Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Science and Technology Parks: a study of value creation for park tenants

  • Published:
The Journal of Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The literature on Science and Technology Parks (STPs) is growing rapidly and, despite the positive impact of STPs on firms found by many studies, it remains unclear how STPs create value for tenants. In this paper, we study the STP supply side through a case study in a Swedish region. We identify two components of the business support provided by parks: a configuration-oriented component, and a process-oriented component. The former refers to the static design of the business support, and the latter to the active, hands-on support provided by parks’ management. Both components must be planned carefully in order to deliver value to tenants. We also discuss some implications for policy and managers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Adapted from Sten Gunnar Johansson, CEO of MSP

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For a review see, for instance, Albahari et al. (2010).

  2. Currently, NOSP is a full member only of SISP.

References

  • Albahari, A., Barge-Gil, A., Pérez-Canto, S., & Modrego, A. (2016). The influence of Science and Technology Park characteristics on firms’ innovation results. Papers in Regional Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albahari, A., Catalano, G., & Landoni, P. (2013). Evaluation of national Science Park systems: A theoretical framework and its application to the Italian and Spanish systems. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 25(5), 599–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albahari, A., Pérez-Canto, S., Barge-Gil, A., & Modrego, A. (2017). Technology Parks versus Science Parks: Does the university make the difference? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 116, 13–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albahari, A., Pérez-Canto, S., & Landoni, P. (2010). Science and Technology Parks impacts on tenant organisations: A review of literature. MPRA Paper No. 41914. University Library of Munich, Germany.

  • ALMI. (2013). ALMI AB. Available at http://www.almi.se. Accessed 10 June 2013.

  • Audretsch, B. (1998). Agglomeration and the location of innovative activity. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 14(2), 18–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Autio, E., & Klofsten, M. (1998). A comparative study of two European business incubators. Journal of Small Business Management, 36(1), 30–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakouros, Y. L., Mardas, D. C., & Varsakelis, N. C. (2002). Science park, a high tech fantasy? An analysis of the science parks of Greece. Technovation, 22(2), 123–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaudry, C., & Swann, P. (2009). Firm growth in industrial clusters of the United Kingdom. Small Business Economics, 32(4), 409–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benneworth, P., de Boer, H., & Jongbloed, B. (2015). Between good intentions and urgent stakeholder pressures: Institutionalizing the universities’ third mission in the Swedish context. European Journal of Higher Education, 5(3), 280–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cabral, R. (1998). Refining the Cabral–Dahab science park management paradigm. International Journal of Technology Management, 16(8), 813–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cadorin, E., Johansson, S. G., & Klofsten, M. (2017). Future developments for science parks: Attracting and developing talent. Industry and Higher Education, 31(3), 156–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, K. Y. A., Oerlemans, L. A., & Pretorius, M. W. (2011). Innovation outcomes of South African new technology-based firms: A contribution to the debate on the performance of science park firms. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 14(4), 361–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. J., & Huang, C. C. (2004). A multiple criteria evaluation of high-tech industries for the science-based industrial park in Taiwan. Information & Management, 41(7), 839–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C., & Link, A. N. (2017). Employment in China’s hi-tech zones. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0486-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colombo, M. G., & Delmastro, M. (2002). How effective are technology incubators? Evidence from Italy. Research Policy, 31(7), 1103–1122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durão, D., Sarmento, M., Varela, V., & Maltez, L. (2005). Virtual and real-estate science and technology parks: A case study of Taguspark. Technovation, 25(3), 237–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Klofsten, M. (2005). The innovative region: Toward a theory of knowledge-based regional development. R&D Management, 35(3), 243–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1997). Universities and the global knowledge economy: A triple helix of university–industry–government relations. London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felsenstein, D. (1994). University-related science parks—Seedbeds or enclaves of innovation. Technovation, 14(2), 93–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, R., & Olofsson, C. (2004). Science parks and the development of NTBFs—Location, survival and growth. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(1), 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukugawa, N. (2006). Science parks in Japan and their value-added contributions to new technology-based firms. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 24(2), 381–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, I. R., & Mccann, P. (2005). Innovation, agglomeration, and regional development. Journal of Economic Geography, 5(5), 523–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs, K. G., Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2017a). Science and technology parks: An annotated and analytical literature review. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(4), 957–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs, K. G., Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2017b). The growth of US science and technology parks: Does proximity to a university matter? Annals of Regional Science, 59(2), 495–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hommen, L., Doloreux, D., & Larsson, E. (2006). Emergence and growth of Mjardevi Science Park in Linkoping, Sweden. European Planning Studies, 14(10), 1331–1361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, E. S., & Link, A. N. (2017). An Oasis of knowledge: The early history of gateway university research park. Journal of the Knowledge Economy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-017-0513-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, K. F., Yu, C. M. J., & Seetoo, D. H. (2012). Firm innovation in policy-driven parks and spontaneous clusters: The smaller firm the better? The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(5), 715–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Innovationsbron. (2011). Available at http://www.innovationsbron.se/en. Accessed 10 June 2011.

