201102 martin moodysson

7/28/2019 201102 Martin Moodysson

1/30

c

Paper no. 2011/02

Comparing knowledge bases: on the

organisation and geography of knowledgeflows in the regional innovation system ofScania, southern Sweden

Roman Martin ([email protected])

CIRCLE, Lund University, Sweden

Jerker Moodysson ([email protected])

CIRCLE, Lund University, Sweden

This is a pre-print version of a paper that has been accepted for publication in theEuropean Urban and Regional Studies (forthcoming 2013). The final publicationis available athttp://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969776411427326)

Citations to and quotations from this work should reference the finalpublication. If you use this work, please check that the published form containsprecisely the material to which you intend to refer.

This version: February 2011

Centre for Innovation, Research and Competence in the Learning Economy (CIRCLE)

Lund University

P.O. Box 117, Slvegatan 16, S-221 00 Lund, SWEDENhttp://www.circle.lu.se/publications
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969776411427326http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969776411427326http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969776411427326http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969776411427326mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/30

WP 2011/02Comparing knowledge bases: on the organisation and geography of knowledge flowsin the regional innovation system of Scania, southern SwedenRoman Martin and Jerker Moodysson

ABSTRACT

This paper deals with knowledge flows and collaboration between firms in the regionalinnovation system of southern Sweden. It focuses on industries which draw on differenttypes of knowledge bases. The aim is to analyse how the functional and spatial organisationof knowledge interdependencies among firms and other actors vary between different typesof industries which are part of the same regional innovation system. We argue thatknowledge sourcing and exchange in geographical proximity is especially important forindustries that rely on a synthetic or symbolic knowledge base, since the interpretation of theknowledge they deal with tend to differ between places. This is less the case for industriesdrawing on an analytical knowledge base, which rely more on scientific knowledge that is

codified, abstract and universal, and therefore less sensitive to geographical distance. Thus,geographic clustering of firms in analytical industries builds on other rationale than the needof proximity for knowledge sourcing and exchange. To analyse these assumptionsempirically, we draw on data from three case studies of firm clusters in the region ofsouthern Sweden: (1) the life science cluster represents an analytical (science) basedindustry, (2) the food cluster includes mainly synthetic (engineering) based industries, and(3) the moving media cluster is considered as symbolic (artistic) based. Knowledge sourcingand knowledge exchange in each of the cases are explored and compared using socialnetwork analysis in association with a dataset gathered through interviews with firmrepresentatives.

Keywords: knowledge bases, life science, food cluster, moving media, Sweden

Disclaimer: All the opinions expressed in this paper are the responsibility of the individual

author or authors and do not necessarily represent the views of other CIRCLE researchers.


3/30

1

Title:

Comparingknowledgebases:ontheorganisationandgeographyofknowledge

flowsintheregionalinnovationsystemofScania,southernSweden

Authors:

RomanMartinandJerkerMoodysson

CIRCLE,LundUniversity

Abstract:

Thispaperdealswithknowledgeflowsandcollaborationbetweenfirms intheregional innovationsystemof

southernSweden. It focuseson industrieswhichdrawondifferent typesofknowledgebases.Theaim is to

analysehowthefunctionalandspatialorganisationofknowledge interdependenciesamongfirmsandother

actorsvarybetweendifferenttypesof industrieswhicharepartofthesameregional innovationsystem.We

argue thatknowledgesourcingandexchange ingeographical proximity isespecially important for industries

thatrelyonasyntheticorsymbolicknowledgebase,sincetheinterpretationoftheknowledgetheydealwith

tend todiffer betweenplaces.This is less thecase for industriesdrawingonananalyticalknowledgebase,

whichrelymoreonscientificknowledgethatiscodified,abstractanduniversal,andthereforelesssensitiveto

geographical distance. Thus, geographic clustering of firms in analytical industries builds on other rationale

thantheneedofproximityforknowledgesourcingandexchange.Toanalysetheseassumptionsempirically,

wedrawondatafromthreecasestudiesoffirmclustersintheregionofsouthernSweden:(1)thelifescience

cluster

represents

an

analytical

(science)

based

industry,

(2)

the

food

cluster

includes

mainly

synthetic

(engineering) based industries, and (3) the moving media cluster is considered as symbolic (artistic) based.

Knowledgesourcing and knowledge exchange ineach of thecasesare exploredand compared using social

networkanalysisinassociationwithadatasetgatheredthroughinterviewswithfirmrepresentatives.


4/30

2

INTRODUCTION:GEOGRAPHYOFKNOWLEDGEFLOWSThe geography of innovation and knowledge creation is a vital research field in contemporary economic

geography. In the last decades, a large body of literature has emerged studying geographical patterns of

innovation,buildingonanlongresearchtraditionthatrangesfromMarshall's(1920)earlyworkoninnovation

in

industrial

districts

to

the

more

recent

work

on

innovative

milieus

(Camagni

1991),

learning

regions

(Asheim

1996)andregionalinnovationsystems(Cooke,Uranga,andEtxebarria1998;AsheimandGertler2005).Inthis

streamof literature, innovation is largelyunderstoodasoutcomeof interactive,nonlinearprocesses (Pavitt

2005;KlineandRosenberg1986),emanatingfrom interactionamongvariousactorsrepresenting industryas

wellastheuniversityandgovernmentsphere(EtzkowitzandLeydesdorff1997).Theseinteractionsdonottake

place randomly distributed over space, but tend to occur within predominantly, however not exclusively,

localisednetworksofactors(MalmbergandMaskell2006).Althoughthereisconsensusintheliteraturethat

proximity matters for knowledge exchange (Gertler and Levitte 2005), there is no agreement under which

conditions the local or regional sphere matters most for exchange of knowledge between firms and other

organisations.

There

are

however

strong

arguments

on

the

claim

that

specific

knowledge

characteristics

contributestronglytodeterminetheroleofspaceindifferentindustries(Boschma2005).Whereassometypes

ofknowledgetraveleasilyandcanbetransferredoverlargegeographical distance,othersarespatiallysticky

andrequireactors toshare thesamesocioculturalnormsandunderstandings.Thedegreeatwhichoneor

another type of knowledge is prevailing may influence the role of proximity for innovation activities in

differentindustries.Furthermore,itisacknowledgedthatknowledgeexchangeandinnovationnotonlyoccur

in industries that traditionally have been referred to as science based and (high) technology oriented, but

frommoreor less allsegmentsof the economy, whereas increasedattention is paid to economic activities

transcendingestablishedsectorialboundaries(BoschmaandIammarino2009).Thereisneverthelessstillagap

inthe

literature

as

regards

how

these

cross

sectorial

interactive

processes

are

organised,

which

actors

are

involved, where they are located in relation to each other and, not least, how and why these patterns of

interactionvarybetweendifferenttypesofactivitiesbasedondifferenttypesofknowledge.

Thepresentpapercontributestotheexisting literaturebyprovidingempiricalfindingsonthequestionhow

industryspecificknowledgecharacteristicscontributetoshapingthegeographyofinnovation.Theaimofthe

paper istoexaminehowgeographicalandorganisationalpatternsofknowledgesourcingandexchangevary

between industrieswithdifferent knowledgebase,yet locatedwithinthesameregional innovationsystem.

Weaddressquestionsontheroleofregionalversusglobalknowledgenetworksindifferentindustriesaswell

astheroleofknowledgesourceswith lowerversushigherdegreeofformalisation.Wedrawourfindingson

interviewswith firmrepresentatives in threedistinct industries located in theregional innovationsystemof

southern Sweden1: (1) life science represents an analytical (science) based industry, (2) the food sector

includes mainly synthetic (engineering) based industries, and (3) moving media is considered as a symbolic

1Interviewshave beenconductedbetween2007 and2010 in the frameworkof theEuropeancollaborative

researchprojectConstructingRegionalAdvantage(CRA).


5/30

3

(artistic)based industry.Thecasesaresystematicallyexploredandcomparedbasedondescriptivestatistics

andsocialnetworkanalysis.

THEORY:DIFFERENTIATED KNOWLEDGEBASES

The point of departure in our attempt to understand the geography of knowledge and its industry specific

characteristicsisadiscussionontypesofknowledgeandformsknowledgecreation.Atleastthreeknowledge

taxonomiescanbefoundintheliterature,whichbuilduponeachotherandhavecontributedsubstantiallyto

thediscussion.

