Is the Creation and Development of Biotech SMEs Localised? Conclusions Drawn from the French Case

The article examines the localisation effects within biotechnology, concentrating in particular on the French case. The paper has two strands of analysis. The first presents a detailed statistical survey of the French biotechnology sector. Among other things, the survey shows that a) localisation effects within France are strong, b) in terms of dependence on local cluster infrastructures (especially universities and related public research institutes), most firms progress from an entry stage in which they are very dependent on local cluster infrastructures, to a mature phase in which their networks become more national/international in focus and c) French firms can be grouped into four general types of firms, ranging from "type 1" growth oriented product firms, to "type 2" niche market players, "type 3" subsidiaries of larger firms, and "type 4" firms that have been acquired. Localisation effects differ across these firms, esp. across type 1 (international) and type 2 (very localised) firms. The second strand of analysis consists of a review of the localisation and related cluster literature, with implications drawn out for localisation and knowledge spillovers within biotech clusters. It examines the relative effects of scientific centres proximity and compares them to the public policy of start-up creation.

[1]  Maryann P. Feldman.  The geography of innovation , 1994 .

[2]  Armand Hatchuel,et al.  Experts in Organizations: A Knowledge-Based Perspective on Organizational Change , 1995 .

[3]  V. Mangematin.  Competing business models in the french biotech industry , 2000 .

[4]  Michael R. Darby,et al.  Labor Mobility from Academe to Commerce , 1997, Journal of Labor Economics.

[5]  P. P. Saviotti.  KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION AND ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURES , 1999 .

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

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

[8]  Jacques-François Thisse,et al.  Economie géographique: Problèmes anciens et nouvelles perspectives , 1997 .

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

[10]  Vincent Mangematin,et al.  PhD job market: professional trajectories and incentives during the PhD , 2000 .

[11]  L. Zucker,et al.  Present at the biotechnological revolution: transformation of technological identity for a large incumbent pharmaceutical firm , 1997 .

[12]  A. Shaw,et al.  On the Analytical Dimension of Proximity Dynamics , 2000 .

[13]  B. Kogut,et al.  The Exploration of Technological Diversity and the Geographic Localization of Innovation , 1997 .

[14]  Attila Varga,et al.  Local Geographic Spillovers between University Research and High Technology Innovations , 1997 .

[15]  Paula E. Stephan,et al.  Company-Scientist Locational Links: The Case of Biotechnology , 1996 .

[16]  L. Nesta,et al.  What kind of knowledge can a firm absorb , 1999 .