  • Johansson, S. G. (2009). New challanges meet old experience—Networking as astrategic tool. Working paper 2009-08-20/MSP. Linköping: Mjärdevi Science Park.

  • Jones-Evans, D. (2007). Entrepreneurship environment and policies: Exploiting the science and technology base in the region of Halle. OECD LEED local entrepreneurship series. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones-Evans, D., & Klofsten, M. (1997). Universities and local economic development: The case of Linköping. European Planning Studies, 5(1), 77–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klofsten, M., Heydebreck, P., & Jones-Evans, D. (2010). Transferring good practice beyond organizational borders: Lessons from transferring an entrepreneurship programme. Regional Studies, 44(6), 791–799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klofsten, M., Jones-Evans, D., & Schärberg, C. (1999). Growing the Linköping technopole—A longitudinal study of triple helix development in Sweden. Journal of Technology Transfer, 24(2–3), 125–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoben, J., & Oerlemans, L. A. G. (2006). Proximity and inter-organizational collaboration: A literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8(2), 71–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kortum, S., & Lerner, J. (2001). Does venture capital spur innovation? In G. D. Libecap (Ed.), Entrepreneurial inputs and outcomes: New studies of entrepreneurship in the United States (pp. 1–44). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laur, I., Klofsten, M., & Bienkowska, D. (2012). Catching regional development dreams: A study of cluster initiatives as intermediaries. European Planning Studies, 20(11), 1909–1921.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laursen, K., Reichstein, T., & Salter, A. (2011). Exploring the effect of geographical proximity and university quality on university–industry collaboration in the United Kingdom. Regional Studies, 45(4), 507–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LEAD. (2017). LiU entrepreneurship and development. Available at http://www.lead.se/en. Accessed 14 December 2017.

  • Lee, W. H., & Yang, W. T. (2000). The cradle of Taiwan high technology industry development—Hsinchu Science Park (HSP). Technovation, 20(1), 55–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindelöf, P., & Löfsten, H. (2003). Science park location and new technology-based firms in Sweden—Implications for strategy and performance. Small Business Economics, 20(3), 245–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2003). US science parks: The diffusion of an innovation and its effects on the academic missions of universities. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21(9), 1323–1356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2007). The economics of university research parks. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 661–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., & Yeong Yang, U. (2017). On the growth of Korean technoparks. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0459-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Löfsten, H., & Lindelöf, P. (2002). Science Parks and the growth of new technology-based firms—Academic–industry links, innovation and markets. Research Policy, 31(6), 859–876.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Löfsten, H., & Lindelöf, P. (2003). Determinants for an entrepreneurial milieu: Science Parks and business policy in growing firms. Technovation, 23(1), 51–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malairaja, C., & Zawdie, G. (2008). Science parks and university–industry collaboration in Malaysia. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 20(6), 727–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, B. T., & Folta, T. B. (2008). Location matters: Where we have been and where we might go in agglomeration research. Journal of Management, 34(3), 532–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, B. T., & Folta, T. B. (2011). Performance differentials within geographic clusters. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(1), 104–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monck, C. S. P., Porter, R. B., Quintas, P., Storey, D., & Wynarczyk, P. (1988). Science parks and the growth of high-technology firms. London: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • NULINK. (2013). Available at http://www.nulink.se. Accessed 10 June 2013.