Probably themostwellknowndistinction is theonebetween codifiedand tacitknowledge.Whereas the

firstcanbewrittendownandeasily transferredovertimeanddistance,the latter isembedded intopeople

andorganisationsandconsideredasspatiallysticky.ThisclassificationoriginatesfromPolanyis(1967)work,

has

been

promoted

by

Nelson

and

Winter

(1982)

and

receives

much

attention

within

the

innovation

systems

literature (Cooke, Heidenreich, and Braczyk 2004). The basic notion is that tacit knowledge is by definition

difficult towritedownandstronglycontextspecific,therefore it isdifficulttoshareoverdistanceandmost

effectivelytransmittedthroughdirectsfacetofaceinteraction.Consequently,innovatingactorswhodrawon

tacit knowledge will tend to locate close to eachother in order to access and benefit from these localised

knowledge flows.Knowledgesources ingeographicalproximitywillbe less important if innovationactivities

dependmoreoncodifiedtypesofknowledge,sincethesearerelativelyeasytotransferoverdistance(Gertler

2008). Despite being rather intelligible, this tacitcodified dichotomy is often criticized for a narrow

understanding of knowledge, learning and innovation. The underlying assumption that transfer and

coordinationof

tacit

knowledge

takes

place

almost

exclusively

on

alocal

scale

can

certainly

be

criticized:

There

is no empirical evidence for this claim; in contrast, many studies oriented towards tracing flows of tacit

knowledge identify a relatively low degree of local knowledge exchange compared to global flows of

knowledge (Hagedoorn 2002; McKelvey, Alm, and Riccaboni 2003; Gertler and Levitte 2005). In some

industriessuchasthosebasedonbiotechnology,themostimportantexchangerelationsseemtotakeplacein

globallyconfiguredepistemiccommunitiesratherthaninlocallyconfigured,trustbasednetworks(Moodysson

2008). Besides, it is not reasonable to expect that exchange in the local milieu is limited to tacit forms of

knowledge;infactalargepartofthelocalknowledgeexchangedistoahighdegreecodified.Furthermore,itis

obviousthatmostformsofeconomicallyrelevantknowledgearemixed inthisrespect,hencethetwotypes

shouldbe

seen

as

complements

rather

than

substitutes

to

each

other

(Johnson,

Lorenz,

and

Lundvall

2002).

This complementary was in fact also stressed in the original writings by Polanyi (1967), but tend to be

forgottenorignoredinthefurtherelaborationsandapplicationsofhisideas(Nightingale1998).

Inordertomovebeyondabinarydiscussiononthetacitnessofsomeandthecodifyabilityofothertypesof

knowledge, Lundvall and Johnson (1994) promote an alternative distinction between knowwhat, know


6/30

4

why,knowhowandknowwho2.Thefirst,knowwhat,iscloselyrelatedtowhatonewouldassociatewith

the term information; it refers to knowledge about mere facts. It can be acquired by reading books or

attendinglecturesanddoesnotnecessarilyinvolve interactive learningorcooperationbetweenactors.Since

technologicalprogresshasmadeaccesstoinformationeasierandknowwhatalmostubiquitous,othertypes

of knowledge have become increasingly relevant.The second type, knowwhy, refers to knowledge about

principlesand laws innatureandsociety,which isrelatedtoscientificknowledgeandparticularly important

forinnovationactivitiesinsciencebasedindustriessuchaschemicalsordrugdevelopment.Thethird,know

how,referstoskillsandthecapabilityofdoingsomething,notonlyintermsofpracticalorphysicalwork,but

ofallsortsofactivities intheeconomicsphere.Thiskindofknowledge istypicallygeneratedandpreserved

withintheboundariesofafirm,howeverthegrowingcomplexityofeconomicactivitiesincreasestheneedfor

firms to cooperate and to engage into the exchange of knowhow. Thus, one important rationale for the

formationofnetworksbetweenfirms istheirneedtoshareandcombineelementsofknowhow.Theforth

type of knowledge, knowwho, is closely linked to the previous by referring to knowledge about possible

partnersforcooperationandknowledgeexchange.Inordertoacquirecompetencesthatarenotyetpresent

within the firm, innovatingcompaniesneed tobuildupandcultivaterelationshipswithother firms thatare

willingtoshareknowledgeandrelatedskills.Thusitbecomesobviousthatknowwhoiscloselyrelatedtothe

formationof knowledge networksbetween actors. However in thediscussion so far, only littlecan be said

aboutthegeographicalconfigurationofthesenetworks.

Morerecently,andreferringtoLaestadius(2000),AsheimandGertler(2005)have introducedanalternative

conceptualizationofknowledgethattakesexplicitlyintoaccountthecontentoftheactualinteractionstaking

placeinnetworksofinnovators.Toexplainthegeographyofinnovationindifferentindustries,adistinctionis

madebetweenthreedifferenttypesofknowledgebases:(1)analytical,(2)syntheticand(3)symbolic.These

knowledgebases

differ

in

various

respects

such

as

the

dominance

of

tacit

and

codified

knowledge

content,

the

degree of formalisation and the context specificity of the knowledge. This distinction is intended as ideal

typical.. In practice, most activities comprise more than one knowledge base, and the degree to which a

certain knowledge base prevails varies between industries, firms and different types of activities and

occupationswithinthose(AsheimandHansen2009).Themaincharacteristicsofthethreeknowledgebases

aredescribedinthefollowing.

Ananalyticalknowledgebaseisdominantineconomicactivitieswherescientificknowledgeisimportant,and

whereknowledgecreationismainlybasedonformalmodels,codifiedscienceandrationalprocesses(Asheim

and

Gertler

2005).

Examples

mentioned

in

the

literature

are

genetics,

biotechnology,

and

information

technology, whereas the present study focuses on the life science industry. For those industries, basic and

appliedresearchisrelevantandnewproductsandprocessesaredevelopedinarelativelysystematicmanner.

Companiesusuallyruntheirownresearchanddevelopment(R&D)departments,butrelyalsoonknowledge

2KnowwhyissimilartoEpistemeandknowhowtoTechne,adistinctionthatrefersbacktoAristotelesand

is naturally made in other languages, for instance in Frenchbetween connaissanceand savoirfaire or inGermanbetweenWissenandKnnen.


7/30

5

generated at universities and other research organisations as an input to their innovation activities. Thus

linkages and networks between industry and public research organisations are highly important and occur

morefrequentlythan inother industries.Analytical industriesdealwithscientificknowledgestemmingfrom

universitiesandotherresearchorganisations;consequentlytheyrelymainlyoncodifiedformsofknowledge.

However, the role of tacit knowledge should not be ignored since the process of knowledge creation and

innovationalwaysinvolvesbothkindsofknowledge(Nonaka,Toyama,andKonno2000;Johnson,Lorenz,and

Lundvall2002).

Asyntheticknowledgebaseprevailsinindustriesthatcreateinnovationthroughuseandnewcombinationof

existing knowledge, with the intention to solve concrete practical problems (Asheim and Gertler 2005).

Examplesmentionedintheliteratureareplantengineering,specializedindustrialmachineryandshipbuilding,

whilethepresentstudyfocusesoninnovativefoodproduction.Intheseindustries,formalR&Dactivitiesareof

minorimportance;innovationisdrivenbyappliedresearchormoreoftenbyincrementalproductandprocess

development. Linkagesbetweenuniversityand industry are relevant butoccurmore in the fieldof applied

R&Dand

less

in

basic

research.

New

knowledge

is

generated

partly

through

deduction

and

abstraction,

but

primarily through induction, encompassing the process of testing, experimentation and practical work.

Knowledgethatisrequiredfortheseactivitiesispartiallycodified,howeverthedominatingformofknowledge

istacit,duetothefactthatnewknowledgeoftenresultsfromexperiencegainedthroughlearningbydoing,

usingand interacting.Comparedtoothers,synthetic industriesrequiremoreknowhow,craftandpractical

skills for designing new products and processes. Those skills are often provided by professional and

polytechnicsschoolsorbyonthejobtraining(AsheimandCoenen2006).

Thesymbolicknowledgebaseisathirdcategorythathasbeenintroducedrecentlytoaccountforthegrowing

importance

of

cultural

production.

It

is

strongly

present

within

a

set

of

cultural

industries

such

as

film,

television, publishing, music, fashion, and design, in which innovation is dedicated to the generation of

aesthetic value and images and less to a physical production process (Asheim, Coenen, and Vang 2007).

Symbolic knowledge can be embedded in material goods such as clothing or furniture, but its impact on

consumers and its economic value arises from its intangible character, its aesthetic quality. Symbolic

knowledge also includes forms of knowledge applied and created in service industries such as advertising.

Sincetheseindustriesoftenorganizetheiractivitiesinshorttermprojects,knowledgeaboutpossiblepartners

forcooperationandknowledgeexchange (knowwho) isofconsiderable importance.Symbolicknowledge is

highly contextspecific, as the interpretation of symbols, images, designs, stories and cultural artefacts is

strongly

tied

to

a

deep

understanding

of

the

habits

and

norms

and

everyday

culture

of

specific

social

groupings (Asheim,Coenen,andVang2007)p.664).AsGertler (2008)pointsout,thesymbolicknowledge

embedded within industries such as advertising has been shown to be very highly shaped by its social and

cultural context witness the infamous accounts of how an advertisement that is highly effective in one

culturalsetting often meets with a verydifferent reception when it is implemented in another market (p.

215f.).Therefore,themeaningandthevalueassociatedwithsymbolicknowledgevariesconsiderablybetween

places.


8/30

6

Theoryledexpectations

Followingthetheoreticaldiscussion,itisreasonabletoexpectthatindustrieswithdifferentknowledgebases

varyalsoasregardsthegeographyandorganisationofknowledgesourcingandknowledgeexchange.Weaim

atexploringtheseindustryspecificdifferencesbyfocussingontheroleoftheregionalversustheglobalsphere

forknowledgeexchange,andtheroleofmoreformalisedversuslessformalisedknowledgesources.

