User menu

Configuration in the flesh: challenges in publicly promoted clusters

Bibliographic reference Hermans, Julie ; Castiaux, Annick ; Dejardin, Marcus ; Lucas, Stéphane. Configuration in the flesh: challenges in publicly promoted clusters. In: Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 37, no. 5, p. 609-630 (2012)
Permanent URL
  1. Abernathy, W. J., & Utterback, J. M. (1978). Patterns of innovation in industry. Technology Review, 80, 40–47.
  2. Alter, N. (2000). L’innovation ordinaire (Sociologies). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
  3. Andersen Poul Houman, Regional Clusters in a Global World: Production Relocation, Innovation, and Industrial Decline, 10.2307/41166373
  4. Arthur, W. B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Economic Journal, 99(394), 116–131.
  5. Asheim Bj⊘rn T., Industrial districts as ‘learning regions’: A condition for prosperity, 10.1080/09654319608720354
  6. Asheim, B. T., & Isaksen, A. (2002). Regional innovation systems: The integration of local ‘sticky’and global ‘ubiquitous’ knowledge. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(1), 77–86.
  7. Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1996a). Innovative clusters and the industry life cycle. Review of Industrial Organization, 11(2), 253–273.
  8. Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1996b). R&d spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. American Economic Review, 86(3), 630–640.
  9. Autio, E., Gustafsson, R., & Kanninen, S. (2008). First- and second-order additionality and learning outcomes in collaborative r&d programs. Research Policy, 37(1), 59–76.
  10. Bachmann, R. (2001). Trust, power and control in trans-organizational relations. Organization Studies, 22(2), 337–365.
  11. Bayenet, B., & Capron, H. (2007). Les pôles de compétitivité : Effet de mode ou nouveau paradigme de politique industrielle. Paper presented at the 17ème Congrès des Economistes belges de langue française, Louvain-la-Neuve, 21 et 22 Novembre 2007.
  12. Blankenburg, S. (1998). University-industry relations, innovation and power: A theoretical framework for the study of technology transfer from the science base. ESRC Center for Business Research. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
  13. Buisseret, T. J., Cameron, H. M., & Georghiou, L. (1995). What difference does it make—additionality in the public support of r-and-d in large firms. International Journal of Technology Management, 10(4–6), 587–600.
  14. Clarysse, B., Wright, M., & Mustar, P. (2009). Behavioural additionality of r&d subsidies: A learning perspective. Research Policy, 38(10), 1517–1533.
  15. Debackere, K., & Veugelers, R. (2005). The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links. Research Policy, 34(3), 321–342. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2004.12.003 .
  16. Diez, M. A. (2001). The evaluation of regional innovation and cluster policies: Towards a participatory approach. European Planning Studies, 9(7), 907–923.
  17. Doloreux, D., & Parto, S. (2005). Regional innovation systems: Current discourse and unresolved issues. Technology in Society, 27(2), 133–153.
  18. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and “Mode 2” To a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.
  19. Freeman, C. (1992). Formal scientific and technical institutions in the national system of innovation. In B.-Å. Lundvall (Ed.), National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter Publishers.
  20. Fromhold-Eisebith, M., & Eisebith, G. (2008). Looking behind facades: Evaluating effects of (automotive) cluster promotion. Regional Studies, 42(10), 1343–1356.
  21. Gatignon, H., Tushman, M. L., Smith, W., & Anderson, P. (2002). A structural approach to assessing innovation: Construct development of innovation locus, type, and characteristics. Management Science, 48(9), 1103–1122.
  22. Gelsing, L. (1992). Innovation and the development of industrial networks. In B.-Å. Lundvall (Ed.), National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter Publishers.
  23. Georghiou, L. (2003). Evaluation of behavioral additionality Concept paper for OECD directorate for science, technology and industry, committee for scientific and technological policy, working party on innovation and technology policy. Paris.
  24. Gibbons, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London, Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications.
  25. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  26. Griliches, Z. (1979). Issues in assessing the contributions of r&d to productivity growth. Bell Journal of Economy, 10, 92–116.
  27. Jaffe, A. B. (1989). Real effects of academic research. American Economic Review, 79(5), 957–970.
  28. Kuty, O. (2008). Pôles de compétitivité wallons: Typologie des réseaux et modes de gouvernances. Liege: The Innovation Process research center, University of Liege.
