yiannis L., Dimitri C., Mardas, Nikos C., and Varsakelis. Science park, a high tech fantasy?: an analysis of the Science Parks of Greece. Technovation 22 (2002) 123-128
4. Bigliardi B., Dormio A.I., Nosella A., and Petroni G. Assessing science parks' performances: directions from selected Italian case studies. Technovation 26 (2006) 489-505
5. Chan K.F., and Lau T. Assessing technology incubator progress in the science parks: the good, the bad and the ugly. Technovation 25 (2005) 1215-1228
6. Chorda I. Towards the maturity stage: an insight into the performance of French technopoles. Technovation 16 3 (1996) 143-152
7. Dettwiler P., Lindelof P., and Lofsten H. Utility of location: a comparative survey between small new technology-based firms located on and off Science Parks-Implications for facilities management. Technovation 26 (2006) 506-517
8. Dosi G. Sources, procedures, and microeconomic effects of innovation. Journal of Economic Literature 26 (1988) 1120-1171
9. Dyker A.D. Technological change, network building and dynamic Competitiveness in the engineering industry in Kazakhstan. Post-Communist Economies 17 4 (2005) 485-501
10. EU, 2002. Benchmarking of business incubators. Final Report for Enterprise Directorate, Centre for Strategy and Evaluation Services, Kent, UK.
11. EU, 2003. Trendchart. National Report, Poland, August. 〈http://www.proinno-europe.eu〉.
12. Gerschenkron, Alexander, 1962. Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective. Cambridge, MA.
13. Gerschenkron A. An Economic Spurt That Failed: Four Lectures in Austrian History (1977), Princeton University Press, Princeton
14. Hobday M. Innovation in Asian Industrialization: A Gerschenkronian Perspective. Oxford Development Studies 31 3 (2003) 293-314(22)
15. Hansson F., Husted K., and Vestergaard J. Second generation science parks: from structural holes jockeys to social capital catalysts of the knowledge society. Technovation 25 (2005) 1039-1041
16. Kembaev B.A., Aitmambetov R.M., and Ordabaeva S.I. The Dynamic of S&T Potential of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 1991-2000 (2001), INTI, Kazgos p. 30
17. Kihlgren A. Promotion of innovation activity in Russia through the creation of science parks: the case of St. Petersburg (1992-1998). Technovation 23 (2003) 65-76
18. Kline S., and Rosenberg N. An overview of innovation. In: Landau R., and Rosenberg N. (Eds). The Positive Sum Strategy (1986), National Academy Press
19. Koenraad P. An assessment of science parks: towards better understanding of their role in the diffusion of technological knowledge. R&D Management 21 2 (1991) 18-27
20. Koha C.C., Francis C.C., Winston T.H., Koh, and Feichin Ted Tschang. An analytical framework for science parks and technology districts with an application to Singapore. Journal of Business Venturing 20 (2005) 217-239
21. Ku Y.L., Liau S.-J., and Hsing W.-C. The high-tech milieu and innovation-oriented development. Technovation 25 (2005) 145-153
22. Lai H.-C., and Shyu J.Z. A comparison of innovation capacity at science parks across the Taiwan Strait: the case of Zhangjiang High-Tech Park and Hsinchu Science-based Industrial Park. Technovation 25 (2005) 805-813
23. Lofsten H., and Lindelof P. Science parks and the growth of new technology-based firms-academic industry links, innovation and markets. Research Policy 31 (2001) 859-876
24. Lofsten H., and Lindelof P. Science Parks in Sweden-industrial renewal and development?. R&D Management 31 3 (2001) 309-322
25. Markusen A., Halley P., and Glasmier A. High Tech America: The What, How, Where and Why of the Sunrise Industries (1986), Allen and Unwin, London
26. Massey D., Quintas P., and Wield D. High Tech Fantasies: Science Parks in Society, Science and Space (1992), Routledge, London
27. OECD. Main S&T Indicators (2000), OECD, Paris
28. Palmai Z. An innovation park in Hungary: INNOTECH of the Budapest University of Technology and Economics. Technovation 24 (2004) 421-432
29. Pavitt K. Sectoral patterns of technical change: towards taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy 13 (1984) 343-373
30. Peng, W. Michael, 2000. Business Strategies in Transition Economies, Sage IBS Series, London.
31. Pro INNO, 2008. Pro INNO-Policy TrendChart-policy trends and appraisal report: Kazakhstan 2007. Report prepared within the RIPKA project funded by the INTAS EC programme.
32. Phan H.P., Siegel D.S., and Wright M. Science parks and incubators: observations, synthesis and future research. Journal of Business Venturing 20 (2005) 165-182
33. Phillimore J. Beyond the linear view of innovation in science park evaluation, an analysis of Western Australian Technology Park. Technovation 19 (1999) 673-680
34. Quintas, P., 1986a. Science Parks and Local Economies, Open University Conference on Local Economic Strategies. Mimeo, SPRU.
35. Quintas, P., 1986b. The Technological Relevance of Science Parks. Mimeo, Annual Conference, UK Science Park Association, SPRU.
36. Quintas, P., Massey, D., Wield, D., 1992. Some Questions Raised by the UK Science Park Experience. Mimeo, SPRU, Brighton, December.
37. Ramasamy, B., Chakrabarty, A., Cheah, M., 2003. Malaysia's leap into the future: an evaluation of the multimedia super corridor. Working Paper, Nottingham University Business School.
38. Rostow W.W. The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto (1960), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
39. Staudt E., Bock J., and Muhlemeyer P. Technology centres and science parks: agents or competence centres for small businesses?. International Journal of Technology Management 9 2 (1999) 197-212
40. Sarfraz M.A. Assessing value-added contributions of university technology business incubators to tenant firms. Research Policy 25 (1996) 325-335
41. Shelton R.D., and Margenbhalter C.R. The Business Incubator Development Programme in Ukraine. Mimeo (2002), International Technology Research Institute, Loyola College, Baltimore
42. Storey D.J., and Tether B.S. Public policy measures to support new technology based firms in the EU. Research Policy 26 (1998) 1037-1057
43. In: Tsalik S., and Ebel R. (Eds). Caspian Oil Windfalls: Who Will Benefit? Central Eurasia Project (2003), Open Society Institute, New York
44. Vedovello C. Science parks and university-industry interaction: geographical proximity between the agents as a driving force. Technovation 17 9 (1997) 49-59
45. Westhead P., and Storey D.J. Links between education institutions and high technology firms. Omega, International Journal of Management Science 23 4 (1995) 345-360
46. World Bank, 2005. Getting competitive, staying competitive: the challenge of managing Kazakhstan's oil boom. Country Economic Memorandum, Report No. 30852-KZ, June.
47. Xue L. Promoting industrial R&D and high-tech development through Science Parks: the Taiwan experience and its implications for developing countries. International Journal of Technology Management, Special Issue on R&D Management 13 7/8 (1997) 744-761