Impact of the Types of Clusters on the Innovation Output and the Appropriation of Rents from Innovation
AbstractThe ability to generate innovations and capture the rents from innovation are important for firms’ competitive advantage. Increasingly firms seek knowledge abundant locations, or industry clusters, to access novel knowledge and generate innovations through knowledge recombinations (Schumpeter, 1934). We examine how different types of clusters impact on the innovation output, the knowledge flows among the clustered firms and, ultimately, on who captures the rents from innovation. The type of cluster reflects the configuration of firms and the interactions among firms, individuals and agencies in the cluster and is likely to be a major driver of both the innovative output and of which firms will be more likely to capture the rents from innovation. Extant research has noted that the social and business networks binding firms in clusters are excellent vehicles for the flow of knowledge that eases innovations, but different types of clusters may lead to different outcomes.
AMIT, R., Schoemaker, P. (1993). Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 33-46.
ARGOTE, L., Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 150-169.
BALBINOT, Z., Dias, J., Borim-de-Souza, R. (2012). Unique organizational competencies of Brazilian technological innovation centers, Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 7(1), 1-16.
BARNEY, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
BAS, T., Amoroso, E., Kunc, M. (2008). Innovation, entrepre-neurship and clusters in Latin America natural resource: Implication and future challenges, Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 3(4), 52-65.
BELLANDI, M. (1989). The industrial district in Marshall. In small firms and industrial districts in Italy, 136-52. London: Routledge.
BOWMAN, E. (1974). Epistemology, corporate strategy and academe. Sloan Management Review, 15, 35-50.
BRESCHI, S. (2000). The geography of innovation: A cross-sector analysis. Regional Studies, 34(3), 213-229.
BULL, A., Pitt, M., Szarka, J. (1991). Small firms and industrial districts, structural explanations of small firm viability in three countries. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 3, 83-99.
DOERINGER, P., Terkla, D. (1995). Business strategy and cross-industry clusters. Economic Development Quarterly, 9, 225-37.
DRIFFIELD, N., Munday, M. (2000). Industrial performance, agglomeration, and foreign manufacturing investment in the UK. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(1), 21-37.
DYER, J., Nobeoka, K. (2000). Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge-sharing network: the Toyota case. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 345-367.
ENRIGHT, M. (2000). The globalization of competition and the localization of competition: Policies toward regional clustering, in Hood, N. and Young, S. (Eds),The Globalization of Multinational Enterprise Activity and Economic Development, London: Macmillan.
FERREIRA, M. P.; Serra, F., Maccari, E. (2012).When the innovator fails to capture rents from innovation. Latin American Business Review, 13(3),
FERREIRA, M. P.; Tavares, A., Hesterly, W. (2006). A new perspective on parenting spin-offs for cluster formation. in Fai, Felicia and Morgan, Eleanor (Eds.) Managerial Issues in International Business, Palgrave MacMillan, 67-84.
GOULD, R. (2012) Open innovation and stakeholder engagement, Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 7(3), 1-10.
GRANT, R. (1996).Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 109-122.
HENDERSON, R., Clark, K. (1990). Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 9-30.
HILL, C. (1992). Strategies for exploiting technological innovations:When and when not to license. Organization Science, 3(3), 428-441.
JACOBS, D., De Man, A-P. (1996). Clusters, industrial policy and firm strategy: A menu approach.Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 8(4), 425-437.
JAFFE, A.; Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 63, 677-598.
KOGUT, B., Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3, 383-397.
KOGUT, B., Zander, U. (1993). Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24(4), 625-646.
KRUGMAN, P. (1991). Increasing returns and economic geography. Journal of Political Economy, 99(3), 483-499.
LEVIN, R., Klevorick, A., Nelson, R.,Winter, S. (1987). Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 3, 783-820.
LEWRICK, M., Raeside, R., Peisl, T. (2007). The innovators’s social network. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 2(3), 38-48.
MAEHLER,A., Curado, C., Pedrozo, E., Pires, J. (2011) Knowledge transfer and innovation in Brazilian multinational companies. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 6(4), 1-14.
