The Journal of Technology Transfer

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 115–129 | Cite as

‘The Biosciences Knowledge Value Chain and Comparative Incubation Models’

  • Philip Cooke
  • Dan Kaufmann
  • Chen Levin
  • Rob Wilson


This research derives from an EU DG Enterprise (IPS Programme) project on bio-incubation, called Bio-Link. The Bio-Link project is innovative in three ways. First, it involves an international comparative analysis of biotechnology incubators of the kind that is rarely if ever done. Second, the incubator representatives are monitored and investigated by an academic partnership team. Third, there is a stated aspiration by the incubator companies to engage in co-incubation across borders. Co-incubation is, as far as we are aware, a new kind of boundary crossing innovation in which advanced start-up businesses are assisted to enter other national markets and/or benefit from specialised services or scientific, technological, or commercial knowledge absent in the home country but present in a partner country. Evidence from research on European, Israeli and North American bioincubators is included to compare, contrast and enable future judgements of incubator appropriateness to biotechnology.


biotechnology innovation incubators universities knowledge transfer 

JEL Classification

A14 O33 R11 R58 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Andersson, M. and O. Ejermo, 2002, ‘Knowledge Production in Swedish Functional Regions 1993–1999,’ in paper to International Workshop on Knowledge Spillovers and Knowledge Management in Industrial Clusters and Networks, Ljungby, Sweden, 19–21 September, in C. Karlsson et al. (eds.), 2004, Knowledge Spillovers & Knowledge Management, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  2. Audretsch, D., Feldman, M. 1996‘Knowledge Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production’American Economic Review86630640Google Scholar
  3. Audretsch, D., 2001, R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production, paper to International Workshop ‘Innovation Clusters and Interregional Competition’ Kiel Institute of World Economics, 12–13 November, in J. Bröcker, D. Dohse, and R. Soltwedel (eds.), 2003, Innovation Clusters & Interregional Competition, Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  4. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services2003Provision of Bioscience Incubators and Grow-on Facilities in the UKCSESLondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Cooke, P. 2001‘Regional Innovation Systems, Clusters, and the Knowledge Economy’Industrial & Corporate Change10945973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cooke, P. 2002aKnowledge EconomiesRoutledgeLondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Cooke, P., 2002b, Regional Science Policy and the Growth of Knowledge Megacentres in Bioscience Clusters. Presented at the Regional Science Association 42nd European Congress, Dortmund, Germany, August 27–31, 2002, in Special Issue – Embeddedness & Regional Development: Guest Editors, Frans Boekema and Roel Rutten, European Planning Studies, 12(4), 2004.Google Scholar
  8. Cooke, P., 2005, Rational Drug Design, the Knowledge Value Chain and Bioscience Megacentres, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 28, (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  9. Cooke, P., S. Roper, and P. Wylie, 2003, “The ‘Golden Thread of Innovation’ and Northern Ireland’s Evolving Regional Innovation System,” Regional Studies, 37.Google Scholar
  10. Feldman, D., Audretsch, M. 1999‘Innovation in Cities: Science-based Diversity, Specialisation and Localised Competition’European Economic Review43409429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fritsch, M., 2001, How and Why Does Efficiency of Regional Innovation Systems matter? Paper to International Workshop on ‘Innovation Clusters & Interregional Competition,’ Kiel Institute of World Economics, Kiel, Germany, 12–13 November, in J. Bröcker, D. Dohse and R. Soltwedel (eds.), 2003, Innovation Clusters & Interregional Competition, Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  12. Giesecke, S. 2000‘The Contrasting Roles of Government in the Development of Biotechnology Industry in the US and Germany’Research Policy29205223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Granovetter, M,  et al.  et al. 2000Social Networks in Silicon ValleyLee, C. eds. The Silicon Valley EdgeStanford University PressStanfordGoogle Scholar
  14. Jaffe, A., Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R. 1993‘Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations’Quarterly Journal of Economics108577598Google Scholar
  15. Kaiser, R. 2003‘Multi-level Science Policy and Regional Innovation: The Case of the Munich Cluster for Pharmaceutical Biotechnology’European Planning Studies11841858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. National Business Incubation Association2002A National Benchmarking Analysis of Technology Business Incubator Performance & PracticesNBIAWashington, D.C.Google Scholar
  17. Norton, R. 2000Creating the New Economy: The Entrepreneur and the US ResurgenceEdward ElgarCheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  18. Owen-Smith, J., M. Riccaboni, F. Pammolli, and W. Powell, 2001, A Comparison of US and European University–Industry Relations in Life Sciences, (mimeo).Google Scholar
  19. Porter, M. 1998On CompetitionHarvard Business School PressBostonGoogle Scholar
  20. Powell, W., Koput, K., Bowie, J., Smith-Doerr, L. 2002‘The Spatial Clustering of Science and Capital: Accounting for Biotech firm-venture Capital Relationships’Regional Studies36291305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Senker, J., Zwanenberg, P. 2001European Biotechnology Innovation SystemsUniversity of SussexSPRUFinal Report to EU-TSER ProgrammeGoogle Scholar
  22. Weick, K. 1995Sensemaking in OrganizationsSageLondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Wolter, K. 2002Can the US Experience Be Repeated? The Evolution of Biotechnology in Three European Regions, (mimeo)Duisburg UniversityGermanyGoogle Scholar
  24. Zook, M., 2000, Grounded Capital: Venture Capital’s Role in the Clustering of Internet Firms in the US, paper to American Collegiate Schools of Planning Conference, Atlanta, November.Google Scholar
  25. Zucker, L., Darby, M., Armstrong, J. 1998‘Geographically Localised Knowledge: Spillovers or Markets?’Economic Inquiry366586CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philip Cooke
    • 1
  • Dan Kaufmann
    • 2
  • Chen Levin
    • 2
  • Rob Wilson
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Advanced StudiesCardiff UniversityCardiffUK
  2. 2.Jerusalem Institute for Israel StudiesJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations