University-related science parks - 'seedbeds' or 'enclaves' of ...

Science parks - seedbeds or enclaves of innovation?approaches. From a spatial perspective, theexogenous factors nurturing and promoting innovationat a given location are integral componentsof the seedbed environment. Much effort has beenexpended in identifying those areas that have‘good’ incubator conditions based on city size,level of urbanization, institutional structures andcommunity characteristics [7, 81. While the evidenceon the impact of these influences oninnovation is mixed, it does seem to suggest thaturban areas are not particularly important marketsfor the development of innovative activity. In fact,a study of the incubator function of the Raandstadcities in Holland has shown these locations to beunder-represented in terms of innovative activity[9]. The spatial seedbed hypothesis of an indigenousregional impact supporting innovation could thereforenot be supported and the study suggestslooking at intra-firm characteristics for furtherexplanation.While this spatial approach relates to the determinantsof innovative activity, other approacheshave looked, from this same perspective, at thedeterminants of the incidence of industrial andscience parks. The presence of industrial parks ingeneral has been related to city (or community)size and age, population densities and populationgrowth rates [lo]. Looking more specifically atscience parks, Luger and Goldstein [ll] havedemonstrated the importance of size of metropolitanarea, linkage to a local university and level ofservice offered, in explaining science park successas measured by employment generation. Conversely,parks located in small areas and withoutuniversity connections are the most likely to fail.This identification of seedbed characteristics hasnot been without its critics. As an approach tounderstanding location tendencies it has beentermed ‘analytically sterile’ [12 (p. 219)] and it isclaimed that innovative places cannot be ‘read-offon the basis of the ‘right’ exogenously determinedcharacteristics. Furthermore, such an approach, itis argued, misses the subtle role played by industrialorganizations and overlooks the social divisions oflabour that have allowed the seedbed to emerge.In essence, a behavioural component of seedbedformation is missing. This would include the roleof exogenous organizations or institutions such asuniversities, the role of other firms in promotingor discouraging spin-offs, previous work and educationalbackground of entrepreneurs, and so on.From a behavioural perspective, the seedbedenvironment is composed of a knowledge infrastructure(such as a university or research institute)that creates positive externalities that becomepublic goods. These institutions can also includelocal chambers of commerce, banks, venture capitalcompanies and so on. These are all milieu-creatingorganizations [13] in that, when they occur withina given area, they create an information- andtransaction-intensive complex that not only provideseconomies in scale and scope and cost savingsin transactions but also reduces risk [14].Other firms also have an important role to playin fashioning the behavioural environment. Theyare sources of knowledge and externalities no lessthan the institutions mentioned above. As Acs andAudretsch [15] point out, other firms (competitors,collaborators) are repositories of know-how andwork experience. Some of this is accessed throughformal sources such as contracts and licensingagreements while some is generated through meetings,trade fairs, informal contacts and intermediariessuch as suppliers and consultants. Where allthis occurs in a given environment such as ascience park, the spatial and behavioural factorsinterchange. However, as Birley [16] has pointedout, in a local environment one of the maininformational shortcomings is the lack of kncwledgeas to what information is in fact available.This would seem to suggest, for example, thatfirms choosing to locate on a science park maynot necessarily be exercising this choice becauseof its perceived seedbed function. They often setupwithout a proper screening process of theenvironment, and their location choice may bepart of a ‘social signalling’ process [17]. Theseedbed properties of the environment (access toinformation, networks etc.) are then probably onlyrealized at a later stage. This could also seem tosuggest that initially the innovative capacities of anew firm in an environment such as a science parkTechnovation Vol. 14 No. 2 95