  29. Lorenzen, M. (2001). Clusters, localized learning and policy: Conversations between north american and european scholars. In P. Maskell (Ed.), Innovation and learning for competitiveness and regional growth (pp. 73–115). Stockholm: Nordregio.
  30. Lorenzen, M., & Foss, N. (2003). Coordination, institutions, and clusters: An exploratory discussion. In D. Fornahl & T. Brenner (Eds.), Cooperation, networks, and institutions in regional innovation systems. Cheltenham, UK, Northhampton, MA: E. Elgar.
  31. Lorenzen, M., & Mahnke, V. (2002). Global strategy and the acquisition of local knowledge: How mncs enter regional knowledge clusters. DRUID working paper (pp. 1–24).
  32. Lundvall, B.-Å. (1992). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter Publishers.
  33. Marshall, A. (1890). Principles of economics. London, New York: Macmillan and co.
  34. Maskell, P. (2001). Towards a knowledge-based theory of the geographical cluster. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), 921–943.
  35. Monjon, S., & Waelbroeck, P. (2003). The nature of innovation and the origin of technological spillovers: An econometric analysis on individual French data. Brussels Economic Review/Cahiers Economiques de Bruxelles, 46(3), 87–106.
  36. Mowery David C., Oxley Joanne E., Silverman Brian S., Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer : Strategic Alliances and Interfirm Knowledge Transfer, 10.1002/smj.4250171108
  37. Murmann, J. P., & Frenken, K. (2006). Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change. Research Policy, 35(7), 925–952. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.04.011 .
  38. Nelson, R. R. (1993). National innovation systems: A comparative analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
  39. Nishimura, J., & Okamuro, H. (2010). R&d productivity and the organization of cluster policy: An empirical evaluation of the industrial cluster project in japan. The Journal of Technology Transfer (forthcoming).
  40. Phillips, N., Lawrence, T. B., & Hardy, C. (2000). Inter-organizational collaboration and the dynamics of institutional fields. Journal of Management Studies, 37(1), 23–43.
  41. Ponds, R., van Oort, F., & Frenken, K. (2007). The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration. Papers in Regional Science, 86(3), 423–443.
  42. Porter, M. E. (1998). On competition (The harvard business review book series). Boston, MA: Harvard Businesss School Publishing.
  43. Pyke, F., Becattini, G., & Sengenberger, W. (1992). Industrial districts and inter-firm cooperation in Italy. Geneva: International Institute for Labour Studies.
  44. Sachwald, F. (2008). Location choices within global innovation networks: The case of europe. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(4), 364–378.
  45. Simon, H. (1996). Hidden champions: Lessons from 500 of the world’s best unknown companies. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press.
  46. Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
  47. Van Haeperen, B., Lefèvre, M., & Dejardin, M. (2009). Plan marshall wallon: Une évaluation ex ante en référence à la politique industrielle et d’innovation. Reflets et perspectives de la vie économique, 48(1–2), 161–177.
  48. Varga, A. (2002). Knowledge transfers from universities to the regional economy: A review of the literature. In A. Varga & L. Szerb (Eds.), Innovation, entrepreneurship and regional economic development: International experiences and Hungarian challenges (pp. 147–171). Pecs: University of Pécs Press.
  49. Gouvernement Wallon (2005). Les actions prioritaires pour l’avenir wallon.
  50. Williamson, O. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: Free Press.
  51. Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
  52. Asheim, B. T. (2003). Regional innovation policy for small-medium enterprises. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Pub.
  53. Bercovitz, J. E. L., & Feldman, M. P. (2007). Fishing upstream: Firm innovation strategy and university research alliances. Research Policy, 36(7), 930–948.
  54. Cooke, P. (2002). Regional innovation systems: General findings and some new evidence from biotechnology clusters. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(1), 133–145.
  55. Cooke, P., Uranga, M. G., & Etxebarria, G. (1998). Regional systems of innovation: An evolutionary perspective. Environment and Planning A, 30(9), 1563–1584.
  56. Rothaermel, F. T., & Deeds, D. L. (2004). Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: A system of new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 201–221.
  57. Tushman, M. L., & Murmann, J. P. (1998). Dominant designs, technology cycles, and organizational outcomes. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20, 231–266.
  58. Utterback, J. M. (1996). Mastering the dynamics of innovation : How companies can seize opportunities in the face of technological change. Boston, MA.: Harvard Business School Press.