What Hold us Together? Analyzing Biotech Field Formation

  • Jackeline Amantino de Andrade Federal University of Pernambuco
Keywords: biotechnology, organizational field, actor-network theory, interorganizational relations, institutional theory, innovation.


This article proposes to analyze the formation of biotechnological field bringing actor-network theory’s lens as contribution. Based on conclusions of studies developed by Walter Powell and colleagues it was held a research to analyze the diversity of institutional relations that are active by hemophilia therapies, the principle of generalized symmetry adopted for actor-network theory is highlight to identify how socio-technical associations are assembled. Besides the interorganizational relations, research’s findings indicate the scientific and technological contents have a significant mediating role to create and sustain those connections of knowledge. So, it is emphasized the need of a boarder theoretical discussion to enlarge explanations about the dynamics of organizational fields as well as innovation processes.


Download data is not yet available.


Metrics Loading ...

Author Biography

Jackeline Amantino de Andrade, Federal University of Pernambuco
Professor of Department of Administration - Federal University of Pernambuco


CALLON, M. (1986). Some elements of sociology of translation: the domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St. Brieux Bay. In: LAW, J. (ed.) Power, action and belief. Routledge & Kegan. London, pp. 196-229.

CALLON, M. (1989) Society in the making: the study of technology as a tool for sociological analysis. In: Pinch, T.; Hugues, T. Bijker, W. (eds.) The social construction of technological systems. MIT Press , Cambridge, MA.

CALLON, M.; Law, J.; Rip, A. (1986). A qualitative scientometrics. In: Callon, M.; Law, J.; Rip, A. (eds.) Mapping the dynamics of science and technology. Macmillan Press, London. pp. 102-123.

CORIAT, B.; Orsi, F.; Weinstein, O. (2003). Does biotech reflect a new science-based innovation regime? Industry and Innovation. 10 (3). pp. 231-253.

DiMAGGIO, P.; Powell, W.W. (1991). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational field. In: Powell, W.W.;

DiMAGGIO, P. (eds.) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. pp. 63-82.

DOMÈNECH, M.; Tirado, F. (1998). Claves para la lectura de textos simétrico. In: Domènech, M.; Tirado, F. (comps.) Sociología simétrica. Gedisa Editorial, Barcelona. pp. 13-50.

EDQUIST, C. (1997). Systems of innovation approaches: their emergence and characteristics. In: Edquist, C. (ed.) Systems of innovation: technologies, institutions and organizations. Pinter, London.

FERNANDES, C. (2010) Redes de informacSo tecnológica. DissertagSo de Mestrado. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife.

FREEMAN, C. (1987). Technology policy and economic performance: lesson from Japan. London, Pinter.

HOLT, R.T. (2008). Actor-network theory. In: The Sage Dictionary of Qualitative Management Research. Sage Publications, Oxford, UK. pp. 23-24.

JUDICE, V. M.M.; Baeta, A. M.C. (2005). Modelo empresarial, gestSo de inovagSo e investimentos de venture capital em empresas de biotecnologia no Brasil. Revista de AdministragSo Contemporánea. 9 (1), 171-191.

LATOUR, B. (1994). Jamais fomos modernos. Editora 34, SSo Paulo.

LATOUR, B. (2000). Ciencia em agSo. Editora Unesp, SSo Paulo.

LATOUR, B. (2001). A esperanga de Pandora. Editora EDUSC, SSo Paulo.

LATOUR, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network theory.Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

LATOUR, B.; Woolgar, S. (1997). A vida em laboratório. Relume Dumará, Rio de Janeiro.

LAW, J. (1999). After Ant. In: Law, J.; Hassard, J. (eds.) Actor Network Theory and after. Blackwell, Oxford, UK. pp. 1-14.

LAW, J. (2008). Actor-Network Theory and material semiotics. In Turner, B.S. The New Blackwell Companion to Social Theory. 3rd ed. Blackwell, Oxford. 141-158.

LAW, J.; Hetherington, K. (2000). Materialities, spatialities, globalities. Lancaster University. <http://www.comp.lancs. ac.uk/sociology/soc029jl.html>. [Accessed may, 22, 2003]

LILLICRAP, D.; Thompson, A. R. (2008). Gene therapy for hemophilia. World Federation of Hemophilia, Montreal.