Based on the preliminary theoretical considerations, we would expect symbolic industries to rely

predominantly on knowledge sources situated in geographical proximity, since the interpretation of the

knowledgetheydealwithtendstovarybetweenplaces.Formalisedknowledgesourcesrelatedtoacademia

areexpectedtobe lessimportant,sinceproductandprocessdevelopmentisdrivenbycreativityratherthan

application of scientific laws. Since creativity and artistic skills are key to these firms competitiveness, and

sincesuchcapacitiesarehard to transfer fromone individual toanother,staffrecruitment (in thefollowing

referredtoasmobility)isassumedtobeanimportantstrategyforknowledgesourcingamongthesefirms.At

thesametime,theseartisticskillsarestronglycontextdependent,notonlywithregardtogeographybutalso

withregard

to

type

of

activity,

which

would

imply

that

firms

in

the

same

type

of

industry

would

be

the

primary

sourceforstaffrecruitment.Sincemanyofthesecompaniesbuildtheir imageandbrandnamearoundtheir

coreproducts, their innovationsareusuallynotkeptsecret,butdistributed inaswidechannelsaspossible.

This would imply monitoring of other firms through channels such as fairs, exhibitions and magazines an

importantstrategyforknowledgesourcingamongfirmsinthisindustry.

Syntheticindustriesdealtoahigherextentwithcodifiedknowledgewhichislesscontextspecific,althoughthe

dominatingform isstilltacit.Therefore,cooperationandknowledgeexchange isexpectedtooccurprimarily

betweenspatiallycollocatedpartners,butalsoactorsonthenationalandglobal leveltoplayaconsiderable

role.

Staff

recruitment

between

firms

in

the

same

industry

is

expected

to

be

a

crucial

strategy

for

knowledge

sourcing,whilemonitoringof other firms innovative activities through indirectchannelsareexpected tobe

lessimportant,asaconsequenceoftheappliedandspecializednatureoftheknowledgeonwhichthesefirms

buildtheircompetitiveness.Totheextentthatthesefirmsusesuch indirectchannels,theseareexpectedto

belessformalizedandlargelyindustryspecific.

Analytically based industries rely on scientific knowledge that is codified, abstract and universal, and are

thereforelesssensitivetogeographical distance.Inlinewiththis,wewouldexpectanalyticalindustriestorely

on formalised knowledge sources and to operate within globally configured epistemic communities rather

than locally configured, trust based networks (Moodysson 2008; Gertler 2008). Since a large share of the

crucialknowledge for innovation in thesetypesof industries isembodied inkey individuals,staffmobility is

assumedanimportantstrategyforknowledgesourcingamongfirms.Universitiesareassumedtobethemain

sourceofhumancapital,butalsootherfirmswithsimilarprofile,whereasthespecializednatureofmostof

these firms makes more generic knowledge available in other types of sectors less important. The strong

regulationsandrelianceon intellectualpropertyrightsmayserveasabarrierforcollaboration,whichwould


9/30

7

increasetheincentives,butalsothedifficulties,forknowledgesourcingthroughmonitoringcompetitorsusing

indirectsourcesofknowledgesuchasscientificjournals,surveysandquestionnaires.

TheseexpectationsarevisualizedinFigure1andwillbeempiricallyaddressedintheremainderofthisarticle.

FIGURE1:EXPECTEDPATTERNSOFKNOWLEDGESOURCING.SOURCE:OWNDRAFT

RESEARCHDESIGN:LIFE SCIENCE,FOODANDMOVINGMEDIAINSCANIA

While

previous

studies

applying

the

knowledge

base

approach,

with

very

few

exceptions,

have

done

so

withoutempiricsorthrough indepthcasestudiesof innovationprocessescarriedoutbysinglefirmsand/or

projectgroups (AsheimandGertler2005;CoenenandAsheim2005;Moodysson2008;Moodysson,Coenen

andAsheim2008)orthroughveryindirectmeasuresofknowledgecollaboration(Coenenetal2006)thisstudy

draws on data from a collection of cases, with the ambition of further assessing some of the theoretically

derived assumptions (specified above). The current analysis should however not be seen as an attempt to

verifyorfalsifythetheory,ratherasanattempttobetterunderpinandspecifysomeofitscorearguments.For

this reason, the initial selection of cases is based on a qualitative assessment of the core activities of

companiescomposing regional clusters, while theassumptionson thegeography and organisation of these

coreactivities

put

forward

in

previous

studies

are

assessed

through

acombined

survey

and

interview

based

study on three industries that are located in the region of Scania, Sweden, namely life science (analytical

based),food(syntheticbased),andmovingmedia(symbolicbased).3Whilesomewouldarguethatwehereby

apply a circular argument basing the selection of cases on observations what we subsequently set out to

3Interviewshave beenconductedbetween2007 and2010 in the frameworkof theEuropeancollaborative

research project Constructing Regional Advantage (CRA). Eight project teams in different countries havemadeuseofthesamejointlydevelopedquestionnairetointerviewfirmrepresentatives.


10/30

8

measure,wearguethatthis isnotthecase.Thecasesareselectedbasedonthetypeofinnovationactivities

onwhichthefirmsoughttobasetheircompetitiveadvantagegiventhemarketinwhichtheyoperate,while

thegeographyandorganizationofknowledgesourcingareempiricalquestionsnotreflectedintheselectionof

cases.

Theregion

of

Scania

is

located

in

the

southernmost

part

of

Sweden.

With

1.3

Mio

inhabitants

representing

13%ofthecountrystotalpopulation,itisoneofthemostpopulatedandurbanizedregionsinSweden.Most

oftheeconomicactivitiestakeplaceintheagglomerationaroundMalm,whichisthecountrysthirdlargest

cityandhasundergoneatransformationfromheavymanufacturingandshipbuildingtomoreserviceoriented

activities,andthecityofLund,whichhoststhelargestuniversityintheNordiccountriesandisamajorsource

forscientificknowledgeandhighlyskilledlabourwithapproximately40,000studentsand5,500employees.In

order to strengthen the position of Scania both nationally and internationally, the regional authorities,

represented by the regional council Region Skne, are for more than one decade actively implementing

policiesthataredesignedtowardsinnovationbasedregionaldevelopment.Theexisting initiativesarelargely

influencedby

theoretical

concepts

like

clusters

(Porter

2003),

learning

regions

(Asheim

1996)

and

regional

innovation systems (Cooke, Heidenreich, and Braczyk 2004; Asheim and Gertler 2005), andgeared towards

improvedcooperationandknowledgeexchangebetweenindustry,universityandgovernmentontheregional

level.Thesepoliciesfocusonthedevelopmentofselectedindustriesinwhichtheregionissupposedtohavea

competitiveadvantageandafuturegrowthpotential.Threeoftheseindustriesarepresentedanddealtwith

inthefollowing.

The life science industry in Scania encompasses more than 20 research based biotechnology companies

focusingonnewpharmaceuticalsandaboutthesamenumberofmedicaltechnologyorientedcompanies.The

majority

of

biotechnology

companies

were

established

after

1995

and

are

clustered

around

Lund

University

and in the two science parks Ideon (in Lund) and Medeon (in Malm). Strong research units such as Lund

University and Lund Institute of Technology as well as the university hospitals of Lund and Malm are

importantorganisations thatcontribute to thedevelopmentof this industry.Employingabout7,000people

andaccountingforaround15%ofthecountrysvalueaddedinthesector,theregionistodayoneofthethree

major locations for the pharmaceutical and biotechnological industry in Sweden, besides the Stockholm

UppsalaLifeScienceClusterandStockholmScienceCity.Theregional industrycanalsobeseen inthe larger

context of the crossborder cluster Medicon Valley, which covers life science companies in the south of

SwedenandtheneighbouringpartofDenmark,includingCopenhagen.Firmsinbothcountriesareaddressed

byacluster

initiative

named

Medicon

Valley

Alliance,

which

was

set

up

with

the

aim

to

encourage

bi

national

cooperationbetweenSwedishandDanishlifesciencecompanies,tostimulateindustryuniversitylinkagesand

to improve theglobalvisibilityofthecluster (Moodysson2007).Witha listoffirmsprovidedbythiscluster

initiativeandthroughamanualselectionprocess,43innovating lifesciencecompanieswereidentifiedinthe

region, most of them independent small and medium sized. No large multinationals, pharmaceutical or

medical technology firms with their headquarters located elsewhere were included in the sample. Semi


11/30

9

standardizedandindepthinterviewswereconductedwithrepresentativesof30ofthesefirms(responserate

70%)4.

Thefood industry inScaniaplaysan importantrolebothfortheregionaleconomyandforthenationalfood

production.Thispositionisrootedinhistoryandlinkstonaturalconditionsthatarefavourableforagriculture

andfood

processing,

e.g.

fertile

soils

and

arelatively

mild

climate.

Today,

approximately

45%

of

the

Swedish

turnover in the food sector is generated in the region.Nilssonatal. (2002) estimate that a totalof40,000

peopleareemployedintheindustry,ofwhich25,000areactiveinthecoreactivitiesaroundfoodproduction

and processing, and another 15,000 in supporting and related industries such as food oriented packaging,

agricultural research or manufacturing of food related machinery. There are several larger national or

internationalcompaniesactiveinfoodprocessing,suchasNestl,Sknemejerier,FindusandUnilever,aswell

as supporting and auxiliary company such as Tetra Pak, a food packaging company originating from Lund.

