I investigate the mechanisms through which a cluster policy can enhance entrepreneurship defined as new venture creation. The paper is based on the study of a cluster policy (‘BioRegio’) that strongly simulated new firm creation in biotechnology in Germany after 1996. The process induced by BioRegio at the territory level is analyzed over a ten-year period (1995–2004). I identify a three-step social mechanism through which a cluster policy can enhance entrepreneurship. The presented results strengthen the literature on cluster policies and clusters on the specif c issue of entrepreneurship: four main contributions are suggested.
AudretschDStephanP, 1996, “Company scientist locational links: The case of biotechnology”American Economic Review86641–652
2.
BMBF, 1996a“Delphi—Bericht 1995 zur Entwicklung von Wissenschaft und Technik: Mini Delphi”, Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und Technologie, Bonn
3.
BMBF, 1996b“Bundesbericht Forschung 1996”, Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und Technologie, Bonn
4.
BorràsSTsagdisD, 2008Cluster Policies in Europe, Firms, Institutions, and Governance (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Glos)
5.
BraczykH-JCookePHeidenreichM, 1998Regional Innovation System: The Role of Governance in a Globalized World (UCL Press, London)
6.
BurfittAMcNeillSGibneyJ, 2007, “The dilemmas of operationalizing cluster policy: The medical technology cluster in the West Midlands”European Planning Studies151273–1290
7.
CasperS, 2000, “Institutional adaptiveness, technology policy, and the diffusion of new business models: The case of German biotechnology”Organization Studies21887–914
8.
CasperS, 2007, “How do technology clusters emerge and become sustainable? Social network formation and inter-firm mobility within the San Diego biotechnology cluster”Research Policy36438–455
9.
CookeP, 1998, “Introduction: Origins of the concept”, in Regional Innovation Systems Eds BraczykH-JCookePHeidenreichM (UCL Press, London) pp 2–26
10.
CookeP, 2001, “Regional innovation systems, clusters, and the knowledge economy”Industrial and Corporate Change10945–975
Development Bank of Japan, 2006“Erfolgreiche Biotechnologieregionen in Deutschland. Die Beispiele Berlin-Brandenburg, München, Rhein—Neckar—Dreieck”, Repräsentanz Frankfurt am Main Research, Frankfurt am Main
13.
DohseD, 2000a, “Technology policy and the regions: The case of the BioRegio contest”Research Policy291111–1133
14.
DohseD, 2000b, “Regionen als Innovationsmotoren: Zur Neuorientierung in der deutschen Technologiepolitik”, in Kieler Diskussionsbeiträge August 2000, August, Institut für Wirtschaft Kiel, Kiel
15.
DohseD, 2007, “Cluster-based technology policy: The German experience”Industry and Innovation1469–94
DurantonGMartinPMayerTMaynerisF, 2009Whither Clusters? Lessons from the French Experience (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
18.
EickelpaschAFritschM, 2005, “Contests for cooperation: A new approach in German innovation policy”Research Policy341269–1282
19.
EisenhardtK M, 1989, “Building theories from case studies research”Academy of Management Review14535–550
20.
EisenhardtK MGraebnerM E, 2007, “Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges”Academy of Management Journal5025–32
21.
Ernst & Young, Mannheim
22.
Ernst & Young2002, “Neue Chancen: Deutscher Biotechnologie-Report 2002”
23.
Ernst & Young2004, “Per Aspera Ad Astra. ‘Der steinige Weg zu den Sternen’”, Deutscher Biotechnologie Report 2004”
24.
Ernst & Young2005, “Kräfte der Evolution. Der Deutsche Biotechnologie-Report 2005”
25.
Ernst & Young2008, “Auf gutem Kurs. Deutscher Biotechnologie-Report 2008”
26.
European Commission, 2008, “The concept of clusters and cluster policies and their role for competitiveness and innovation”, Europe Innova/Pro Inno Europe Paper Number 9, Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
27.
FeldmanM, 2003, “The locational dynamics of the US biotech industry: Knowledge externalities and the anchor hypothesis”Industry and Innovation10311–328
28.
FeldmanMFrancisJBercovitzJ, 2005, “Creating a cluster while building a firm: Entrepreneurs and the formation of industrial clusters”Regional Studies39129–141
29.
GrossettiMBartheJ-F, 2008, “Dynamique des réseaux interpersonnels et des organisations dans les créations d'entreprises”Revue française de sociologie49585–612
30.
HallPSoskiceD, 2001Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
31.
IrelandD RReutzelC RWebbJ W, 2005, “Entrepreneurship research in AMJ: What has been published, and what might the future hold?”Academy of Management Journal48556–564
32.
KraussGStahleckerT, 2001, “New biotechnology firms in Germany: Heidelberg and the BioRegion Rhine—Neckar Triangle”Small Business Economics17143–153
33.
KrückenG, 1999Jenseits von Einsamkeit und Freiheit: Institutioneller Wandel von Universitäten. Eine Untersuchung zum Wissens- und Technologietransfer an den Universitäten des Landes Nordrhein-WestfalenFakultät für Soziologie, Universität Bielefeld
34.
KrückenG, 2003, “Learning the ‘new, new thing’: On the role of path dependency in university structures”Higher Education46315–339
35.
LangleyARoyerI, 2006, “Perspectives on doing case study research in organizations”M@n@gement981–94
36.
MaurerIEbersM, 2006, “Dynamics of social capital and their performance implications: Lessons from biotech start-ups”Administrative Science Quarterly51262–292
37.
MietschA, 1999Bio-Technologie. Das Jahr-und Adressbuch 1999Biocom, Berlin
38.
PorterM E, 1998, “Clusters and the new economics of competition”Harvard Business Review7677–90
39.
PowellWPackalenKWhittingtonK, 2012, “Organizational and institutional genesis: The emergence of high-tech clusters in the life sciences”, in The Emergence of Organizations and Markets Eds PadgettJPowellW (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) pp 434–465
40.
ProudfootN, 2004, “The biopharmaceutical cluster in Oxford”, in Changing Governance of Local Economies: Responses of European Local Production Systems Eds CrouchCLe GalèsPTrigiliaCVoelzkowH (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 237–260
41.
SaxenianA, 1994Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128 (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
42.
SchumpeterJ A, 1934The Theory of Economic Development (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
43.
SotarautaM, 2012, “Policy learning and the ‘cluster-flavoured innovation policy’ in Finland”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy30780–795
44.
StaehlerTDohseDCookeP, 2007, “Evaluation der Fördermassnahmen BioRegio und BioProfile”, Report creport commisioned by Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, Consulting für Innovations- und Regionalanalysen, Institut für Weltwirtschaft and der Universität Kiel, Centre for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences, Kiel
45.
SternbergRKieseMStockingerD, 2010, “Cluster policies in the US and Germany: Varieties of capitalism perspective on two high-tech states”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy281063–1082
46.
YinR K, 1994Case Study Research: Design and Methods2nd edition (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA)
47.
ZuckerLDarbyMBrewerM, 1998, “Intellectual capital and the birth of US biotechnology enterprises”American Economic Review88290–306
