Proximity as determinant of business cooperation for technological and non-technological innovations: a study of an agribusiness cluster

Purpose This paper aims to use the proximity approach of economic geography with its spatial dimension (geographic) and their non-spatial dimensions (social, institutional, cognitive and organizational) to shed light on the determinants of business cooperation with other organizations. It is also examined whetherthis cooperation is a determining factor for business innovation (innovation networks), drawing a distinction between technological and non-technological innovations. Design/methodology/approach The study has a quantitative approach; it analyzes the case of 312 companies in a cluster of agribusinesses in an emerging economy (Chile). The proposal model and its interrelations are tested with exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Findings The results show that cognitive-organizational proximity is a positive determinant of business cooperation with other organizations, whereas social and institutional proximity are negative determinants. It is also established that business cooperation is a positive determinant of business innovation. It is more relevant in the case of technological innovation unlike non-technological innovations. In addition, it is noted that business cooperation levels are lower in micro-enterprises, a result that differs from developed countries. Practical implications For business managers, it is best to cooperate with companies that are similar in terms of cognitive and organizational levels for innovation. At the same time, it is necessary develop strategies to reduce the social and institutional barriers to cooperation, especially in the agribusiness sector. Originality/value The contributions of the study are as follows: an in-depth quantitative examination of the relationships of various non-spatial proximities as determinants of business cooperation; an analysis of whether business cooperation with other organizations is a determining factor for business innovation, distinguishing between technological and non-technological innovation; and testing these relationships in the context of agribusiness in an emerging economy such as Chile’s because most of studies are related to high-tech sector and developed economies.

[1]  B. Kogut.  The network as knowledge : Generative rules and the emergence of structure , 2000 .

[2]  Christian Felzensztein,et al.  Marketing innovations in the agribusiness sector , 2013 .

[3]  E. Giuliani.  The Selective Nature of Knowledge Networks in Clusters: Evidence from the Wine Industry , 2007 .

[4]  Shu Wang.  What Motivates Marketing Innovation and Whether Marketing Innovation Varies across Industry Sectors , 2015 .

[5]  K. Kilic,et al.  Effects of Innovation Types on Firm Performance , 2011 .

[6]  Réjean Landry,et al.  Lessons from Innovation Empirical Studies in the Manufacturing Sector: A Systematic Review of the Literature from 1993-2003 , 2006 .

[7]  Ron Boschma,et al.  Aviation, Space or Aerospace? Exploring the Knowledge Networks of Two Industries in The Netherlands , 2011 .

[8]  R. Boschma.  Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment , 2005 .

[9]  Ekaterina Turkina,et al.  How does proximity affect interfirm marketing cooperation? A study of an agribusiness cluster , 2015 .

[10]  Third Edition,et al.  THE MEASUREMENT OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL ACTIVITIES: PROPOSED GUIDELINES FOR COLLECTING AND INTERPRETING INNOVATION DATA , 2005 .

[11]  F. Molina-Morales,et al.  Geographical and cognitive proximity effects on innovation performance in SMEs: a way through knowledge acquisition , 2011, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal.

[12]  A. Morrison,et al.  Proximity and scientific collaboration: Evidence from the global wine industry , 2015 .

[13]  Luciana Lazzeretti,et al.  How proximity matters in innovation networks dynamics along the cluster evolution. A study of the high technology applied to cultural goods , 2016 .

[14]  K. Munksgaard.  Is this network for you or for me? The pursuit of self and collective interests in a strategic network , 2015 .

[15]  Walter W. Powell,et al.  Knowledge Networks as Channels and Conduits: The Effects of Spillovers in the Boston Biotechnology Community , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[16]  C. Vedovello.  Science parks and university-industry interaction: Geographical proximity between the agents as a driving force , 1997 .

[17]  M. Najib,et al.  Innovation, cooperation and business performance: Some evidence from Indonesian small food processing cluster , 2011 .

[18]  B. Asheim,et al.  Regional Innovation Systems: The Integration of Local ‘Sticky’ and Global ‘Ubiquitous’ Knowledge , 2002 .

[19]  Raffaele Paci,et al.  Proximity, networking and knowledge production in Europe: What lessons for innovation policy? , 2013 .

[20]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using multivariate statistics, 5th ed. , 2007 .

[21]  Patrick Spieth,et al.  Are Innovation Networks in Need of a Conductor? Examining the Contribution of Network Managers in Low and High Complexity Settings , 2016 .

[22]  Anne Albert-Cromarias,et al.  Proximity cooperation driving innovation. The Naturopole case-file , 2017 .

[23]  D. Olaru,et al.  Innovation network trajectories: the role of time and history , 2015 .

[24]  Scott Stern,et al.  Clusters and Entrepreneurship , 2010 .

[25]  Ilaria Giannoccaro,et al.  Interpreting the role of proximity on Industrial District competitiveness using a complexity science-based view and Systems Dynamics simulation , 2011, J. Geogr. Syst..

[26]  R. Brennan,et al.  The structuration of relational space: Implications for firm and regional competitiveness , 2013 .

[27]  M. Korsgaard,et al.  Trust in the face of conflict: the role of managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[28]  Teis Hansen,et al.  Substitution or Overlap? The Relations between Geographical and Non-spatial Proximity Dimensions in Collaborative Innovation Projects , 2015 .

[29]  André Torre,et al.  Proximity and Localization , 2005 .

[30]  Ron Adner.  Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. , 2006, Harvard business review.

[31]  S.W.F. Omta,et al.  Key Success Factors of Innovation in Multinational Agrifood Prospector Companies , 2007 .