Whilethesecompanieshavebeenshapingtheclusterfora longtime,theydonotnecessarilyhavetheirkey

activitiesintheregionanymore.Asaresponsetoan increasingglobalcompetitionintheagriculturalsector,

whichwas

partly

accelerated

by

the

entry

of

Sweden

to

the

European

Union

in

1995,

many

firms

have

gone

through a sharp process of restructuring and rationalization. The food industry faces a high pressure to

innovate and develop towards higher value added niche products such as functional food, e.g. food with

health promoting or disease preventing functions. Over the last decades, a number of small knowledge

intensivefirmshaveevolvedwithinfoodandrelatedsectors,someofwhichhaveclosecontactstoresearch

and development facilities both inside and outside the region (Nilsson 2008). The analysis in this paper is

limitedto innovativefoodproductionandprocessingcompanies. Basedonan inclusive listofactorswhoma

regionalclusterinitiativehadidentifiedasbeingpartoftheregionalfoodindustry,amanualselectionprocess

was carried out in which inactive firms and firms that only have sales departments in the region were

excluded.After

this

selection

process,

the

innovative

core

of

the

food

industry

was

defined

as

being

composed

by 35 firms, of which 28 were interviewed (response rate 80%). As in the case of life science, most of the

companies are small and medium sized, based in the region with both head quarter, development and

productionunit.

ThemovingmediaindustryrepresentsanewandgrowingnicheintheregionaleconomyofScania.Thegrowth

oftheindustrytookoffinthebeginningofthe21thcentury;afteraperiodinwhichthetraditionalnavaland

heavyprocessingindustrylocatedinMalmwentdown.In2002,thelargecraneoftheshipyard,asymbolof

Malmas industrialcity,wassoldandtransportedtoSouthKoreafor futureuse inamotorvehiclefactory.

Theregional

authorities

had

the

explicit

ambition

to

create

anew

landmark

for

the

city,

and

the

abandoned

shipyard was transformed into a modern office and housing area. In the same period, the local university

collegeexperiencedrapidgrowthandextendeditsfacilitiesintothenewneighbourhood.Partlytodistinguish

themselves from the larger and more established Lund University with core competences in science,

engineering and management, the university college in Malm decided to focus its development and

4Adesktopbasednonrespondentanalysisrevealednosystematicdifferencebetweenrespondingandnon

respondingcompaniesintermsofsize,ageandtypeofactivities.


12/30

10

education activities on applied science and creative activities related to arts, design and moving images

(Henning,MoodyssonandNilsson2010).Around thesame time, theregionalauthorities launchedacluster

initiativewiththeaimtobringtogetherandstrengthenthemediaindustryintheregion.Movingmediaspans

over a range of organisationally distinct, but functionally related, activities. Examples are film and TV

production, digital arts and design, development of computer games software and various graphical

applicationsforcomputers,mobilephonesandotherhandhelddevices(MartinandMoodysson2011).Since

the majorityof the firms workingwith movingmedia represent small and specialisedniches ofothermore

genericsectors(likeICT,advertising,softwaredevelopmentetc.)itwasnotpossibletouseofficialstatisticsto

identify the entire population of firms. This was instead done through a dialogue with a regional support

organisation and a manual selection process, in which inactive firms and firms that only have sales

departmentsaswellasindependentartistsandinterestorganisationswithoutrealcommercialactivitieswere

excluded.Afterthisselectionprocess,themovingmediaclusterwasdefinedasbeingcomposedby71firms,

mostofthemsmallwithlessthan10employees,butalsosomemediumsized.Interviewswithrepresentatives

of37ofthesecompanieswereconducted(responserate52%).

Keeping inmindtheabovementioneddifferencesandsimilarities intheevolutionandcompositionofthese

industries,theremainderofthepaperwillfocusondifferencesasregardstheunderlyingknowledgestructure

and will analyse more in detail the organisational and geographical patterns of knowledge sourcing. As

toucheduponabove,allthreeknowledgebasesandthemodesofknowledgecreationcharacterizingthemare

to some extent involved in a concrete innovation process, no matter in which industry it takes place.

Nevertheless,therearefundamentaldifferencesasregardsthedegree towhichvarioustypesofknowledge

are present, or, more accurate, as regards the type of knowledge that is crucial and constitutes the

competitive core of the industry. Innovation activities in the lifescience industry aremainlygeared toward

solving

analytical

challenges

that

are

most

effectively

addressed

by

scientific

knowledge

and

principles.

Syntheticchallengesrelatedtoproblemsolvingaswellassymbolicchallengesrelatedtodesignandaesthetics

arepresentaswell,butdonotconstitutethecorecompetenceinthisindustry.Firmsinthefood industryin

contrastare innovatingpredominantlythrough incrementalproblemsolvingprocessesandbyapplicationof

engineeringskills; theircorecompetence is thedissolvingofsyntheticchallenges.Movingmediacompanies

aremostlyconcernedwithsymboliccontents involvingartisticknowledgeanddesign,oftenwith theaimto

improvetheuserexperienceandperceptionofaproduct.Whereastheanalyticalandsyntheticchallenge in

principlecouldbesourcedout toadvancedsuppliersorsubcontractors, thesymbolicchallengeconstitutes

thecorecompetenceofthemovingmediaindustry(MartinandMoodysson2011).

EMPIRICALANALYSIS:ORGANISATIONALANDGEOGRAPHICALPATTERNSOF

KNOWLEDGESOURCINGBelow followsacomparativeanalysisoforganisationalandgeographicalpatternsofknowledge flows inthe

lifescience,foodandmovingmedia industry inScania.Knowledgesourcing iscapturedfromthreedifferent

angles,namelymonitoring,mobilityandcollaboration.Monitoringreferstotheacquisitionofnewknowledge


13/30

11

withoutdirectinteractionwithotheractors,butthroughintermediarycarriersofknowledge.Mobilityrefersto

therecruitmentofskilledlabourfromotherorganisationsandisassociatedwithknowledgethatisembodied

into people. Collaboration refers to the intentional exchange of knowledge through direct interaction with

otheractorsinsideoroutsidetheregion.Inthefollowing,weexaminetheorganisationalpatternsofvarious

sourcesformonitoringandmobility,aswellasthegeographicalpatternsofcollaborationbetweenfirms.Firm

representativesinthethreeindustrieswereaskedtoindicatetheimportanceofeachsourceonascalefrom1

(verylow)to5(veryhigh);theresultsthusdisplayperceivedimportance.

Knowledgesourcingthroughmonitoring

As regards monitoring, there is a range of possible sources for new knowledge. The most obvious primary

sourcesareotheractors inthe innovationsystemsuchasuniversities,companiesorgovernmentalagencies.

Howeverinthissectionmainattentionispaidtotheacquisitionofknowledgewithoutdirectinteraction,but

through intermediaries carrying knowledge from these primary sources. Examples for intermediaries are

scientificjournalsreportingresultsfrombasicresearch,surveysandquestionnairescarriedoutandpublished

by

various

business

and

support

organisations,

specialised

magazines

focussing

on

specific

industries

or

technologies, as well as trade fairs and exhibitions targeting these industries. Following the preliminary

theoreticalconsideration,wewouldexpectthelifescienceindustrytoattributearelativelyhighimportanceto

journalsandsurveysrepresentingscientificknowledgeandprinciples. Incontrast,wewouldexpectthefood

industry and even more the moving media industry to rely primarily on knowledge sources with a lower

degreeofformalisation,herereflectedbybusinessmagazines,tradefairsandexhibitions.

TABLE1:RELATIVEIMPORTANCEOFVARIOUSSOURCESFORGATHERINGMARKETKNOWLEDGETHROUGHMONITORING

Mean Std.Deviation N

Scientificjournals

Life

Science 3.31 1.31 29

Food 1.86 1.08 28

MovingMedia 2.31 1.21 36

Surveys,questionnaires LifeScience 3.31 1.51 29

Food 2.86 1.30 28


Specialisedmagazines LifeScience 2.83 1.34 29

Food 3.07 1.27 28


Fairs,exhibitions LifeScience 2.72 1.39 29

Food

3.11 1.40 28MovingMedia 3.00 1.29 36

Source:ownsurvey.Note:importanceonascalefrom1(verylow)to5(veryhigh)

The results presented in Table 1 reveal clear industry specific differences as regards how different

intermediaries for knowledge sourcingare perceived. In the lifescience industry, thehighest importance is


14/30

12

attributedtoscientificjournals(3.31)5andsurveys(3.31)representingmoreformalisedsourcesofknowledge,

whereas specialised magazines (2.83) and fairs and exhibitions (2.72) are considered less important. This

observationissignificantly6differentfromthefoodandthemovingmediaindustry,wherefairsandmagazines

representingknowledgesourceswithalowerdegreeofformalisationareperceivedasmoreimportant.Inthe

food industry,scientificjournalsarealmostunanimouslyconsideredasvery little important (1.86),whereas

main importance isattributestospecialisedmagazines(3.07)andfairsandexhibitions(3.11).Theresultsfor

movingmediarevealthatjournals(2.31)andsurveys(2.44)areconsideredlessrelevantthanfairs(3.00)and

specialised magazines (3.19). These results go fairly well in line with our theory lead expectations on the

organisationalpatternsofknowledgesourcing. Innovation in lifescience isbasedonformalmodels,codified

science and rational processes, thus knowledge and principles stemming from academia are of particular

importance. This is less the case for the food industry in which innovation is driven by the use and

recombinationofexistingknowledgeratherthanbyformalbasicresearch.Innovationinthemovingmediais

based on creativity and aesthetics, thus conceptual knowledge stemming from academia is of minor

importancecomparedtocontextspecificknowledgeandrumourdisseminatedinmagazinesorexchangedat

fairsandexhibitions.