  • Phillimore, J. (1999). Beyond the linear view of innovation in science park evaluation—An analysis of Western Australian Technology Park. Technovation, 19(11), 673–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quintas, P., Wield, D., & Massey, D. (1992). Academic–industry links and innovation—Questioning the science park model. Technovation, 12(3), 161–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramírez-Alesón, M., & Fernández-Olmos, M. (2017). Unravelling the effects of Science Parks on the innovation performance of NTBFs. The Journal of Technology Transfer. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9559-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratinho, T., & Henriques, E. (2010). The role of science parks and business incubators in converging countries: Evidence from Portugal. Technovation, 30(4), 278–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salvador, E. (2011). Are science parks and incubators good “brand names” for spin-offs? The case study of Turin. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(2), 203–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., Westhead, P., & Wright, M. (2003). Assessing the impact of university science parks on research productivity: Exploratory firm-level evidence from the United Kingdom. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21(9), 1357–1369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Squicciarini, M. (2008). Science Parks’ tenants versus out-of-Park firms: Who innovates more? A duration model. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(1), 45–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Squicciarini, M. (2009). Science parks: Seedbeds of innovation? A duration analysis of firms’ patenting activity. Small Business Economics, 32(2), 169–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storey, D. J., & Tether, B. S. (1998). New technology-based firms in the European Union: An introduction. Research Policy, 26(9), 933–946.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svensson, P., Klofsten, M., & Etzkowitz, H. (2012). An entrepreneurial university strategy for renewing a declining industrial city: The Norrköping way. European Planning Studies, 20(4), 505–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vásquez-Urriago, Á. R., Barge-Gil, A., Rico, A. M., & Paraskevopoulou, E. (2014). The impact of science and technology parks on firms’ product innovation: Empirical evidence from Spain. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 24(4), 835–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vedovello, C. (1997). Science parks and university–industry interaction: Geographical proximity between the agents as a driving force. Technovation, 17(9), 491–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VINNOVA. (2018). Swedish governmental agency for innovation systems. Available at http://www.vinnova.se/en. Accessed 1 February 2018.

  • WAINOVA. (2009). Wainova Atlas of innovation: Science/technology/research parks and business incubators in the world. Cheshire: Ten Alps Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westhead, P., & Batstone, S. (1998). Independent technology-based firms: The perceived benefits of a science park location. Urban Studies, 35(12), 2197–2219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westhead, P., & Batstone, S. (1999). Perceived benefits of a managed science park location. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development: An International Journal, 11(2), 129–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westhead, P., & Storey, D. J. (1995). Links between higher-education institutions and high-technology firms. Omega-International Journal of Management Science, 23(4), 345–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C. H., Motohashi, K., & Chen, J. R. (2009). Are new technology-based firms located on science parks really more innovative? Evidence from Taiwan. Research Policy, 38(1), 77–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (Vol. 5). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors want to thank all the interviewees, especially Sten Gunnar Johansson, Åke Rolf and Christian Berger for their precious time. A previous version of this paper has been presented to the Triple Helix IX International Conference at Stanford University in 2011. The authors thank the participants to the conference for their useful comments. Alberto Albahari wants to acknowledge funding from the University of Malaga for carrying out the research staying in Sweden and for attending the conference.

Funding

Funding was provided by Universidad de Málaga (Grant No. C.3.; A.1. III Plan Propio de Investigación de la Universidad de Málaga).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and Business Administration, Universidad de Málaga –School of Industrial Engineering, Campus de Teatinos, 29071, Málaga, Spain

    Alberto Albahari & Juan Carlos Rubio-Romero

  2. Department of Management and Engineering, Helix Competence Centre and PIE, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden

    Magnus Klofsten

Authors
  1. Alberto Albahari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Magnus Klofsten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Juan Carlos Rubio-Romero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alberto Albahari.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Albahari, A., Klofsten, M. & Rubio-Romero, J.C. Science and Technology Parks: a study of value creation for park tenants. J Technol Transf 44, 1256–1272 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9661-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9661-9

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation