Beyond clusters: Crafting contexts for innovation

Abstract

Innovation requires cooperation among multiple actors spread across different organizations in order to fund, research, develop, scale-up and bring new products and services to the marketplace. Proximity is often corelated with cooperation, leading to policies adopted around the world to build science and technology parks as a way of stimulating economic development. However, cooperation can falter in the presence of extant collective action problems. The transformation of collocated facilities and expertise into dynamic innovation clusters requires that multiple individual actors recognize the opportunities and synergies that can arise from cooperation, diagnose prevailing collective action problems, and craft the rules needed to solve the myriad challenges to working together. Elaborating the institutional contexts within which linkages across innovation ecosystems can grow and thrive can also broaden the opportunity for economic growth to areas beyond dense technology clusters.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Aghion, P., & Jaravel, X. (2015). Knowledge spillovers, innovation and growth. The Economic Journal, 125(583), 533–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Audretsch, D. B. (2015). Everything in its place: Entrepreneurship and the strategic Management of Cities, regions, and states. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (2004). Knowledge spillovers and the geography of innovation- Handbook of regional and urban economics, 4, 2713–2739.

  4. Braunerhjelm, P., & Feldman, P. (2006). Cluster genesis: Technology based industrial development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Buchanan, J. M. (1965). An economic theory of clubs. Economica, 32(125), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. U. Cantner & A. Meder (2008). Innovators and the diversity of innovation systems. Applied Economics Quarterly. 59(supplement), 9-26.

  7. Coase, R. H. (1937). Nature of the firm. Economica, 4(16), 386–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Czarnitzki, D., Hussinger, K., & Schneider, C. (2015). R&D collaboration with uncertain intellectual property rights. Review of Industrial Organization, 46, 183–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Delgado, M., Porter, M. E., & Stern, S. (2014). Clusters, convergence, and economic performance. Research Policy, 10, 1785–1799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Delgado, M., Porter, M. E., & Stern, S. (2016). Defining clusters of related industries. Journal of Economic Geography, 16(1), 1–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Desrochers, P., & Sautet, F. (2004). Cluster-based economic strategy, facilitation policy and the market process. The Review of Austrian Economics, 17, 233–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dorfman, N. S. (1983). Route 128: The development of a regional high technology economy. Research Policy, 12(6), 299–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. The Economist. (2015). Business high school: Companies struggling to find talent are looking to teenagers, July 18.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Economic Development Administration. (2020) “U.S. Cluster Mapping Project.” Accessed at eda.gov on February 7, 2020.

  15. Estrin, James (August 12, 2015). "Kodak's first digital moment". The New York Times.

  16. Feldman, M.F. &. Francis, J.L. (2004). Homegrown Solutions: Fostering Cluster Formation. Economic Development Quarterly, 18(2).

  17. Flamm, K. (2003). SEMATECH revisited: Assessing consortium impacts on semiconductor industry R&D. In In National Research Council, Securing the Future: Regional and National Programs to Support the Semiconductor Industry. Washington DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hayek, F. A. (2014) “Degrees of explanation” (1955). In B. Caldwell (Ed.), The market and other orders. London: Routledge.

  19. Irwin, D. A., & Klenow, P. J. (1996). Sematech: Purpose and performance. Proceedings of the National Academies of the United States, 93(23).

  20. Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 63, 577–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Janssen, M. A., Holahan, R., Lee, A., & Ostrom, E. (2010). Lab experiments for the study of social-ecological systems. Science, 328(5978), 613–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Klimenko, M. (2005). The ‘thick market’ effect and agglomeration in high-growth industries. Pacific Economic Review, 10(2), 167–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lachmann, L. M. (1978). Capital and its structure. Kansas City: Sheed, Andrews and McMeel Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lewis, P. (2019). Technicians and innovation: A literature review. London: Gatsby Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Link, A.N. (1995). A generosity of Spirit: The early history of the research Triangle Park, Research Triangle Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  26. A.N. Link (2009) Research, science, and technology parks. An overview of the academic literature. In National Research Council, Understanding Research, Science and Technology Parks: Global Best Practices: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

  27. Marshall, A. (1920). Principles of economics; an introductory volume. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  28. McFadden, C. (2012). Praise for Sematech. Issues in Science and Technology, 28(4).

  29. Mills, K. G., Reynolds, E. B., & Reamer, A. (2008). Clusters and competitiveness: A new Federal Role for stimulating regional economies. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  30. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Building America's skilled technical workforce. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. National Research Council. (2008). An assessment of the SBIR program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  32. National Research Council. (2011). Growing innovation clusters for American prosperity: Summary of a symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  33. National Research Council. (2012). Clustering for 21st century prosperity: Summary of a symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  34. National Research Council. (2013). 21st century manufacturing: The role of the manufacturing extension partnership program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Ostrom, V. (1971). The political theory of a compound republic: Designing the American experiment. San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Polyani, M. (1951). The logic of liberty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. Harvard Business Review, 68(2), 73–93.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Potter, A., & Watts, H. D. (2014). Revisiting Marshall's agglomeration economies: Technological relatedness and the evolution of the Sheffield metals cluster. Regional Studies, 48(4), 603–623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Robey, J., Eberts, R. W., Pittelko, B., & Robey, C. (2018). The National-Level Economic Impact of the manufacturing extension partnership (MEP): Estimates for fiscal year 2017. Kalamazoo: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Saxenian, A. (1994). Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge MA: Harvard University press.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Schumpeter, J.A. (1983) [1934]. The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Books.

  44. Shivakumar, S.  (2017). Innovation as a collective action challenge. In P. D. Aligica, P. Lewis & V. H. Stor (Eds.), The Austrian and Bloomington School of Political Economy, Advances in Austrian Economics (Vol. 22). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited.

  45. Technology News. (January 3, 2018). Beijing to build $2 billion AI research park: Xinhua

  46. Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2005). One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research Policy, 34(8), 1203–1219.

  47. United States Census Bureau. (2019). Delineating metropolitan and Micropolitan statistical areas.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Wessner, C. W., & Howell, T. (2019). Regional Renaissance. How New York’s Capital Region became a Nanotechnology Powerhouse: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Wessner, C. W., & Shivakumar, S. (2013). Driving regional growth, the growing role of policies to promote clusters. In D. Audretsch & M. Walshok (Eds.), Creating competitiveness, entrepreneurship and innovation policies for growth. Edward Elgar.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sujai Shivakumar.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Submitted to RAE Special Issue on Innovation and Austrian Economics

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shivakumar, S. Beyond clusters: Crafting contexts for innovation. Rev Austrian Econ 34, 115–127 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-020-00509-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Innovation
  • Economic development
  • Polycentricity