You are here

Home » Content

Where is the value of cluster associations for SMEs?

Journal Name:

  • Intangible Capital

Publication Year:

  • 2012
DOI: 
http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/ic.346

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Purpose: To explore the role played by policies for co-operation and networking, such as cluster initiatives. We empirically examine not only the direct effect of cluster initiatives on firms’ innovation performance, but also potential moderation and mediation effects with regards effort in other internal innovation activities. Design/methodology: We analyze the case of the long-running and stable Basque Cluster policy. We built using SABI an extensive sample of 1779 industrial SMEs, 132 of which are members of cluster associations. Findings: The results show that cluster associates do not have more innovation than non-cluster associates. It also rejects the moderation role of other innovation activities (such as technology management, environmental management or R&D activities). However, the results give support to the mediation role of cluster associations in enhancing the value of innovation activities. Research limitations: There are two main limitations to the empirical analysis. Firstly, the impossibility of identifying the year in which cluster associates formally register to the cluster association through secondary sources could entail a degree of endogeneity in the direct and moderationmodels. Secondly, we measure innovation as labour productivity growth, which is acknowledged as only a partial measure of innovation. More generally we acknowledge that evaluations of soft policies such as that reported in this paper should be combined with complementary qualitative analysis. Practical implications: The results presented are relevant both for policy-makers seeking to achieve an optimal mix of “general cooperation” and “activity-specific” policies, as well as for the managers of firms who may accelerate the impacts of their innovation efforts by being members of cooperation networks. Originality/value: Few empirical analyses have been conducted to empirically assess the efficiency of the Basque cluster policy. The research does not support the idea that cluster associates increase innovation per se. However, it reinforces the view that cluster associations can be conceived as a focal network or broker of knowledge. In particular, this could be interpreted in terms of the success of the cluster initiative as a mechanism for generating or demonstrating a certain degree of trust among firms that already engage in innovation activities, supporting in turn benefits from the exchange of their knowledge.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-where-value-cluster-associations-smes.pdf
  • 2
472-496
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

