The Geographical and Institutional Proximity of Scientific Collaboration Networks

The geography of innovation has established itself as a central subject in economic geography. Geographical proximity to firms and organizations like universities is supposed to have a positive effect on a firms’ innovative performance. One of the reasons causing these positive agglomeration effects is the fact that collaboration is eased by geographical proximity. Although the role of proximity for collaboration is a well researched theme with regard to innovation, less is known about the role of proximity in scientific collaboration and how this affects the probability and nature of networking among research institutions. This is surprising given the fact that collaboration in science has become a central policy issue. In this paper we set out a number of theoretical considerations about the role of geography for innovation and see whether these apply for science as well. The empirical part will focus on the geography of collaboration in scientific knowledge production, testing the hypothesis that collaboration between different kinds of organizations is geographically more localized than collaboration between the same kinds of organizations due to institutional or organizational proximity. Besides this we will analyze the importance of spatial proximity for various forms of collaboration (such as university-university and university-firm collaboration) using the concept of the gravity model. Finally we will look at the spatial structure of these collaboration networks using insights from social network methodology. Based on co-publications, central nodes of collaborative interaction and network structures are analysed over time. On the network-level we conclude on differences in the fields of life- and physical sciences and on differences on the type of relations according to university-firm, university-university and university-governmental institution linkages. On the regional level we conclude on the centrality and spatial extent of scientific collaboration hubs over time

[1]  Walter W. Powell,et al.  A Comparison of U.S. and European University-Industry Relations in the Life Sciences , 2001 .

[2]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Do science-technology interactions pay off when developing technology? , 2004, Scientometrics.

[3]  Meric S. Gertler,et al.  Tacit Knowledge and the Economic Geography of Context , 2001 .

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

[5]  P. Cohendet,et al.  The theoretical and policy implications of knowledge codification , 2001 .

[6]  Toby E. Stuart.  Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: A study of growth and innovation rates i , 2000 .

[7]  K. Pavitt.  Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change : Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory : Research Policy , 1984 .

[8]  I. Cockburn,et al.  Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery , 2003 .

[9]  J. Howells.  Tacit Knowledge, Innovation and Economic Geography , 2002 .

[10]  Maureen McKelvey,et al.  Does co-location matter for formal knowledge collaboration in the Swedish biotechnology-pharmaceutical sector? , 2003 .

[11]  James M. Utterback,et al.  The Dynamics of Innovation , 2003 .

[12]  M. Feldman.  The New Economics Of Innovation, Spillovers And Agglomeration: Areview Of Empirical Studies , 1999 .

[13]  A. Elzinga.  The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1997 .

[14]  J. Christensen.  Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment , 2008 .

[15]  Attila Varga,et al.  University Research and Regional Innovation: A Spatial Econometric Analysis of Academic Technology Transfers , 1998 .

[16]  Michelle Gittelman,et al.  Does Good Science Lead to Valuable Knowledge? Biotechnology Firms and the Evolutionary Logic of Citation Patterns , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[17]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D , 1989 .

[18]  P. David,et al.  Toward a new economics of science , 1994 .

[19]  A. Jaffe.  Real Effects of Academic Research , 1989 .

[20]  D. Foray,et al.  The Economics of Codification and the Diffusion of Knowledge , 1997 .

[21]  N. Rosenberg.  Why do firms do basic research (with their own money) , 1990 .

[22]  M. Feldman,et al.  R&D spillovers and the ge-ography of innovation and production , 1996 .

[23]  J. S. Katz,et al.  What is research collaboration , 1997 .

[24]  Olle Persson,et al.  The measurement of international scientific collaboration , 1993, Scientometrics.

[25]  W. Powell,et al.  Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology. , 1996 .

[26]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations , 2004, Scientometrics.

[27]  Rolph E. Anderson,et al.  Multivariate Data Analysis: Text and Readings , 1979 .

[28]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and , 2000 .

[29]  John Gabriel Goddard,et al.  How Do Public Laboratories Collaborate with Industry? New Survey Evidence from France , 2006 .

[30]  E. Andersen,et al.  National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning , 1992 .

[31]  K. Frenken,et al.  The geography of research collaboration: theoretical considerations and stylized facts in biotechnology in Europe and the United States , 2005 .

[32]  Ling Zhu,et al.  Major factors affecting China's inter-regional research collaboration: Regional scientific productivity and geographical proximity , 2002, Scientometrics.

[33]  Rolph E. Anderson,et al.  Nederlandse samenvatting en bewerking van 'Multivariate data analysis, 4th Edition, 1995' , 1998 .

[34]  Attila Varga,et al.  Geographic and sectoral characteristics of academic knowledge externalities , 2000 .

[35]  Ajay Agrawal,et al.  Innovation and the Growth of Cities , 2003 .

[36]  Devashish Mitra,et al.  Inequality, Nonhomothetic Preferences, and Trade: A Gravity Approach , 2004 .

[37]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[38]  A. Malmberg,et al.  The Elusive Concept of Localization Economies: Towards a Knowledge-Based Theory of Spatial Clustering , 2002 .

[39]  Roland Wagner-Döbler.  Continuity and Discontinuity of Collaboration Behaviour since 1800 — from a Bibliometric Point of View , 2004, Scientometrics.

[40]  Derek deS. Price,et al.  The Science/Technology Relationship, the Craft of Experimental Science, and Policy for the Improvement of High Technology Innovation : Research Policy , 1987 .

[41]  B. Lundvall.  National Systems of Innovation , 1992 .

[42]  J. Sylvan Katz,et al.  Geographical proximity and scientific collaboration , 1994, Scientometrics.

[43]  P. Cooke,et al.  Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organisational dimensions , 1997 .

[44]  Bengt-Åke Lundvall,et al.  National Systems of Innovation: towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning London: Pint , 1995 .

[45]  Joëlle Noailly,et al.  Crossing borders; when science meets industry , 2005 .

[46]  O. Persson,et al.  Understanding Patterns of International Scientific Collaboration , 1992 .

[47]  Mario A. Maggioni,et al.  International networks of knowledge flows: an econometric analysis , 2006 .

[48]  Caroline S. Wagner,et al.  Mapping the network of global science: comparing international co-authorships from 1990 to 2000 , 2005 .

[49]  D. Tsichritzis.  The dynamics of innovation , 1997 .

[50]  S. Breschi,et al.  Knowledge Spillovers And Local Innovation Systems: A Critical Survey , 2001 .