Policies to promote new knowledge-intensive industrial agglomerations

Entrepreneurship and Regional Development

Volumn 16, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 459-479

  O'Gorman, Colm ^a   Kautonen, Mika ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^b TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

Author keywords

Clustering; Development policy; Finland; Industrial districts; Innovation milieu; Ireland; Knowledge intensive industries; Technopolis

Indexed keywords

ENDOGENOUS GROWTH; ENTREPRENEUR; INDUSTRIAL AGGLOMERATION; INDUSTRIAL POLICY; REGIONAL POLICY;

COUNTY DUBLIN; DUBLIN; EASTERN HEMISPHERE; EURASIA; EUROPE; FINLAND; IRELAND; LANSI-SUOMEN; LEINSTER; NORTHERN EUROPE; SCANDINAVIA; TAMPERE; WESTERN EUROPE; WORLD;

EID: 8744317238     PISSN: 08985626     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0898562042000224369     Document Type: Review

References (48)

1. Arnold, E. and Thuriaux, B. 1997 Developing Firms' Technological Capabilities (Brighton: Technopolis Ltd).
2. Autere, J. 2000 Ohjelmistotuoteyritysten kasvuhakuisuus Helsingin, Oulun ja Tampereen seuduilla, in Kostiainen, J. and Sotarauta, M. (eds), Kaupungit innovatiivisina toimintaympäristö inä (Helsinki: University of Technology, Institute of Strategy and International Business).
3. Autio, E. 1998 Evaluation of RTD in regional innovation systems, European Planning Studies, 6 (2): 131-140.
4. Badham, R. 1994 From socio-economic to socially oriented innovation policy, in Aichholzer, G. and Schienstock, G. (eds), Technology Policy: Towards an Integration of Social and Ecological Concerns (Berlin and New York: De Gruyter).
5. Barney, J. 1991 Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage, Journal of Management, 17: 99-120.
6. Best, M. 2001 The New Competitive Advantage: The Renewal of American Industry (New York: Oxford University Press).
7. Breschi, S. and Malerba, F. 1997 Sectoral innovation systems: technological regimes, Schumpeterian dynamics, and spatial boundaries, in Edquist, C. (ed.), Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations (London: Pinter).
8. Camagni, R. 1995 The concept of innovation milieu and its relevance for public policies in European lagging regions, Papers in Regional Science, 4: 317-340.
9. Clarke, A. 1995 Software Support Programme: Final Report (Dublin: Department of Enterprise, EU Structural Funds Operational Programme for Industrial Development Evaluation Unit).
10. Collinson, S. 2000 Knowledge networks for innovation in small Scottish software firms, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 12: 217-244.
11. Cooke, P. 2002 Knowledge Economies: Clusters, Learning and Cooperative Advantage (London: Routledge).
12. Cooke, P. and Morgan, K. 1998 The Associative Economy (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
13. Dicken, P., Quevit, M., Savary, J., Desterbecq, H. and Nauwelaers, C. 1994 Strategies of transnational corporations and European regional restructuring: some conceptual bases, in Dicken, P. and Quevit, M. (eds), Transnational Corporations and European Regional Restructuring (Utrecht: Netherlands Geographical Studies 181).
14. Dodgson, M. and Bessant, J. 1996 Effective Innovation Policy. A New Approach (London: Thomson).
15. Druilhe, C. and Garnsey, E. 2000 Emergence and growth of high-tech activity in Cambridge and Grenoble, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 12: 163-177.
16. Dunning, J. 2002 Regions, globalization, and the knowledge economy: the issues stated, in Dunning, J. (ed.), Regions, Globalization, and the Knowledge-Based Economy (New York: Oxford University Press).
17. Duranton, G. and Puga, D. 2000 Diversity and specialisation in cities: why, where and when does it matter?, Urban Studies, 37: 533-555.
18. Gibson, D. and Stiles, C. 2000 Technopolis, technology transfer, and globally networked entrepreneurship, in Conceicao, P., Gibson, D., Heitor, M. and Shariq, S. (eds), Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy: Opportunities and Challenges for the Knowledge Economy (London: Quorum Books).
19. Howells, J. 1999 Regional systems of innovation?, in Archibugi, D., Howells, J. and Michie, J. (eds), Innovation Policy in a Global Economy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
20. Johannisson, B. 1998 Personal networks in emerging knowledge-based firms: spatial and functional patterns, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 10: 297-312.
21. Jones-Evans, D. 2000 Entrepreneurial universities: policies, strategies, and practice, in Conceicao, P., Gibson, D., Heitor, M. and Shariq, S. (eds), Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy: Opportunities and Challenges for the Knowledge Economy (London: Quorum Books).
22. Kautonen, M. and Tiainen, M. 2000 Regiimit, innovaatioverkostot ja alueet. Vertaileva tutkimus Pirkanmaalla ja Keski-Suomessa. In English: Regimes, innovation networks, and regions: a comparative study of Tampere and Jyväskylä regions (Tampere: Työraportteja 59/2000, Työelämän tutkimuskeskus, Tampereen yliopisto).