ACS, Z.J.; AUDRETSCH, D.B. (Eds.). (1993). Small firms and entrepreneurship: An east-west perspective, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
AHEDO, M. (2004). Cluster policy in the Basque Country (1991-2002): Constructing “industry-government” collaboration through cluster-associations. European Planning Studies, 12(8): 1097-1113.
ARAGÓN, C.; ARANGUREN, M.J.; ITURRIOZ, C.; LARREA, M.; OLARTE, F.J. (2009). A new step in cluster policy evaluation in the Basque Country. Working Papers no. 2009-01, Basque Institute of Competitiveness – Orkestra, Donostia.
ARANGUREN, M.J.; NAVARRO, I. (2003). La política de clusters en la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco: una primera valoración. Ekonomiaz, 53: 90-113.
ARANGUREN, M.J.; ARAGÓN, C.; LARREA, M.; ITURRIOZ, C. (2008). Does cluster policy really enhance networking and increase firm competitiveness?. In M.J. Aranguren, C. ITURRIOZ & J.W. WILSON (Eds.), Networks, Governance and Development: Bridging Disciplinary Frontiers, Chetlteham, UK: Edward Elgar.
ARANGUREN, M.J.; LARREA, M.; WILSON, J.W. (2010). Learning from the Local: Governance of Networks for Innovation in the Basque Country. European Planning Studies, 18(1): 47-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09654310903343526
ARANGUREN, M.J.; DE LA MAZA, X.; PARRILLI, D.; VENDRELL-HERRERO, F.; WILSON, J. (in press). Nested Methodological Approaches for cluster policy evaluation: An application to the Basque country. Regional Studies.ASHEIM, B.T.; ISAKSEN, A.; NAUWELAERS, C.; TÖDLING, F. (2003). Regional innovation policy for small-medium enterprises. UK: Edward Elgar.
ASHEIM, B.; COOKE, P.; MARTIN, R. (2006). Clusters and Regional Development: Critical Reflections and Explorations. London: Routledge.
AUDRETSCH, D.B.; THURIK, R. (2001). What is new about the new about the economy: Sources of growth in the managed and entrepreneurial economies. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10: 267-315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icc/10.1.267
BALTAGI, B.H. (2002). Econometrics. New York: Springer.
BARON, R.M.; KENNY, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6): 1173-1182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
BECCATINI, G.; BELLANDI, M.; DEI OTTATI, G.; SFORZI, F. (2003). From Industrial Districts to Local Development: An Itinerary of Research. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
BELLANDI, M.; CALOFFI, M. (2010). An Analysis of Regional Policies Promoting Networks for Innovation. European Planning Studies, 18(1): 67–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09654310903343534
BENNETT, R.J.; RAMSDEN, M. (2007). The contribution of Business Associations to SMEs: Strategy, Bundling or Reassurance?. International Small Business Journal, 25(1): 29-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0266242607071781
BOEKHOLT, P.; THURIAUX, B. (1999). Public policies to facilitate clusters: Background, rationale and policy practices in international perspective. In Boosting innovation: the cluster approach. Paris and Washington: OECD Proceedings.
BROWN, R. (2000). Cluster Dynamics in Theory and Practice with Application to Scotland. Regional and Industrial Policy Research Paper, no 38. European Policies Research Centre, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.
COHEN, W.M.; LEVINTHAL, D.A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35:128-152. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2393553COOKE, P.; URANGA, M.G.; ETXEBARRIA, G. (1998). Regional systems of innovation: an evolutionary perspective. Environment and Planning A. 30: 1563-1584. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a301563
COOKE, P.; HEIDENREICH, M.; BRACZYK, H.J. (2004). Regional Innovation Systems: The Role of Governance in a Globalised World, New York: Routledge.
De PROPRIS, L. (2000). Innovation and inter-firm co-operation: The case of the West Midlands. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 9: 421-446. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10438590000000017
DÍAZ-DÍAZ, N.L.; AGUIAR-DIAZ, I.; SAÁ-PÉREZ, P. (2008). The effect of technological knowledge assets on performance: The innovative choice in Spanish firms. Research Policy, 37: 1515-1529. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.06.002
DÍEZ, M.A. (2001). The evaluation of regional innovation and cluster policies: towards a participatory approach. European Planning Studies, 9(7): 907-923. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09654310120079832
DÍEZ, M.A. (2002). Evaluating new regional policies. Reviewing the theory and practice. Evaluation, 8: 285-305. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135638902401462439
DUPUY, C.; TORRE, A. (2006). Local clusters, trust, confidence and proximity. In C. Pitelis, R. Sugden & J.W. Wilson (Eds.) Clusters and Globalisation: The Development of Urban and Regional Economies. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
FREEL, M.S.; HARRISON, R.T. (2006). Innovation and cooperation in the small firm sector: Evidence from “Northern Britain”. Regional Studies, 40(4): 289-305. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00343400600725095
FREEMAN, C. (1991). Networks of innovators: A synthesis of research issues. Research Policy, 20: 499-514. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(91)90072-X