Knowledgesourcingthroughmobility

Asecondmodetoaccessnewknowledgeinanevenmoredirectwayistherecruitmentofskilledlabourfrom

otherorganisations,herereferred toasmobility.Skilled labour isprobably themost importantresource for

knowledgedrivenactivities,andtherecruitmentofskilledlabourenablesfirmstointernalizeknowledgethat

ishighlytacitandembodiedintohumans7.Possiblesourcesfortherecruitmentofskilledemployeesareother

firms from the same or from a different industry, but also research and education organisations such as

universities and technical colleges. Firms in the three industries were asked from where they recruit their

skilled

labour

and

how

important

they

perceive

these

various

sources

for

recruitment.

Based

on

the

preliminarytheoreticalconsiderations,wewouldexpectfirms inthe lifescience industrytodrawverymuch

on graduates and experienced academics stemming from universities. Food companies in contrast are

expectedtorelymoreonpracticalskillstosolvefunctionalchallenges;thesecompetencesarebestprovided

bygraduatesfromtechnicalcollegesorbyworkforcewithjobexperience insimilar industries. Innovation in

themovingmediaindustryrequirescreativityandaculturalunderstanding.Thesecompetencesareexpected

todevelopbestbytrainingandexperiencegainedatworkinasimilarcreativecontext.

TheresultssummarizedinTable2displaytheperceivedimportanceofvarioussourcesfortherecruitmentof

skilledlabour.

In

line

with

our

expectations,

life

science

companies

recruit

primarily

from

universities

(3.93)

and from other firms in the same industry (3.87). Obviously, these companies deal with highly specialized

knowledge content that is most easily acquired and understood at universities involved in research and

5Numbersinbracketsdisplaymeanvalues.

6Significanceismeantasstatisticalsignificanceat5%level,testedwithScheffsmethod.

7Theexplanatorypoweroflabourmobilityisalsoemphasizedintheliteratureonskilledrelatedness,inwhich

industriesaredefinedasrelated toeachother iftheyshare thesameorsimilarskills,measured intermsoflabourflowsbetweencompanies(NeffkeandHenning2010;Boschma,Eriksson,andLindgren2009).


15/30

13

education or in other firms active in the same technological field. Consequently, practical education in

technical colleges (1.90) and firms in other industries (1.77) play a minor role. For the food industry, the

primarysourceforrecruitmentofskilled labour istheprivatesector:otherfirms inthesame industry(3.96)

areconsideredmostimportant,followedbyfirmsinotherindustries(2.93)8.Thehighereducationsectorisof

little importance, both universities (2.11) and technical colleges (1.89) are considered as hardly relevant.

Whereasthefirstgoeswellinlinewiththetheory,thelatterissurprising,giventhatthefoodindustrydraws

on practical education and applied research which is mostly provided by technical colleges. A possible

explanation isthematicfocusofthe localuniversitycollege,whichhasset itsemphasisoncreativeactivities

anddoesnotnecessarilyprovidethespecifictypeoftrainingrequiredbythefoodsector.Inthemovingmedia

industry,skilled labour ismostlyacquired fromother firms in thesame industry(4.36),butalsouniversities

(2.94)aretosomeextentconsideredasrelevant.Thiscanbeexplainedbythefactthatsomeuniversitiesalso

operate increativeandartisticfieldssuchasarts,musicandtheatre,andthatsomeactivates inthemoving

mediaindustryrequireagoodgeneraleducationprovidedinclassicalsubjectslikelanguagesandhumanities.

These observations go fairly well in line with our expectationson theorganisational patternsof knowledge

sourcing. Whereas analytical industries recruit primarily from academia and from other firms in the same

technologicalfield,syntheticandsymbolicindustriesrecruitprimarilyfromtheprivatesectoringeneral.

TABLE2:RELATIVEIMPORTANCEOFVARIOUSSOURCESFORRECRUITMENTOFHIGHLYSKILLEDLABOUR.

Mean Std.Deviation N

Universities LifeScience 3.93 1.55 30

Food 2.11 1.23 28


Technicalcolleges LifeScience 1.90 1.40 30

Food 1.89 1.20 28


Firmsinthesameindustry LifeScience 3.87 1.41 30

Food 3.96 1.04 28


Firmsinotherindustries LifeScience 1.77 1.04 30

Food 2.93 1.30 28


Source:ownsurvey.Note:importanceonascalefrom1(verylow)to5(veryhigh)

Knowledgesourcing

through

collaboration

A third fundamental mode for acquisition of new knowledge is collaboration, e.g. intentional knowledge

exchangethroughdirectinteractionwithotheractors.Thisinteractioncanencompassknowledgeaboutnew

8The observed industry specific differences in the importance of labour flows from other industries partly

contradicttheliteratureonskilledrelatedness,whichbuildsontheassumptionthatlabourflowsoccuralmostexclusivelywithinrelated industries.Ourobservationsshowthatthismightbetrueforsome industries(e.g.lifescience),whereasothers(e.g.food)recruitaswellfromindustriesthatareperceivedasverydifferent.


16/30

14

developmentsortrendsonthemarketaswellasknowledgeoftechnological naturethatisrequiredasdirect

inputforaconcreteinnovationprocess.Basedonthetheoreticaldiscussionandtheinsightsontheknowledge

characteristicsof the three case industries,wewouldexpect life science companies todeal above allwith

knowledge that is universally valid and only little sensitive to geographical distance and therefore to

collaboratewithingloballyratherthanlocallyconfigurednetworks.Innovationinthefoodindustryisbasedon

practical skills andknowledge that ispartly codifiable,buthas a strong tacit component.Furthermore, the

foodindustryhasalongtraditionintheregionandaleadingpositionwithinthenationaleconomy(Henning,

Moodysson, and Nilsson 2010).Thus, we would expect collaboration to take place predominantly on the

regionalandthenationallevel.Themovingmediaindustrydealswithknowledgethatisvalidwithinaspecific,

culturallydefined context.Thus,wewouldexpect knowledgeexchange to takeplace innetworksbetween

actors that share a similar socioculturalbackgroundand arepredominantly located in spatialproximity. In

ordertotesttheseexpectations,thefirmswereaskedwithwhomtheycooperateandexchangevarioustypes

ofknowledge,andwheretheseexchangepartnersarelocated.Theresultsareanalysedusingsocialnetwork

analysisandpresentedinthefollowing9.

FIGURE2:KNOWLEDGESOURCINGTHROUGHCOLLABORATIONINTHELIFESCIENCEINDUSTRY.SOURCE:OWNDRAFT

9Networksarecomposedofnodesrepresentingactorsandlinksrepresentingknowledgeflows.Theshapeof

thenodeindicateswhethertheactorispartoftheinterviewedgroupandthelocationofthenodereflectsthe

spatialdimension(regional,national,international).


17/30

15

Figure 2 displays the network of collaboration in the life science industry.A view on the structure of the

network reveals somebasic characteristicsof the life science industry in Scania.As regards thenumberof

actorsinvolvedintheindustry,wecount257nodesinthenetwork.Regardingtheexchangerelationsbetween

them,wecount293linksrepresentingflowsofknowledge.Thisshowsthatthenetworkbetweencompanies

intheregionallifesinceindustryisnotparticularlydense,andonlyfewactorsarementionedseveraltimesas

important partner for cooperation. The actors that aremost oftenmentioned are Lund University (17)10,

followedbytheUniversityHospitalofMalm(7)andKarolinska Institute(6),a largeandrenownedmedical

universityplaced inStockholm.As regard thespatial locationofactorsandexchangerelations, it isobvious

that contactpartnersaresituatedboth insideandoutside the region,whereasextraregionalcooperation is

dominating11.Ofall257actors,31.9%aresituatedintheregion,19.5%withinthecountryand48.6%outside

the country.Ofall293exchange relations,29.4%occurbetweenactors in the region,23.9%withactors in

other parts of the country and 46.8% are international. Thus it appears that, although some collaboration

takesplacewithintheregion,thelargestshareofknowledgeflowsoccurontheinternational level12.

FIGURE3:KNOWLEDGESOURCINGTHROUGHCOLLABORATIONINTHEFOODINDUSTRY.SOURCE:OWNDRAFT10

Numbersinbracketsindicatethenumberoflinksdirectedtowardsthenode(indegree)11

The interviews were conducted in the administrative region of Scania, however linkages with firms in

Copenhagen are considered as intraregional, in order to account for the close connection and intensive

commutingtakingplacebetweenthetworegions.12

We found no systematic difference as regards the perceived importance of regional, national and

internationalrelations,butahighlysignificantdifferenceasregardstheabsolutenumberofrelations.


