ID: 48264
Authors:
Pablo Lavarello, Mariana Minervini, Verónica Robert.
Source:
Revista Brasileira de Inovação, v. 16, n. 2, p. 299-324, June-December, 2017. 26 page(s).
Keyword:
Bottom Up and Top Down Policies , Networks , Proximity
Document type: Article (Spanish)
Show Abstract
In this article, we propose to discuss public policies oriented to promote science and technology clusters. For this purpose, we studied a particular cluster case linked to a public university located in the suburban area of the city of Buenos Aires: the National University of San Martín (UNSAM). We analyze two cooperation networks between UNSAM research groups, companies, technology centers and potential adopters of innovations: a “bottom up” cluster experience of diagnostic kits development and a “top-down” University-State experience, aero spatial micro-wave development. We adopt a “proximity approach” (RALLET; TORRE, 1999, 2005; BOSCHMA, 2005; KNOBEN, 2008; LAGENDIJK; OINAS, 2005). This approach goes beyond geographical proximity explanation of clusters coordination. It takes in account social proximity (GRANOVETTER, 1985), organizational proximity (Williamson, 1975, 1979, 1985), institutional proximity (EDQUIST; JOHNSON, 1997; HOFSTEDE, 1991) and technological proximity (COHEN; LEVINTHAL, 1990; NOOTEBOOM et al., 2007). This approach enables us to analyze the tensions between opportunism and lock-in that characterize university – enterprise relations and that should be taken into account when defining science and technology clusters. The results of the case studies show that these tensions are solved in an idiosyncratic and particular way. When organizational proximity is low and risks of opportunism are high (under a bottom-up scheme), the tendency is to compensate with greater social proximity. When organizational and technological proximity is high and there is a risk of lock in (under a top-down scheme), the tendency is to seek greater openness of the network with new applications and potential new users.