There are growing academic and policy interests in the factors that underpin the formation and growth of clusters, especially in such ‘hyped-up’ scientific and technological fields as the nano-technologies. With this paper we analyzes the determinants of scientific cluster growth (measured by the number of publications emanating from them), distinguishing between structural effects (ie, initial cluster size, scientific field composition, and geographic location), on the one hand and scientific variety, organizational diversity, and degree of openness (in terms of collaboration with outside actors), on the other. Overall, scientific variety enhances cluster growth, but organizational diversity, slows it down. However, patterns of growth are different in Asia, Europe, and North America, and it seems that cluster evolution is highly contingent on national systems of innovation and on the history of collaboration amongst local actors. Policy makers and cluster strategists must design specific policies according to location and should not simply attempt to replicate best practices from one zone to another. Slow growth may also reflect ‘elitist’ strategies—those based on quality rather than on numbers.
Autant-BernardC.MassardN.MangematinV., 2006, “Creation of high tech SMEs: The influence of local environment”Small Business Economics26173–187
2.
AvnimelechG.TeubalM., 2006, “Creating venture capital industries that co-evolve with high tech: Insights from an extended industry life cycle perspective of the Israeli experience”Research Policy351477–1498
3.
BaglieriD.CiniciM CMangematinV., 2012, “Rejuvenating clusters with sleeping anchors: The case of nanoclusters”Technovation32 (forthcoming)
4.
BatheltH.MalmbergA.MaskellP., 2004, “Clusters and knowledge: Local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation”Progress in Human Geography2831–56
5.
BellG GZaheerA., 2007, “Geography, networks and knowledge flows”Organization Science18955–972
6.
BoschmaR A, 2005, “Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment”Regional Studies3961–74
7.
Bunker-WhittingtonK.Owen-SmithJ.PowellW W, 2009, “Networks, propinquity and innovation in knowledge-intense industries”Administrative Science Quaterly5490–122
8.
CairncrossF., 1997The Death of Distance: How the Communication Revolution Will Change Our Lives (Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA)
9.
CastellsM.HallP., 1994Technopoles of the World: The Making of the Twenty-first-century Industrial Complexes (Routledge, New York)
10.
CrescenziR.Rodríguez-PoseA.StorperM., 2007, “The territorial dynamics of innovation: A Europe–United States comparative analysis”Journal of Economic Geography7673–709
11.
DelemarleA., 2007, “Temporality of the mobilisation process encountered by an institutional entrepreneur: The case of Minatec, institution in micro/nanoelectonics”, in Proceedings of the Academy of Management Conference pp 1–7
12.
FreelM S, 2002, “On regional systems of innovation: Illustrations from the West Midlands”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy20633–654
HakansonL., 2005, “Epistemic communities and cluster dynamics: On the role of knowledge in industrial dynamics”Industry and Innovation12433–463
17.
HoekmanJ.FrenkenK.Van OortF., 2009, “The geography of collaborative knowledge production in Europe”Annals of Regional Science43721–738
18.
KleinJ., 2003, “Innovative clusters: Drivers of national innovation systems”Research and Development Management33239–240
19.
LavieD.MilletS R, 2008, “Alliance portfolio internationalization and firm performance”Organization Science19623–646
20.
McFadyenA MCennallaA A, 2004, “Social capital and knowledge creation: Diminishing returns of the number and strength of exchange relationships”Academy of Management Journal47735–746
21.
MangematinV.ErrabiK.GauthierC., 2011, “Large players in the nanogame: Dedicated nanotech subsidiaries or distributed nanotech capabilities?”Journal of Technology Transfer36640–664
22.
MarkusenA., 1985Profit Cycles, Oligopoly and Regional Development (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
23.
MogoutovA.KahaneB., 2007, “Data search strategy for science and technology emergence: A scalable and evolutionary query for nanotechnology tracking”Research Policy36893–963
24.
MoweryD CSampatB NZiedonisA A, 2002, “Learning to patent: Institutional experience, learning, and the characteristics of US university patents after the Bayh–Dole Act, 1981–1992”Management Science4873–89
25.
NestaL., 2001Cohérence des Bases de Connaissances et Changement Technique: Une Analyse des Firmes de Biotechnologies de 1981 à 1997 Thèse de Doctorat d'Économie Appliquée, Université Pierre Mendès-France, Grenoble
26.
NestaL., 2008, “Knowledge and productivity in the world's largest manufacturing corporations”Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization67886–902
PondsR.Van OortF.FrenkenK., 2007, “The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration”Papers in Regional Science86423–444
29.
PondsR.Van OortF.FrenkenK., 2009, “Innovation, spillovers and university–industry collaboration: An extended knowledge production function approach”Journal of Economic Geography10231–255
30.
PouderR.StJohnC H, 1996, “Hot spots and blind spots: Geographical clusters of firms and innovation”Academy of Management Review211192
31.
RigbyD LEssletzbichlerA., 2006, “Technological variety, technological change and a geography of production techniques”Journal of Economic Geography645–70
32.
RobinsonD K RRipA.MangematinV., 2007, “Technological agglomeration and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology”Research Policy36871–879
33.
Rodríguez-PoseA.CrescenziR., 2008, “Research and development, spillovers, innovation systems, and the genesis of regional growth in Europe”Regional Studies4251–67
34.
SaxenianA., 1994Regional Advantages (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
35.
SmithK GCollinsC JClarkK D, 2005, “Existing knowledge, knowledge creation capability, and the rate of new product introduction in high-technology firms”Academy of Management Journal48346–357
36.
StorperM.VenablesA., 2004, “Buzz: Face-to-face contact and the urban economy”Journal of Economic Geography4351–370
37.
TallmanS BPheneA., 2007, “Leveraging knowledge across geographic boundaries”Organization Science18252–260
38.
ZellerC., 2002, “Project teams as means of restructuring research and development in the pharmaceutical industry”Regional Studies36275–289
39.
ZhangJ.Baden-FullerC.MangematinV., 2007, “Technological knowledge base, R&D organization structure and alliance formation: Evidence from the biopharmaceutical industry”Research Policy36515–528