18/30

16

Figure3showstheknowledgenetwork in thefood industry.Compared tothe lifescience industry,onecan

observe a smaller amount of actors involved, but a denser structure of the network. Some actors are

frequently mentioned as relevant exchange partners, which are foremost the firms Tetra Pak (5),

Sknemejerier(5)andAlfaLaval(5)aswellastheSwedishInstituteforFoodandBiotechnology(5),anapplied

research instituteforfoodstuff locatedinGothenburg.Overall,wecount178nodesinthenetwork,ofwhich

44.4%are located in theregion,30.3%within thecountryand35.3% inotherpartsof theworld.Ofall204

exchange relations, 42.2% occur within the region, 33.3 % within the country and 24.5% cross national

borders.Thisshowsthat,comparedtothelifescienceindustry,asmallershareoftheexchangerelationsoccur

internationally, whereas national and to some extent also regional exchange relations are increasingly

relevant.

FIGURE4:KNOWLEDGESOURCINGTHROUGHCOLLABORATIONINTHEMOVINGMEDIAINDUSTRY.SOURCE:OWNDRAFTFigure4displayspatternsofknowledgesourcingthroughcollaboration inthemovingmedia industry.Actors

thatarementionedoftenas importantexchangepartnersare foremost theMunicipality ofMalm (9), the

UniversityCollegeofMalm(7),MediaMtesplatsMalm(8),whichistheregionalpolicyinitiativetargeting

themediaindustry,aswellasthelocalbranchoftheSwedishtelevisionbroadcasterSVT(5).Comparedtothe

previous twonetworks,weobservea largernumberofactorsandexchangerelations.Altogether,wecount

349nodesinthenetwork,ofwhichamajorityof51.9%islocatedwithintheregion,asmallershareof28.1%


19/30

17

at other places in the country, and only 20.1% outside the country. Considering the exchange relations

betweentheactors,thedominanceoftheregional level isevenmoreobvious.Ofall405 links,54.8%occur

within the region, 24.4% within the country and 20.7% cross national boundaries. We thus observe that

although national and international knowledge exchange is present, intraregional knowledge exchange is

prevailing by far, which goes well in line with the theory led expectations on the context specificity of

knowledgedealtwithinsymbolicindustries.

CONCLUSIONSInthispaperwehavestudiedknowledgeflowsintheregionalinnovationsystemofScania,southernSweden.

Aimwastoexaminehow thegeographical andorganisationalpatternsofknowledgesourcingvarybetween

industries with different knowledge bases, whereas main focus was on the role of regional versus global

knowledgenetworksaswellastheroleofknowledgesourceswithadifferentdegreeofformalisation.Based

on the theoreticaldiscussion, analytical industries were expected to deal with highly formalised knowledge

sourcesandtooperateonaglobalscale.Followingthesamereasoning,syntheticindustrieswereexpectedto

relyonknowledgesourceswithalowerdegreeofformalisation,andglobalcooperationtoplayaminorrole.

Symbolicindustrieswereexpectedtooperatewithlessformalizedsourcesofknowledgeandtobeverymuch

locallyconfigured.Thesetheory ledexpectationshavebeenaddressedandtestedbycasestudyresearchon

three industries located in thesouthernmostprovinceofSweden.Our findingsreveal that industries indeed

differconsiderablywithregardtohowvarioussourcesforknowledgeareperceivedandacquired.Wefound

thatcompaniesinthelifescienceindustryrelyprimarilyonknowledgestemmingfromscientificresearchand

recruitmentfromthehighereducationsector,andthatknowledgeflowsoccurforemostingloballyconfigured

networks.Thefoodindustryretrievesnewknowledgefromlessformalisedsourcesandrecruitsprimarilyfrom

the

private

sector.

Knowledge

exchange

takes

place

in

dense,

nationally

or

regionally

configured

networks.

Companies in themovingmedia industryretrieveknowledge from less formalisedsourcessuchas fairsand

magazines and recruit primarily from other firms in the same industry. Knowledge exchange takes place in

highlylocalisednetworks.

Theseresultspointinthedirectionthatspaceandproximitymattersforinnovationandknowledgeexchange,

although this is notequally true forall industries. It seems that knowledgeexchange in spatial proximity is

particularly important for innovation in symbolic and to some extend in synthetic industries, whereas

analyticalindustriesoperateonawidergeographicalscale.Thegeneralobservationthatinnovationactivities

tendtoclusterincertainlocationsiscertainlyvalidandholdsforalmostalltechnologicalfields,howeverthe

extent and driving force for colocation seems to differ between industries. What drives colocation in

analytical industries is not necessarily the exchange of knowledge with other firms, but first and foremost

linkages with public or private research organisations providing education and a skilled labour force. In

addition to these localised sources of knowledge, firms maintain vital linkages to specialized knowledge

providerssituatedinotherpartsoftheworld.Itbecomesclearthat,despitetheimportanceofthelocalbuzz,

stronglinkagestoforeigncollaboratorsandothersourcesofknowledgeremaincrucialforenablinginnovation


20/30

18

inanalyticalindustries(Bathelt,Malmberg,andMaskell2004;GertlerandLevitte2005;Moodysson2008).In

case of synthetic industries, innovation is driven by cooperation and interactive learning within formally

establishednetworksbetweencustomersandsuppliers,oftenonthenationallevel,whereaslocaluniversities

playaminorrole. Inordertobringnewproductsandprocesses tothemarket,companieshavetoapply to

norms and regulations that are, at least in the case of food, typically part of the national institutional

framework(Coenenetal.2006).Localknowledgeexchangeiscrucialforsymbolicindustries,sincetheybuild

onculturalknowledgethatiscontextspecificandmosteasilyunderstoodbyactorswhosharethesamesocio

cultural background. Due to shortterm and project based organisation of innovation activities, symbolic

industriesrequireeasyaccesstoapoolofpossiblecooperationpartners,which isbestprovided in the local

environment. Ithasbecomeclear in thisstudy that the fundamentalquestionon theroleofgeography for

innovationoughttobeaddressed throughmultipleperspectives;oneofwhichmightbeaknowledgebased

view.As ithasbeenstressed inthispaper,webelievethatasoundunderstandingofthespecificknowledge

characteristics of industries can provide additional insights to the discussion on geographical patterns of

innovationandaddtotheliteratureinthisfield.Suchinsightsare,inourview,alsocrucialforthepossibilityto

designand implementsoundregional innovationsupportpolicies thatareembedded inandattuned to the

specific needs and available resources of the region. While part of such policy measures can be generally

applicable,embracingallmajorsectorsrepresented intheregional innovationsystem,thepartsthatareset

out to be sector specific, for instance those usually referred to as cluster initiatives, must relate to the

specific modes of innovation in the sector. Knowledge base characteristics are important aspects of such

sectorspecificity.

REFERENCES

Asheim, B.r.T. 1996. Industrial districts as 'learning regions': A condition for prosperity. European PlanningStudies4:379400.

Asheim, B.T. 1996. Industrial districts as 'learning regions': A condition for prosperity. European PlanningStudies4:379400.

Asheim, B.T. and L. Coenen. 2006. Contextualising Regional Innovation Systems in a Globalising LearningEconomy: On Knowledge Bases and Institutional Frameworks. TheJournal of Technology Transfer31:163173.

Asheim,B.T.;L.Coenen;andJ.Vang.2007.Facetoface,buzz,andknowledgebases:sociospatialimplicationsfor learning, innovation,and innovationpolicy.EnvironmentandPlanningC:GovernmentandPolicy25:655670.

Asheim,B.T.andM.S.Gertler.2005.TheGeographyofInnovation:RegionalInnovationSystems.InTheOxfordHandbook of Innovation, ed. J. Fagerberg; D.C. Mowery; and R.R. Nelson, 291317. Oxford: OxfordUniversityPress.

Asheim,B.T.andH.K.Hansen.2009.KnowledgeBases,TalentsandContexts:OntheUsefulnessoftheCreativeClassApproachinSweden.EconomicGeography85(4)425442

Bathelt,H.;A.Malmberg;andP.Maskell.2004.Clustersandknowledge: localbuzz,globalpipelinesandtheprocessofknowledgecreation.ProgressinHumanGeography28:3156.

Boschma,R.2005.ProximityandInnovation:ACriticalAssessment.RegionalStudies39:61 74.


21/30

19

Boschma,R.;R.Eriksson;andU.Lindgren.2009.Howdoes labourmobilityaffecttheperformanceofplantsThe importance of relatedness and geographical proximity.Journal of Economic Geography9:169190.

Boschma,R.andS.Iammarino.2009.RelatedVariety,TradeLinkages,andRegionalGrowthinItaly.EconomicGeography85:289311.

Camagni,R.1991.Innovationnetworks:Spatialperspectives.London/NewYork:BelhavenPress.Coenen,L.; J.Moodysson;C.D.Ryan;B.r.Asheim;andP.Phillips.2006.ComparingaPharmaceuticalandan

Agrofood

Bioregion:

On

the

Importance

of

Knowledge

Bases

for

Socio

spatial

Patterns

of

Innovation.

Industry&Innovation13:393 414.Cooke,P.;M.Heidenreich;andH.J.Braczyk.2004.Regional innovationsystems:theroleofgovernance ina

globalizedworld.NewYork:Routledge.Cooke,P.;M.G.Uranga;andG.Etxebarria.1998.Regionalsystemsofinnovation:anevolutionaryperspective.