MARKUSEN, A. (1996). Sticky places in slippery space: A typology of industrial districts. Economic Geography, 72(3), 293-313.
MARSHALL,A. (1920). Principles of economics:An introductory volume. Macmillan and Co.: London, U.K.
MCGRATH, R., Tsai, M-H., Venkataraman, S., MacMillan, I. (1996). Innovation, competitive advantage and rent: A model and test. Management Science, 42(3), 389-403.
MEYER, J., Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony.American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
NAGARAJAN, A., Mitchell,W. (1998). Evolutionary diffusion: Internal and external methods used to acquire encompassing, complementary, and incremental technological changes in the lithotripsy industry. Strategic Management Journal, 19(11), 1063-1077.
NELSON, R., Winter, S. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
PINCH, S., Henry, N., Jenkins, M.,Tallman, S. (2003). From ‘industrial districts’ to ‘knowledge clusters’:A model of knowledge dissemination and competitive advantage in industrial agglomerations, Journal of Economic Geography, 3(4), 373-388.
POLANYI, M. (1967). The growth of science in society. Minerva, 5(4), 533-545.
PORTER, M. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. New York: Basic Books.
PORTER, M. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 77-90.
POUDER, R., John, C. (1996). Hot spots and blind spots: Geographical clusters of firms and innovation, Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1192-1225.
ROCHA, H. (2004). Entrepreneurship and development:The role of clusters, Small Business Economics, 23(5), 363-400.
ROMANELLII, E., Khessina, O. (2005) Regional industrial identity: Cluster configurations and economic development, Organization Science, 16(4), 344-358.
ROSENFELD, S. (1997). Bringing business clusters into the mainstream of economic development. European Planning Studies, 5(1), 3-23.
ROSENKOPF, L., Nerkar, A. (2001). Beyond local search: Boundary-spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry. Strategic Management Journal, 22(4), 287-306.
SARACENI, A., Andrade Júnior, P. (2012). Analysis of aspects of innovation in a Brazilian cluster. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 7(3), 207-212.
SAXENIAN, A. (1994). Regional advantage: Culture and competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
SCHUMPETER, J. (1950). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. 3rd edition, Harper and Row, New York.
SFORZI, F. (1989).The geography of industrial district in Italy. In Goodman, E. and Bamford, J. (Eds.) Small firms and industrial districts in Italy, p. 153-73. London: Routledge.
SHAVER, M. (1998). Do foreign owned and US owned establishments exhibit the same location pattern in US manufacturing industries? Journal of International Business Studies, 29(3), 469-492.
SZULANSKI, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 27-44.
TALLMAN, S., Jenkins, M., Henry, N., Pinch, S. (2004). Knowledge, clusters, and competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 258-271.
TALLMAN, S., Phene, A. (2002). Knowledge flows and geography in biotechnology, International Journal of Medical Marketing, 2(3), 241-254.
TEECE, D. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation. in Teece, D. (Ed.) The competitive challenge. New York: Harper & Row.
TEECE, D. (1992). Competition, cooperation, and innovation: Organizational arrangements for regimes of rapid technological progress. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 18, 1-25.
TEECE, D. (1996). Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 31, 193-224.
TEECE, D. (1997). Capturing value from technological innovation: Integration, strategic partnering, and licensing decisions. in Tushman, Michael and Anderson, Philip (Eds) Managing strategic innovation and change, Oxford University Press.
TEECE, D. (1998). Capturing value from knowledge assets: The new economy, markets for know-how, and intangible assets. California Management Review, 40(3), 55-79.
TEECE, D. (2000). Strategies for managing knowledge assets: The role of firm structure and industrial context. Long Range Planning, 33, 35-54.
VERSPAGEN, B. (1999). Large firms and knowledge flows in the Dutch R&D system: A case study of Philips electronics. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 11(2), 211-233.
WHEELER, D., Mody, A. (1992). International investment location decisions: The case of US firms. Journal of International Economics, 33, 57-76.
WINTER, S. (1987). Knowledge and competence as strategic assets. in Teece, D. (Ed.) The competitive challenge: Strategies for industrial innovation and renewal. Ballinger, Cambridge, MA.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).