Patricia Alencar Silva Mello (*email address protected*)
Ciro Biderman (*email address protected*)
Lycia Lima (*email address protected*)
Claudia Hiromi Oshiro (*email address protected*)
Fundação Getulio Vargas, Public Administration and Government School (FGV-SP EAESP), Brazil, São Paulo
Although Science and Technology Parks (STPs) are spreading worldwide as a result of innovation and competitiveness policies by both established and emerging economies, there are few studies able to certify the success of these organizations. A sense of urgency to find effective methods to measure these innovative environments and their complexity has been motivating many researchers. There is need for data analytics, metrics and indicator’s not only to accountability purposes, given that almost all STPs are funded by public resources, but also because studies of these sort may reveal ways and strategies to increase the efficiency of these environments and to direct public programs that focus on spreading STPs.
The results of Science Park’s progress measurement carried out so far show no consensus, which may be explained by differences between those science parks studied. However, some of them have highlighted some positive results such as affirmative impact on regional economic development, patenting performance improvement by companies within the park, R & D diversity enlargement and others
This track calls for theory, research, and practice in empirical and analytical approaches that intend to develop metrics to measure the performance of STPs. We invite theoretical and empirical perspectives from different areas, and experimental research and case studies addressing questions such as: how to measure the impact of innovative ecosystems which are organized as real estate enterprises where the so-called triple helix elements – academia, private sector and state, work synergistically developing activities based on science, technology and innovation?
Drabowska, J., (2011) Measuring the success of science parks: performance monitoring and evaluation, XXVIII IASP World Conference on Science and Technology Parks
Lindelöf, P and Löfsten, H. (2004) Proximity as a resource base for competitive advantage: University industry links for technology transfer, Journal of Technology Transfer 29, 311–326
Link, A and Scott, J T. (2003) US science parks: The diffusion of an innovation and its effects on the academic missions of universities, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 1323-1356
Siegel, D.S, Westhead, P and Wright, M. (2003) Assessing the impact of University Science parks on research productivity: Exploratory firm-level evidence from the United Kingdom, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 1357–1369
Squicciarini, M. (2009) Science parks: seedbeds of innovation? A duration analysis of firms’ patenting activity, Small Bus Econ, 32, 169–190.
- 1. ENTREPRENEURIAL UNIVERSITY AND ITS SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT
- 2. ENTREPRENEURIAL UNIVERSITY AND REGIONAL INNOVATION SYSTEMS
- 3. SCIENCE PARKS AND INCUBATORS – NEW FRONTIERS
- 4. MEASURING SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PARKS
- 5. REGIONAL DIMENSIONS OF TRIPLE HELIX? CLUSTERS, CITIES AND GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES
- 6. INNOVATION CLUSTERS AND CLUSTER INITIATIVES AS PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF TRIPLE HELIX COLLABORATION
- 7. BOOSTING INNOVATION AND GROWTH THROUGH UNIVERSITY-INDUSTRY CO-CREATION
- 8. INDIVIDUALS IN THE TRIPLE HELIX
- 9. BUSINESS LED TRIPLE HELIX AND THE NEW ROLE OF GOVERNMENT
- 10. THE IMPACT OF GLOBAL INFORMATION FLOWS ON TRIPLE HELIX INTERACTIONS UNIVERSITY-INDUSTRY INTERACTIONS
- 11. ARE WE FACING A NEW GENERATION OF NATIONAL INNOVATION SYSTEMS?
- 12. ADVANCING NEW MODELS AND TOOLS FOR KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER
- 13. THE TRIPLE HELIX MODEL AND KNOWLEDGE CREATION IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
- 14. TRIPLE HELIX: GENDER, ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND DIVERSITY
- 15. MEASURING THE STRENGTH OF THE TRIPLE HELIX
- 16. SCIENCE AND THE ART OF THE TRIPLE HELIX
- 17. TRIPLE HELIX AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP ECOSYSTEMS IN THE LIGHT OF COMPLEXITY AND EVOLUTIONARY ECOLOGY