EnvironmentandPlanningA30:15631584.Etzkowitz, H. and L. Leydesdorff. 1997. Universities and the global knowledge economy : a triple helix of

universityindustrygovernmentrelations.London:Pinter.Gertler,M.S.2008.Buzzwithoutbeing there?Communitiesofpractice incontext. InCommunity,Economic

Creativity,andOrganization,ed.A.AminandJ.Roberts,203226.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.Gertler,M.S.andY.M.Levitte.2005.LocalNodes inGlobalNetworks:TheGeographyofKnowledgeFlows in

BiotechnologyInnovation.Industry&Innovation12:487507.Hagedoorn, J. 2002. Interfirm R&D partnerships: an overview of major trends and patterns since 1960.

ResearchPolicy

31:477

492.

Henning,M.;J.Moodysson;andM.Nilsson.2010.Innovationochregionalomvandling Frnsknskaklustertillnyakombinationer.Malm:RegionSkne.

Johnson, B.; E. Lorenz; and B.. Lundvall. 2002. Why all this fuss about codified and tacit knowledge?IndustrialandCorporateChange11:245262.

Kline, S.J. and N. Rosenberg. 1986. An Overview of Innovation. In The Positive Sum Strategy: HarnessingTechnologyfor Economic Growth,ed. R. Landau and N. Rosenberg, 275305. Washington: NationalAcademyPress.

Laestadius, S. 2000. Biotechnology and the Potential for a Radical Shift of Technology in Forest Industry.TechnologyAnalysis&StrategicManagement12:193212.

Lundvall,B..andB.Johnson.1994.TheLearningEconomy.Industry&Innovation1:2342.Malmberg,A.andP.Maskell.2006.LocalizedLearningRevisited.GrowthandChange37:118.Marshall,A.1920.PrinciplesofEconomics.London:Macmillan.Martin, R. and J. Moodysson. 2011. Innovation in Symbolic Industries: the Geography and Organisation of

KnowledgeSourcing.EuropeanPlanningStudiesforthcoming.McKelvey,M.;H.Alm;andM.Riccaboni.2003.Doescolocationmatterforformalknowledgecollaborationin

theSwedishbiotechnologypharmaceuticalsector?ResearchPolicy32:483501.Moodysson, J. 2007. Sites and modes of knowledge creation: on the spatial organization of biotechnology

innovation.Lund:LundUniversity..2008.PrinciplesandPracticesofKnowledgeCreation:OntheOrganizationof"Buzz"and"Pipelines"in

LifeScienceCommunities.EconomicGeography84:449469.Neffke,F.andM.Henning.2010.Skill relatednessand firmdiversification. InPaperpresentedat theDRUID

SummerConference2010.London.Nelson,R.R.andS.G.Winter.1982.Anevolutionary theoryofeconomicchange.Cambridge,Mass.:Harvard

U.P.Nilsson,M.2008.ATaleofTwoClusters:SharingResourcestoCompete.LundBusinessPress.Nilsson, M.; M. SvenssonHenning; and O. Wilkenson. 2002. Sknska kluster och profilomrden en kritisk

granskning.Malm:

Region

Skne.

Nonaka,I.;R.Toyama;andN.Konno.2000.SECI,BaandLeadership:aUnifiedModelofDynamicKnowledgeCreation.LongRangePlanning33:534.

Pavitt,K.2005.Innovationprocesses.InTheOxfordHandbookofInnovation,ed.J.Fagerberg;D.Mowery;andR.Nelson,86114.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Polanyi,M.1967.TheTacitDimension.NewYork:Doubleday.Porter,M.2003.TheEconomicPerformanceofRegions.RegionalStudies37:545 546.


22/30

CIRCLE ELECTRONIC WORKING PAPERS SERIES (EWP)

CIRCLE (Centre for Innovation, Research and Competence in the LearningEconomy) is a multidisciplinary research centre set off by several faculties at LundUniversity and Blekinge Institute of Technology. CIRCLE has a mandate to conductmultidisciplinary research and education on the following issues: Long-termperspectives on innovation, structural change and economic growth,Entrepreneurship and venture capital formation with a special focus on new ventures,The dynamics of R&D systems and technological systems, including their impact onentrepreneurship and growth, Regional innovation systems in different national andinternational contexts and International comparative analyses of national innovationsystems. Special emphasis is done on innovation policies and research policies. 10nationalities and 14 disciplines are represented among the CIRCLE staff.

The CIRCLE Electronic Working Paper Series are intended to be an instrument forearly dissemination of the research undertaken by CIRCLE researchers, associatesand visiting scholars and stimulate discussion and critical comment.

The working papers present research results that in whole or in part are suitable forsubmission to a refereed journal or to the editor of a book or have already beensubmitted and/or accepted for publication.

CIRCLE EWPs are available on-line at: http://www.circle.lu.se/publications

Available papers:

2011

WP 2011/01SMEs absorptive capacities and large firms know ledge spillovers: Microevidence from MexicoClaudia de Fuentes and Gabriela Dutrnit

WP 2011/02Comparing knowledge bases: on the organisation and geography ofknowledge flows in the regional innovation system of Scania, southern SwedenRoman Martin and Jerker Moodysson

2010

WP 2010/01Innovation policies for development: towards a systemic experimentationbased approachCristina Chaminade, Bengt-Ake Lundvall, J an Vang-Lauridsen and KJ J oseph

WP 2010/02From Basic Research to Innovation: Entrepreneurial Intermediaries forResearch Commercialization at Swedish Strong Research EnvironmentsFumi Kitagawa and Caroline Wigren

WP 2010/03 Different competences, different modes in the globalization ofinnovation?A comparative study of the Pune and Bei jing reg ionsMonica Plechero and Cristina Chaminade


23/30

WP 2010/04 Technological Capability Bui lding in Informal Firms in theAgricu lturalSubsistence Sector In Tanzania: Assessing the Role of Gatsby ClubsAstrid Szogs and Kelefa Mwantima

WP 2010/05The Swedish Paradox Unexploited Opportunities!Charles Edquist

WP 2010/06A three-stage model of the Academy-Industry linking process: the perspectiveof both agentsClaudia De Fuentes and Gabriela Dutrnit

WP 2010/07Innovation in symbolic industries: the geography and organisation ofknowledge sourcingRoman Martin and Jerker Moodysson

WP 2010/08Towards a spatial perspective on sustainability transiti onsLars Coenen, Paul Benneworth and Bernhard Truffer

WP 2010/09The Swedish national innovation system and its relevance for the emergenceof global innovation networksCristina Chaminade, J on Mikel Zabala and Adele Treccani

WP 2010/10Who leads Research Productiv ity Change? Guidelines for R&D policy makersFernando J imnez-Sez, J on Mikel Zabala and J os L- Zofo

WP 2010/11Research councils facing new science and technologyFrank van der Most and Barend van der Meulen

WP 2010/12From new to the firm to new to the world. Effect of geographical proximity andtechnological capabilities on the degree of novelty in emerging economiesMonica Plechero and Cristina Chaminade

WP 2010/13Are knowledge-bases enough? A comparative study of the geography ofknowledge sources in China (Great Beijing) and India (Pune)Cristina Chaminade

WP 2010/14Regional Innovation Policy beyond Best Practice: Lessons f rom SwedenRoman Martin, J erker Moodysson and Elena Zukauskaite

WP 2010/15Innovation in cultural industries: The role of university linksElena Zukauskaite

WP 2010/16


24/30

Use and non-use of research evaluation. A l iterature reviewFrank van der Most

WP 2010/17Upscaling emerging niche technologies in sustainable energy: an internationalcomparison of policy approachesLars Coenen, Roald Suurs and Emma van Sandick

2009

WP 2009/01Building systems of innovation in less developed countries: The role ofintermediate organizations.Szogs, Astrid; Cummings, Andrew and Chaminade, Cristina

WP 2009/02The Widening and Deepening of Innovation Policy: What Conditions Providefor Effective Governance?Borrs, Susana

WP 2009/03Managerial learning and development in small firms: implications based onobservations of managerial workGabrielsson, J onas and Tell, J oakim

WP 2009/04University professors and research commercialization: An empirical test of the knowledge corridor thesisGabrielsson, J onas, Politis, Diamanto and Tell, J oakim

WP 2009/05On the concept of global innovation networksChaminade, Cristina

WP 2009/06Technological Waves and Economic Growth - Sweden in an InternationalPerspective 1850-2005Schn, Lennart

WP 2009/07Public Procurement of Innovation Diffusion: Exploring the Role of Institutionsand Institutional CoordinationRolfstam, Max; Phillips, Wendy and Bakker, Elmer

WP 2009/08Local niche experimentation in energy transitions: a theoretical and empiricalexploration of proximity advantages and disadvantagesLars Coenen, Rob Raven, Geert Verbong

WP 2009/9Product Development Decisions: An empirical approach to Krishnan and UlrichJ on Mikel Zabala, Tina Hannemann


25/30

WP 2009/10Dynamics of a Technological Innovator Network and its impact ontechnological performanceJ u Liu, Cristina Chaminade

WP 2009/11The Role of Local Universities in Improving Traditional SMEs InnovativePerformances: The Veneto Region CaseMonica Plechero

WP 2009/12Comparing systems approaches to innovation and technological change forsustainable and competitive economies: an explorative study into conceptualcommonaliti es, differences and complementaritiesCoenen, Lars and Daz Lpez, Fernando J .