FROMHOLD-EISEBITH, M.; EISEBITH, G. (2005). How to instituzionalize innovative clusters? Comparing explicit top down and implicit bottom-up approaches. Research Policy, 34: 1250-1268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.02.008
FROMHOLD-EISEBITH, M.; & EISEBITH, G. (2008). Looking Behind Facades: Evaluating Effects of (Automotive) Cluster Promotion. Regional Studies. 42: 1343-1356. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00343400701654202HAVNES, E.; HAUGE, P.A. (2004). Observatory of European SMEs. SMEs and cooperation. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
HERAS, I.; ARANA, G.; CAMISÓN, C.; CASADESÚS, M.; MARTIARENA, A. (2008). Gestión de la calidad y competitividad de las empresas en la CAPV. Donostia-San Sebastián, Spain: Basque Institute of Competitiveness.
KETELS, C. (2004). European Clusters, in Structural Change in Europe 3 – Innovative City and Business Regions. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
LI, J.; GENG, S. (2011). Industrial clusters, shared resources and firm performance. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2011.591841
LECHNER, C.; DOWLING, M. (2003). Firm networks: External relationships as sources for the growth and competitiveness of entrepreneurial firms. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 15(1): 1-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08985620210159220
LOVEMAN, G.; SENGENBERGEN, W. (1991). The re-emergence of small-scale production: An international perspective. Small Business Economics, 3(1): 1-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00389842
LUNDVALL, B.A. (1992). National systems of innovation: towards a theory and interactive learning. London: Pinter.
MAILLET, D. (1995). Territorial dynamic, innovative milieus and regional policy. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 7(2): 157-165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08985629500000010
MARSHALL, A. (1898). Principles of Economics, London: Macmillan.
MARTIN, F.; MAYER, T.; MAYNERIS, F. (2011a). Spatial Concentration and Firm-Level Productivity in France. Journal of Urban Economics, 69(2): 182-195. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2010.09.002
MARTIN, F.; MAYER, T.; MAYNERIS, F. (2011b). Public Support to Clusters: A Firm Level Study of French “Local Productive Systems”. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 41: 108-123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2010.09.001MEYER, M. (2010). The rise of the knowledge broker. Service Communication. 32(1): 118-127.
MORGAN, K. (1997). The learning region: Institutions, innovation and regional renewal, Regional Studies, 31(5): 491-503. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00343409750132289
Nauwelaers, C.; Wintjes, R. (2008). Innovation policy in Europe – Measurement and Strategy. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.
OXFORD RESEARCH (2008). Cluster Policy in Europe: A Brief Summary of Cluster Policies in 31 European Countries. Report for the Europe Innova Cluster Mapping Project, available online in: www.clusterobservatory.eu.
PIORE, M.J.; SABEL, C.F. (1984). The second industrial divide: possibilities for prosperity. New York: Basic Books.
PITELIS, C.; SUGDEN, R.; WILSON, J.R. (2006). Clusters and Globalisation: The Development of Urban and Regional Economies. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
PORTER, M.E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. London: The Macmillan Press.
PORTER, M.E. (1998). Clusters and competition: New agendas for companies, government, and institutions. In M.E. Porter (Ed.), On Competition. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
POWELL, W.W.; DOPUT, K.W.; SMITH-DOERR, L. (1996). Interorganisational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 116-145. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2393988
PYKE, F.; BECCATTINI, G.; SENGENBERGER, W. (1990). Industrial districts and inter-firm co-operation in Italy. Geneva: International Institute for Labour Studies.
SAXENIAN, A.L. (1994). Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
SCHMITZ, H. (1995). Collective efficiency: Growth path for small scale industry. Journal of Development Studies, 31(4): 529-586. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220389508422377SMITH, K. (1994). Interactions in knowledge systems: Foundations, policy implications and empirical methods. Oslo: STEP Group Report.
SOBEL, M.E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.). Sociological Methodology, 290-312. Washington DC: American Sociological Association.
SÖLVELL, Ö.; LINDQUIST, G.; KETELS, C. (2003). The cluster initiative greenbook. Stockholm: Bromma tryck AB.
SURROCA, J.; TRIBO, J.; WADDOCK, S. (2010). Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The role of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 31: 461-490.
VISSER, E.J. (2009). The complementary Dynamic Effects of Clusters and Networks. Industry and Innovation, 16(2): 167-195. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13662710902764287
Von HIPPEL, E. (1988). The sources of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
WARD, V.; HOUSE, A.; HAMER, S. (2009). Knowledge Brokering: The missing link in the evidence to action chain?. Evidence & Policy, 5(3): 267-279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/174426409X463811

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com