2nd BRICS workshop, Rio de Janeiro, 25-27 April 2007
The Geography of Innovation in South Africa: A First Cut
Jo LorentzenHSRC, Cape Town
Outline
Background A bit of theory
How close for comfort? Data you got and data you ain’t
What about a knowledge production function? What goes on in the provinces? Linkages between productive and
knowledge activities What’s next?
A bit of theory, all over the place
National domain most appropriate unit of analysis for understanding differential growth rates (Freeman 1987, Lundvall 1992, Nelson 1993)
Regional growth differentials far more challenging (Cooke 2001, Howell 2005, Krugman 1991, Marshall 1890, Piore and Sabel 1984, Porter 2003, Romer 1990, Storper 1997)
Specialisation (Marshall) or diversity (Jacobs) externalities?
Empirical evidence on role of proximity and specialisation vs diversity inconclusive (mostly based on evidence from US and Europe)
Conclusion: we know precious littleOnce we account for innovation and knowledge creation processes, it becomes very difficult to apply simple stylised cluster constructs, because there is neither a representative Marshallian firm nor an illustrative “innovative” cluster. Co-location therefore may or may not offer structures, organisation and institutions which improve the likelihood of local innovation.
Iammarino and McCann in Research Policy (2006)
Data you got and data you ain’t
Systematic?
Public? Electronic?
Online?
Patents(CIPRO)
Yes Yes No No
Value added(Quantec)
Yes No Yes No
R&D(HSRC)
Yes No Yes No
Publications(DoE,NRF)
No Yes Sort of No
Conclusions, open questions, future work Regional or local innovation systems possibly
exist in GP and esp. in WC, but nowhere else. Is this because or urban economies or of
agglomeration advantages? Are there cross-provincial knowledge spillovers or
technology transfer? Estimate a knowledge production function. GP: case study of specialisation vs diversity
externalities. WC: case study of regional knowledge production,
sourcing, and use. MP, LP, NW: sectoral (mining) innovation system?