Constructing entrepreneurial advantage: Consensus building, technological uncertainty and emerging industries

Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society

Volumn 1, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 265-284

  Lowea, Nichola ^a   Feldmanb, Maryann ^b  

^a University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Biotechnology; Economic development; Entrepreneurship; Jurisdictional advantage; Regulation

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954130878     PISSN: 17521378     EISSN: 17521386     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/cjres/rsn007     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Breznitz, S. and Anderson, W. P. (2004) Boston metropolitan area biotechnology cluster. Boston, MA: Boston University, Working Paper for the Center for Transportation Studies.
2. Chang, H.a-J. (1997) The economics and politics of regulation: a critical survey. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 21: 703-728.
3. Chang, H. and Evans, P. (2005) The role of institutions in economic change. In: De Paula S; Dymski G (eds). Reimagining Growth: Towards a Renewal of Development Theory, pp. 99-129. London: Zed Books.
4. De Soto, H. (2000) The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else. New York: Basic Books.
5. DeVol, R., Wong, P. and Ki, J., et al. (2004) America's Biotech and Life Science Clusters: San Diego's Position and Economic Contributions. Milken Institute Research Report, June.
6. Ezzell, C. (1989) North Carolina adopts its own rules. Nature, Santa Monica, CA: Milken Institute. 340: 497.
7. Feldman, M. (2001) The entrepreneurial event revisited: firm formation in a regional context. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10: 861-891.
8. Feldman, M. and Lowe, N. (2008) Consensus from Controversy: A History of Cambridge's Biosafety Ordinance and the Anchoring of the Biotech Industry. Mimeo, European Planning Studies, 16: 395-410.
9. Feldman, M. P. and Martin, R. (2005) Constructing Jurisdictional Advantage. Research Policy, 34: 1235-1249.
10. Fligstein, N. (1990) The Transformation of Corporate Control. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
11. Fredrickson, D. (2001) The Recombinant DNA Controversy: A Memoir. Science, Politics and the Public Interest, 1974-1981. Washington, DC: ASM Press.
12. Friedland, R. and Alford, R. R. (1991) Bringing society back in: symbols; practices and institutional contradictions. In: Powell WW, DiMaggio PJ (eds). The New Institutionalism inOrganizational Analysis, pp. 232-266. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
13. Fung, A. and Wright, E. (2001) Deepening democracy: innovations in empowered participatory governance. Politics and Society, 29: 5-42. (Pubitemid 33244366)
14. Gertler, M. (2004) Manufacturing Culture: The Institutional Geography of Industrial Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Hall, S. (1987) Invisible Frontiers: The Race to Synthesize a Human Gene. New York: The Atlantic Monthly Press.
16. Hodgson, G. (2005) Institutions and economic development: constraining, enabling and reconstituting. In: De Paula S, Dymski G (eds). Reimagining Growth: Towards a Renewal of Development Theory. London: Zed Books.
17. Jong, S. (2006) How Organizational Structures in Science Shape Spin-Off Firms: The Biotechnology Departments of Berkeley, Stanford and UCSF and the Birth of the Biotech Industry. Industrial and Corporate Change, 15: 251-283.
18. Kenney, M. (1986) Biotechnology: The University Industrial Complex. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
19. Krimsky, S. (1982) Genetic Alchemy: The Social History of the Recombinant DNA Controversy. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
20. Krimsky, S., Baeck, A. and Bolduc, J. (1982) Municipal and State Recombinant DNA Laws: History and Assessment. Medford, MA: Tufts University.
21. Lester, R. and Piore, M. (2004) Innovation: The Missing Dimension. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
22. Levi Holtz, D. (1989) Berkeley's policies annoy many firms. The San Francisco Chronicle, October 9, A4.
23. Lipson, S. (2001) The Cambridge Model of Biotech Oversight. GeneWatch, 16. http://www.gene-watch.org/genewatch/articles/16-5lipson.html.
24. Macgregor, L., Prosser, T. and Villiers, C. (2000) Introduction. In: Macgregor L, Prosser T, Villiers C (eds). Regulation and Markets Beyond 2000. Dartmouth/ Aldershot: Ashgate.
25. Feldman, M. and Martin, R. (2005) Constructing jurisdictional advantage. Research Policy. 34: 1235-1249.
26. Miller, H. and Conko, G. (2000) The science of biotechnology meets the politics of global regulation. Issues in Science and Technology, 17: 47-54.
27. North, D. (1984) Transaction costs, institutions and economic history. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 140: 34-49.
28. Owen-Smith, J. and Powell, W. (2006) Accounting for emergence and novelty in Boston and Bay Area biotechnology. In: Braunerhjelm P, Feldman MP (eds). Cluster Genesis: Technology-Based Industrial Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29. Pollack, A. (2007) Without U.S. rules, biotech food lacks investors. New York Times, July 30.
30. Porter,M. (1997) New strategies for inner-city economic development. Economic Development Quarterly, 11: 11-27.
31. Rabin, R. (2007) As demand for donor eggs soars, high prices stir ethical concerns. New York Times, May 15.
32. Rodríguez-Pose, A. and Storper, M. (2006) Better rules or stronger communities? On the social foundations of institutional change and its economic effects. Economic Geography, 82.
33. Sabel, C. (2001) Diversity, not specialization: the ties that bind the (new) industrial district, Paper presented to Complexity and Industrial Clusters: Dynamics and Models in Theory and Practice Conference,Milan, Italy.
34. San Francisco Chronicle. (1992) Editorial: Curbing Biotech. San Francisco Chronicle, A18, 31 January.
35. Saxenian, A. (1996) Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
36. Smith Hughes, S. (2001) Making dollars out of DNA: the first major patent in biotechnology and the commercialization of molecular biology, 1974-1980. Isis, 92: 541-575.
37. Spotts, P. (1992) Agriculture and the Undergraduate. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
38. Suchman, M. and Edelman, L. (1996) Legal rational myths: the new institutionalism and the law and society tradition. Law and Social Inquiry, 21: 903-941. (Pubitemid 126654858)
39. Swedberg, R. (1994) Markets as social structures. In: Smelser N, Swedberg R (eds). Handbook of Economic Sociology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
40. Turney, J. (1998) Frankenstein's Footsteps: Science, Genetics and Popular Culture. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
41. Vettel, E. (2006) Biotech: the countercultural origins of an industry. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
42. Wade, N. (1984) The Science Business. New York: Priority Press.
43. Weiner, C. (2001) Drawing the line in genetic engineering: self-regulation and public participation. Perspective in Biology and Medicine, 22: 208-220.
44. White, H. (1988) Varieties of markets. In: Wellman B, Berkowitz S (eds). Social Structure: A Network Approach. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
45. Wood, D. J. (1985) The strategic use of public policy: business support for the 1906 Food and Drug Act. Business History Review, 59: 403-432.
46. Wright, S. (2001) Legitimating genetic engineering. Perspective in Biology and Medicine, 22: 235-247. (Pubitemid 32480463)
47. Zelizer, V. (1988) Beyond the polemics on the market: establishing a theoretical and empirical agenda. Sociological Forum, 3: 1573-7861.