LUNDVALL, B. (2005). National innovation systems: analytical concept and development tool. Druid tenth Anniversary Summer Conference. Copenhagen.

MARQUES, R.; Gongalves Neto, C. (2007). The brazilian system of innovation in biotechnology: a preliminary study. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation. 2 (1). 55-63.

MEYER, J.W. (2008). Reflections on institutional theories of organizations. In: Greenwood, R.; Oliver, C.; Suddaby, R.; Sahlin, K. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. pp. 788-809.

NIOSI, J. (2003). Alliances are not enough explaining rapid growth in biotechnology firms. Research Policy. 32. 737-750.

ORSENIGO, L. (2006). Clusters and clustering in biotechnology: stylized facts, issues and theories. In: Braunerhjelm, P. and Feldman, M.P. (eds.) Cluster Genesis. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. pp. 195-218.

OWEN-SMITH, J.; Riccaboni, M.; Pammolli, F; Powell, W.W. (2002). A comparison of US and European university-industry relations in the life sciences. Management Science. 48. 24-43.

OWEN-SMITH, J.; Powell, P. (2004). Knowledge networks in the Boston biotechnology community. Organization Science. 15 (1). 5-21.

OWEN-SMITH, J.; Powell, P. (2008). Networks And Institutions. In: Greenwood, R.; Oliver, C.; Suddaby, R.; Sahlin, K. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. pp. 594-621.

PORTER, K.; Whittington, K.B.; Powell, W.W. (2005). The institutional embeddedness of high-tech regions: relational foundations of the Boston biotechnology community. In: Breschi, S.; Malerba, F. Clusters, networks, and innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. pp. 261-296.

POWELL, W.W. (1999) The social construction of an organizational field: the case of biotechnology. International Journal of Biotechnology. 1 (1). 42-66.

POWELL. W.W.; Koput, K.W.; Smith-Doerr, L.(1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly. 41 (1). 116-145.

POWELL, W.W.; Koput, K.W.; Bowie, J.I.; Smith-Doerr, L. (2002). The Spatial Clustering Of Science And Capital: Accounting For Biotech Firm-Venture Capital Relationships. Regional Studies. 36 (3). 291-306.

POWELL, W.W.; Koput, K.W.; White, D.R.; Owen-Smith, J. (2005). Network dynamics in a field evolution: the growth of interorganizational collaboration in life sciences. American Journal of Sociology. 41 (1). 1132-1205.

POWELL, W.W.; Colyvas, J.A (2008). Microfoundations of institutional theory. In: Greenwood, R.; Oliver, C.; Suddaby, R.; Sahlin, K. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. Sage Publications,Thousand Oaks, CA. pp. 276-298.

POWELL, W.W.; Packalen, K.A.; Whittington, K.B. (2010). Organizational and institutional genesis: the emergence of high-tech clusters in life science. In: PadgettJ.; Powell, W.W.; (eds.) The emergence of organization and markets. Queen's School of Business Research Paper. Kingston, Canada.

RIP, A. (1986). Mobilising resources through texts. In: Callon, M.; Law, J.; Rip, A. (eds.) Mapping the dynamics of science and technology. London: Macmillan Press. pp. 84-99.

SCOTT, W.R. (1994). Institutions and organizations: toward a theoretical synthesis. In: Scott, W.R; Meyer, J. W. Institutional environments and organizations. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. pp. 55-80.

SCOTT, W.R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

TRIGUEIRO, M.G.S. (2002). O clone de prometeu: a biotecnologia no Brasil. Editora UnB, Brasilia.

WFH (2008). Contraction fractionation. World Federation of Hemophilia, Montreal.

WHITTINGTON, K.B.; Owen-Smith, J.; Powell, W.W. (2009) Networks, propinquity and innovation in knowledge-intensive industries. Administrative Science Quarterly. 54 (1). 90-112.

How to Cite
Andrade, J. A. de. (2011). What Hold us Together? Analyzing Biotech Field Formation. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 6(3), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242011000300001
Research Articles