WP 2009/13Public Procurement fo r Innovation (PPI) a Pilot StudyCharles Edquist

WP 2009/14Outputs of innovation systems: a European perspectiveCharles Edquist and Jon Mikel Zabala

2008

WP 2008/01R&D and financial systems: the determinants of R&D expenditures in theSwedish pharmaceutical indust ryMalmberg, Claes

WP 2008/02

The Development of a New Swedish Innovation Policy. A Historical Inst itutionalApproachPersson, Bo

WP 2008/03The Effects o f R&D on Regional Invention and InnovationOlof Ejermo and Urban Grsj

WP 2008/04Clusters in Time and Space: Understanding the Growth and Transformation ofLife Science in ScaniaMoodysson, J erker; Nilsson, Magnus; Svensson Henning, Martin

WP 2008/05Building absorptive capacity in less developed countriesThe case of TanzaniaSzogs, Astrid; Chaminade, Cristina and Azatyan, Ruzana

WP 2008/06Design of Innovation Policy through Diagnostic Analysis :Identifi cation of Systemic Problems (or Failures)Edquist, Charles


26/30

WP 2008/07The Swedish Paradox arises in Fast-Growing SectorsEjermo, Olof; Kander, Astrid and Svensson Henning, Martin

WP 2008/08Policy Reforms, New University-Industry Links and Implications for RegionalDevelopment in JapanKitagawa, Fumi

WP 2008/09The Challenges of Globalisation: Strategic Choices for Innovation PolicyBorrs, Susana; Chaminade, Cristina and Edquist, Charles

WP 2008/10Comparing national systems of innovation in Asia and Europe: theory andcomparative frameworkEdquist, Charles and Hommen, Leif

WP 2008/11Putting Constructed Regional Advantage into Swedish Practice? The case ofthe VINNVXT initiative 'Food Innovation at Interfaces'Coenen, Lars; Moodysson, J erker

WP 2008/12Energy transitions in Europe: 1600-2000Kander, Astrid; Malanima, Paolo and Warde, Paul

WP 2008/13RIS and Developing Countries: Linking firm technological capabilities toregional systems of innovationPadilla, Ramon; Vang, J an and Chaminade, Cristina

WP 2008/14The paradox of high R&D input and low innovation output: SwedenBitarre, Pierre; Edquist, Charles; Hommen, Leif and Ricke, Annika

WP 2008/15Two Sides of the Same Coin? Local and Global Knowledge Flows in MediconValleyMoodysson, J erker; Coenen, Lars and Asheim, Bjrn

WP 2008/16Electrification and energy productivityEnflo, Kerstin; Kander, Astrid and Schn, Lennart

WP 2008/17Concluding Chapter: Globalisation and Innovation PolicyHommen, Leif and Edquist, Charles

WP 2008/18Regional innovation systems and the global location of innovation activities:Lessons from ChinaYun-Chung, Chen; Vang, J an and Chaminade, Cristina


27/30

WP 2008/19The Role of mediator organisations in the making of innovation systems inleast developed countries. Evidence from TanzaniaSzogs, Astrid

WP 2008/20Globalisation of Knowledge Product ion and Regional Innovation Policy:Supporting Specialized Hubs in the Bangalore Software IndustryChaminade, Cristina and Vang, J an

WP 2008/21Upgrading in Asian clusters: Rethinking the importance of interactive-learningChaminade, Cristina and Vang, J an

2007

WP 2007/01Path-following or Leapfrogging in Catching-up: the Case of ChineseTelecommunication Equipment IndustryLiu, Xielin

WP 2007/02The effects of institutional change on innovation and productivity growth in theSwedish pharmaceutical industryMalmberg, Claes

WP 2007/03Global-local linkages, Spillovers and Cultural Clusters: Theoretical andEmpirical insights from an exploratory study of Torontos Film ClusterVang, J an; Chaminade, Cristina

WP 2007/04

Learning from the Bangalore Experience: The Role of Universities in anEmerging Regional Innovation SystemVang, J an; Chaminade, Cristina.; Coenen, Lars.

WP 2007/05Industrial dynamics and innovative pressure on energy -Sweden withEuropean and Global outlooksSchn, Lennart; Kander, Astrid.

WP 2007/06In defence of electricit y as a general purpose technologyKander, Astrid; Enflo, Kerstin; Schn, Lennart

WP 2007/07Swedish business research productivity improvements against internationaltrendsEjermo, Olof; Kander, Astrid

WP 2007/08Regional innovation measured by patent data does quality matter?Ejermo, Olof

WP 2007/09


28/30

Innovation System Policies in Less Successful Developing countr ies: The caseof ThailandIntarakumnerd, Patarapong; Chaminade, Cristina

2006

WP 2006/01The Swedish ParadoxEjermo, Olof; Kander, Astrid

WP 2006/02Building RIS in Developing Count ries: Policy Lessons from Bangalore, IndiaVang, J an; Chaminade, Cristina

WP 2006/03Innovation Policy for Asian SMEs: Exploring cluster differencesChaminade, Cristina; Vang, J an.

WP 2006/04Rationales for public intervention from a system of innovation approach: thecase of VINNOVA.Chaminade, Cristina; Edquist, Charles

WP 2006/05Technology and Trade: an analysis of technology specialization and exportflowsAndersson, Martin; Ejermo, Olof

WP 2006/06A Knowledge-based Categorizat ion of Research-based Spin-off Creat ionGabrielsson, J onas; Landstrm, Hans; Brunsnes, E. Thomas

WP 2006/07Board control and corporate innovation: an empirical study of smalltechnology-based firmsGabrielsson, J onas; Politis, Diamanto

WP 2006/08On and Off the Beaten Path:Transferring Knowledge through Formal and Informal NetworksRick Aalbers; Otto Koppius; Wilfred Dolfsma

WP 2006/09Trends in R&D, innovation and product ivity in Sweden 1985-2002

Ejermo, Olof; Kander, Astrid

WP 2006/10Development Blocks and the Second Industrial Revolution, Sweden 1900-1974Enflo, Kerstin; Kander, Astrid; Schn, Lennart

WP 2006/11The uneven and selective nature of c luster knowledge networks: evidence fromthe wine industryGiuliani, Elisa


29/30

WP 2006/12Informal investors and value added: The contribution of investorsexperientially acquired resources in the entrepreneurial processPolitis, Diamanto; Gabrielsson, J onas

WP 2006/13Informal investors and value added: What do we know and where do we go?Politis, Diamanto; Gabrielsson, J onas

WP 2006/14Inventive and innovative activity over time and geographical space: the case ofSwedenEjermo, Olof

2005

WP 2005/1Constructi ng Regional Advantage at the Northern EdgeCoenen, Lars; Asheim, Bjrn

WP 2005/02From Theory to Practice: The Use of the Systems of Innovation Approach forInnovation PolicyChaminade, Cristina; Edquist, Charles

WP 2005/03The Role of Regional Innovation Systems in a Globalising Economy:Comparing Knowledge Bases and Institutional Frameworks in Nordic ClustersAsheim, Bjrn; Coenen, Lars

WP 2005/04

How does Accessibility to Knowledge Sources Affect the Innovativeness ofCorporations? Evidence from SwedenAndersson, Martin; Ejermo, Olof

WP 2005/05Contextualizing Regional Innovation Systems in a Globalizing LearningEconomy: On Know ledge Bases and Institutional FrameworksAsheim, Bjrn; Coenen, Lars

WP 2005/06Innovation Policies for Asian SMEs: An Innovation Systems PerspectiveChaminade, Cristina; Vang, J an

WP 2005/07Re-norming the Science-Society RelationJ acob, Merle

WP 2005/08Corporate innovation and competitive environmentHuse, Morten; Neubaum, Donald O.; Gabrielsson, Jonas

WP 2005/09


30/30

Knowledge and accountability: Outside directors' contribution in the corporatevalue chainHuse, Morten, Gabrielsson, Jonas; Minichilli, Alessandro

WP 2005/10Rethink ing the Spatial Organization of Creative IndustriesVang, J an

WP 2005/11Interregional Inventor Networks as Studied by Patent Co-inventorshipsEjermo, Olof; Karlsson, Charlie

WP 2005/12Knowledge Bases and Spatial Patterns of Collaboration: Comparing thePharma and Agro-Food B ioregions Scania and SaskatoonCoenen, Lars; Moodysson, J erker; Ryan, Camille; Asheim, Bjrn; Phillips, Peter

WP 2005/13

Regional Innovation System Policy: a Knowledge-based ApproachAsheim, Bjrn; Coenen, Lars; Moodysson, J erker; Vang, J an

WP 2005/14Face-to-Face, Buzz and Knowledge Bases: Socio-spatial implications forlearning and innovation policyAsheim, Bjrn; Coenen, Lars, Vang, J an

WP 2005/15The Creative Class and Regional Growth: Towards a Knowledge BasedApproachKals Hansen, Hgni; Vang, J an; Bjrn T. Asheim

WP 2005/16Emergence and Growth of Mjrdevi Science Park in Linkping, SwedenHommen, Leif; Doloreux, David; Larsson, Emma

WP 2005/17Trademark Statistics as Innovation Indicators? A Micro StudyMalmberg, Claes

201102 martin moodysson

Documents