Competitiveness of East Asian Science Cities and Role of Innovative SMEs Sang-Chul Park, Professor at Graduate School of Knowledge based Technology and Energy, Korea Polytechnic University, Adjunct professor at Business Economics Program, KAIST, Visiting professor at the School of Business, Economics and Law, Gothenburg University, Sweden [email protected] / [email protected]/ [email protected]

ABSTRACT In a knowledge-based economy of the globalizing economic order, the role of regions is very significant in order to create and to disperse knowledge. Particularly, geographical clusters of firms in a single sub-national region may contribute to transmitting certain kinds of knowledge between and among firms. In addition, markets prefer to favour specialized firms with a coherent body of knowledge when knowledge creation and the use of new knowledge become increasingly important for maintaining and improving a firm’s competitiveness. Therefore, regional policy makers may not interfere directly with markets and firms when the process of globalization pushes national economies into a world of learning and innovation. The reason is that the institutional framework for market exchange favours knowledge exchange in a globalizing economic system. This paper argues how East Asian science cities such as Tsukuba Science City in Japan, Daedeok Innopolis in South Korea, Hsinchu Science based Industrial Park in Taiwan, and Zhongguancun Science Park in China have been developed in order to create technology innovation as well to contribute to national and regional economic growth. Moreover, it also focuses on their competitiveness and the further development strategy that aims to become global science cities. Finally, it also discusses whether their competitiveness as innovative clusters is based on global or local levels. Key words: Competitiveness, innovative cluster, knowledge economy, technology innovation, globalization, science cities

1

1. Introduction Moulaert explains that the term “globalization” has been at the heart of economic and political discourse for the last twenty years. It is regarded as a major driving force of contemporary economic transformation. Additionally, both conservative and progressive political parties use it as an argument to support changes in socioeconomic policy. (Moulaert, 2000) Since the 1990s the debate has focused on the relationship between the globalization of the world economy and its impact on the different spheres of society, such as production, trade, culture, politics and governance, which develop more and more at a global scale. With globalizing economic process, the production of social and economic structures at different spatial levels generates a threat to the creativity of local and regional territories. Shachar urges that the emerging global economy is characterized by the simultaneous operation of a number of processes that produce the transition from an international to a global economy. (Shachar, 1997) Additionally, Dicken distinguishes processes between internationalization and globalization. According to his explanation, the former is a quantitative process which leads to a more extensive geographical pattern of economic activity, while the latter is a qualitative process that is based on the functional integration of internationally dispersed activities. (Dicken, 2007) Globalization is the new economic, political and cultural order in which nationstates are no longer significant actors or meaningful economic units as these used to be. Under the circumstance, Florida argues that the economic and social trajectory of cities depend heavily on the level of its integration into the global economy. As a result more cities are becoming involved in the co-ordination of processes and managerial activities. In addition, cities will occupy different positions in the international urban hierarchy to the extent to which they are functionally and spatially more involved with the most innovative and most globalizing activities. (Florida, 2008) All cities and regions produce specific forms of spatial organization of the production process and create new spatial formation after hit by economic decline and restructuring. At the same time, these territories become the social spaces producing new forms of industrial, social, and technical structures. While these are created, the previously constructed spaces experience dramatic transformation and try to adapt to the new requirements. This indicates why certain regions are abandoned and others are not. Brenner identifies it as a new global city-centric capitalism that creates a dominant leading edge of contemporary capitalist development. This functions as territorial platforms for the post-Fordist economy and as staging posts for the operations of multinational corporations. (Brenner, 1998) Scott also urges that city-regions are coming to function as the basic motors of the global economy. He explains that globalization and city-region development are two facets of a single integrated reality that leads to enormous and unfamiliar pressures. (Scott, 1996) However, new modes of industrial organization, communication, and exchange of 2

