This Editorial introduces the Special Issue on ‘Biotechnology Clusters and Beyond’. Drawing on the interventions of five commissioned articles from Canada, Germany, Israel, the UK and the US it suggests that biotechnology clusters are interesting and important intellectually and for policy deliberation. They pose questions about basic cluster theory because localized networks, though intense, may not be as extensive as global ones in firm practices, especially as these evolve over time. Moreover, innovation is more deeply embedded in the publicly funded science base than for ‘Porterian’ clusters. Regarding innovation, biotechnology is also less obviously Schumpeterian, there being little market-driven ‘creative destruction’, and is arguably, with its strong emphasis on both large- and small-firm ‘capabilities’—Penrosian—an emphasis in clustering research and applications that warrants further investigation. Finally, at the specific technology-exploitation phase, market interactions assert themselves over milieu characteristics because scientists know the value of their discoveries and there is accordingly high appropriability associated with such knowledge capabilities.
[1]
J. R. Moore,et al.
The theory of the growth of the firm twenty-five years after
,
1960
.
[2]
B. Lundvall.
National Systems of Innovation
,
1992
.
[3]
Kenneth W. Koput,et al.
The Spatial Clustering of Science and Capital: Accounting for Biotech Firm-Venture Capital Relationships
,
2002
.
[4]
Denis Maillat,et al.
Interactions between urban systems and localized productive systems: An approach to endogenous regional development in terms of innovative milieu
,
1998
.
[5]
C. Freeman.
Technology policy and economic performance : lessons from Japan
,
1987
.
[6]
Massimo Riccaboni,et al.
Technological change and network dynamics: Lessons from the pharmaceutical industry
,
2001
.