23. Kautonen, M., Kolehmainen, J. and Koski, P. 2002 Yritysten innovaatioympäristoöt: Tutkimus yritysten innovaatiotoiminnasta ja alueellisesta innovaatiopolitiikasta Pirkanmaalla ja Keski-Suomessa. In English: Firms' innovation milieux: a study on firms' innovation activities and of regional innovation policies in Tampere and Central Finland regions (Helsinki: TEKES, Teknologiakatsaus 120/2002).
24. Krugman, P. 1995 Development, Geography and Economic Theory (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
25. Lovio, R. 1985 Emerging industries: interactions between production, technology and markets in a small open economy, Research Notes 554 (Helsinki: Technical Research Centre of Finland).
26. Lundvall, B. 1992 National Systems of Innovations: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning (London: Pinter).
27. Lundvall, B. 1999 Innovation policy in the globalising learning economy, The European Socio-Economic Research Conference, paper presented at the Globalising Learning Economy Conference on Major Socio-economic Trends and European Innovation Policy, Brussels, 28-30 April.
28. Lundvall, B. and Borras, S. 1999 The globalizing learning economy: implications for innovation policy, Report Based on the Preliminary Conclusions from Several Projects under the TSER Program (Brussels: DG XI, Commission of the European Union).
29. Malmberg, A. and Maskell, P. 1997 Towards an explanation of regional specialisation and industry agglomeration, European Planning Studies, 5: 25-42.
30. Nelson, R. and Winter, S. 1982 An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press).
31. Oerlemans, L., Meeus, M. and Boekema, F. 1999 Learning, innovation and proximity: an empirical exploration of patterns of learning: a case study, paper presented at the 39th Congress of the European Regional Science Association, 23-27 August, Dublin.
32. O'Malley, E. and O'Gorman, C. 2001 Competitive advantage in the Irish indigenous software industry and the role of inward foreign direct investment, European Planning Studies, 9: 303-321.
33. Pavitt, K. 1990 What do we know about the strategic management of technology?, California Management Review, 32: 17-26.
34. Porter, M. 1990 The Competitive Advantage of Nations (London: Macmillan).
35. Porter, M. and Sölvell, Ö. 1998 The role of geography in the process of innovation and the sustainable competitive advantage of firms, in Chandler, A., Hagström, P. and Sölvell, Ö. (eds , The Dynamic Firm: The Role of Technology, Strategy, Organization, and Regions (New York: Oxford University Press).
36. Price Waterhouse LLP 1996 1996 Software Business Practice Survey (London: Price Waterhouse).
37. Reynolds, P., Hay, M., Bygrave, W., Camp, S. and Autio, E. 2000 Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2000 Executive Report (Kansas City, MO: Ewing & Marion Kauffman Foundation, Kauffman Centre for Entrepreneurial Leadership).
38. Saxenian, A. 1994 Regional Advantage (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
39. Schienstock, G., Kautonen, M. and Roponen, P. 1997 Regional innovation systems: Tampere region as a case in point. A company survey, Second Interim Report to the DGXII of the European Commission (TSER Programme) (Cardiff: Centre for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences, University of Wales).
40. Schoonhoven, C. and Romanelli, E. 2001 Premises of the entrepreneurship dynamic, in Schoonhoven, C. and Romanelli, E. (ed.), The Entrepreneurship Dynamic (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press).
41. Schwab, K., Porter, M. and Sachs, J. 1999 The Global Competitiveness Report (Geneva: World Economic Forum).
42. Statistics Finland 2000 Industrial Statistics for CityWeb Statistics Service (Tampere: City of Tampere).
43. Tampere Centre of Expertise 1998 Centre of Expertise Programme for Tampere Region 1999-2006 (Tampere: Tampereen Teknologiakeskus Oy).
44. Tampereen kaupunginkanslia 2000 Tompereen seutukunta, tilastoaineisto 21.6.2000. In English: City Council of Tampere, Tampere Central Region, statistics package (Tampere: Tampereen kaupunginkanslia, suunnittelu- ja rahoitusryhmä).
45. Teece, D. and Pisano, G. 1998 The dynamic capabilities of firms: an introduction, in Dosi, G., Teece, D. J. and Chytry, J. (eds), Technology, Organization, and Competitiveness: Perspectives on Industrial and Corporate Change (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
46. Valtion tiede- ja teknologianeuvosto 2000 Katsaus 2000: tiedon ja osaamisen haasteet. In English: Science and Technology Council of Finland, Review 2000: Challenges of Knowledge and Know-How. Report prepared by Valtion tiede- ja teknologianeuvosto.
47. Vinig, T. 2002 Determinant of successful technology sector, PrimaVera Working Paper Series, No. 2002-04, University of Amsterdam.
48. Yin, R. 1994 Case Study Research: Design and Methods (London: Sage).