[32]  Pierre-Alexandre Balland,et al.  Proximity and the Evolution of Collaboration Networks: Evidence from Research and Development Projects within the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) Industry , 2012 .

[33]  A. Malmberg,et al.  (How) Do (Firms in) Clusters Create Knowledge? , 2005 .

[34]  César Pérez López.  Tecnicas De Analisis Multivariante De Datos Aplicaciones Con Spss 1/E , 2004 .

[35]  A. Codini.  Business networks along innovation life cycle , 2015 .

[36]  Janelle A. Kerlin.  Social Enterprise in the United States and Europe: Understanding and Learning from the Differences , 2006 .

[37]  E. Ogliastri,et al.  Introduction: innovation in Latin America , 2013 .

[38]  S. Pascucci,et al.  Keeping Your Secrets Public? Open Versus Closed Innovation Processes in the Hungarian Wine Sector , 2014 .

[39]  Clifford J. Shultz,et al.  Reframing Agribusiness: Moving from Farm to Market Centric , 2005 .

[40]  Jacques H. Trienekens,et al.  INNOVATION THROUGH (INTERNATIONAL) FOOD SUPPLY CHAIN DEVELOPMENT: A RESEARCH AGENDA , 2003 .

[41]  J. Knoben,et al.  Proximity and Inter-Organizational Collaboration: A Literature Review , 2006 .

[42]  Barbara M. Byrne,et al.  Structural equation modeling with AMOS , 2010 .

[43]  Rex B. Kline,et al.  Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling , 1998 .

[44]  An empirical analysis of the relationship between technological and marketing innovations: a case of Polish manufacturing firms , 2013 .

[45]  Iica.  Perspectivas de la agricultura y del desarrollo rural en las Américas: una mirada hacia América Latina y el Caribe, 2014 , 2013 .

[46]  M. T. Martínez-Fernández,et al.  Social Networks: Effects of Social Capital on Firm Innovation* , 2010 .

[47]  Bronwyn H. Hall,et al.  Introduction to the Handbook , 2010 .

[48]  R. Boschma,et al.  The Spatial Evolution of Innovation Networks: A Proximity Perspective , 2010 .

[49]  D. Aylward,et al.  Working together: innovation and export links within highly developed and embryonic wine clusters , 2004 .

[50]  Chiara Luisa Cantu,et al.  Exploring the role of spatial relationships to transform knowledge in a business idea - Beyond a geographic proximity , 2010 .

[51]  F. B. Tapia.  Commons, social capital, and the emergence of agricultural cooperatives in early twentieth century Spain , 2012 .

[52]  Wesley M. Cohen.  Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance , 2010 .

[53]  Ana Lúcia Tatsch,et al.  The Brazilian Wine Industry: a case study on geographical proximity and innovation dynamics , 2014 .

[54]  H. Yeung,et al.  A Place for R&D? The Singapore Science Park , 2003 .

[55]  S. Czellár,et al.  The Importance of a General Measure of Brand Engagement on Market Behavior: Development and Validation of a Scale , 2009 .

[56]  Francisco Lima,et al.  Cooperation in innovation activities: The importance of partners , 2010 .

[57]  Defining an Agribusiness Strategic Agenda for 2010-2020 , 2010 .

[58]  Jeroen S. Lemmens,et al.  Development and Validation of a Game Addiction Scale for Adolescents , 2008 .

[59]  J. Hair.  Multivariate data analysis , 1972 .

[60]  S. Carter,et al.  Geographical Co-Location, Social Networks and Inter-firm Marketing Co-operation: the Case of the Salmon Industry , 2010 .

[61]  Marina Apaydin,et al.  A Multi-Dimensional Framework of Organizational Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Literature , 2010 .

[62]  S. Noar.  The Role of Structural Equation Modeling in Scale Development , 2003 .

[63]  Ma. Cristina Olarte-Pascual,et al.  Marketing Innovation as an Opportunity in a Situation of Uncertainty: The Spanish Case , 2012 .

[64]  Caroline Mothe,et al.  The link between non‐technological innovations and technological innovation , 2010 .

[65]  T. Minshall,et al.  Negative Effects of Relative Proximity and Absolute Geography on Open Innovation Practices in High-tech SMEs in the UK , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and Technology.

[66]  Pamela R. Haunschild,et al.  The effects of firm reputation and status on interorganizational network structure , 2013 .

[67]  Muge Ozman,et al.  Inter-firm networks and innovation: a survey of literature , 2009 .

[68]  H. Sandee,et al.  Clustering of Small Agro-Processing Firms in Indonesia , 1999 .

[69]  J. Viaene,et al.  Determinants of innovation in small food firms , 2003 .

[70]  M. Boehlje,et al.  Future Agribusiness Challenges: Strategic Uncertainty, Innovation and Structural Change , 2011 .

[71]  Caroline Mothe,et al.  Non-technological and technological innovations: do services differ from manufacturing? An empirical analysis of Luxembourg firms , 2012, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[72]  Lorenzo Cassi,et al.  Proximity, network formation and inventive performance: in search of the proximity paradox , 2014 .

[73]  Daniela Corsaro,et al.  Actors’ heterogeneity and the context of interaction in affecting innovation networks , 2015 .

[74]  G. Dagnino,et al.  Interorganizational network and innovation: a bibliometric study and proposed research agenda , 2015 .

[75]  M. Porter.  Clusters and the new economics of competition. , 1998, Harvard business review.

[76]  Marie Coris,et al.  Proximity Dynamics, Social Networks and Innovation , 2015 .