commodities, labour, and information provide new spaces for production. It means that new combinations of technological and geographical displacement arise in response to changing social, technical, and institutional conditions. (Moulaert, 2000) In a knowledge-based economy of the globalizing economic order, the role of regions is very significant in order to create and to disperse knowledge. Particularly, geographical clusters of firms in a single sub-national region may contribute to transmitting certain kinds of knowledge between and among firms. In addition, markets prefer to favour specialized firms with a coherent body of knowledge when knowledge creation and the use of new knowledge become increasingly important for maintaining and improving a firm’s competitiveness. (Maskell, 2001) The benefits of a geographical cluster in the knowledge-based economy are to access knowledge that cannot easily be acquired on the market. As a result, the benefits of proximity can be translated into a force of agglomeration in relation to firms engaged in interactive learning processes. Therefore, it is safe to say that the more tacit the knowledge involved, the more important is spatial proximity between the actors taking part in the exchange. (Maskell & Malmberg, 1999) The nationalization of locations of economic activities leads to clustering of R & D and high value added production in privileged urban areas. At the same time the accumulated dynamics of global capitalism cause coverage of large market areas by a limited set of metropolitan providers and an exclusion of peripheral regions. Additionally, the process of globalization enhances global corporate structures, trade, and finance networks that are enabled by spectacular transformations in information and telecommunication technology, management and organization science, and money and capital transfer. Therefore, regional policy makers may not interfere directly with markets and firms when the process of globalization pushes national economies into a world of learning and innovation. The reason for this is that the institutional framework for market exchange favours knowledge exchange in a globalizing economic system. The research problem of the paper is to find out and analyze why all East Asian science cities have become different innovative clusters in terms of development strategies, core high-technology sectors, innovative environment and habitat although their common role model was set as Silicon Valley. Silicon Valley is regarded as the most competitive innovative cluster at a global level. In fact, it is true that there are many conceptual overlaps by explaining Silicon Valley as a high tech region, a techno-pole, a technopolis, an innovative cluster, a knowledge hub, a science city, a science park, an innovative ecosystem etc. In this paper, all concepts are equally used as synonym. (Castells & Hall, 1994; Saxenian, 1994; Maskell, 2001; Florida, 2005; Park, 2009) 2. Theoretical Debate on Innovation Theory and Regional Innovation System Technology innovation impacts significantly on national and regional economic development. It is also safe to say that technology innovation contributes to further technology diffusion as well as technology change (OECD, 2000). Technology innovation is related with the processes of technological change, which consist of invention, innovation, and diffusion.

3

Regarding the accumulation of technical knowledge, Dosi (1982) already urged that the knowledge leads to the formation of a path of possible technical developments. Furthermore, the cumulative nature of the technological process narrows down the range of potential choices that is regarded as the evolution of the technology proceeds. David (1985) characterized this as the path dependency theory embodying strong prescriptions about which technological change should be pursued and which should be neglected. Where the cumulative nature of the process of technological development involves the narrowing of ranges of potential choices, national trajectories enable differentiation and diversification from the main development path (OECD 1992). However, Schienstock and Hämäläinen (2001) argue that a risk of path dependency exists when a specific development path in an economy exhausts itself. This is indicated by a loss of competitiveness, retarding economic growth, and increasing unemployment. Therefore, Grabher (1993) and Schienstock (1997) insist that such a lock-in phenomenon suggests paying more attention to the aspect of path creation. In fact, Schumpeter (1942) already stressed that innovation implies breaking out of the traditional path of technological development, which is regarded as the process of creative destruction. He urged the will of the entrepreneur as decisive for the creation of a new development path. As such, a theory of path creation can provide a way of understanding how entrepreneurs escape a lock-in situation. Garud and Karnoe (2000) explain that path creation is interpreted as a process of transforming a technological field in which different actors with different frames are cooperating. In the transformation process, the entrepreneur plays a main role as a stimulator and coordinator at a business level. According to the path-creation perspective, all economic actors are regarded as knowledgeable agents with a capacity to react in ways other than those prescribed by the existing social rules and technological artifacts. However, David (2000) argues that a new path-creating innovation needs the development and coordination of a vast array of complementary elements that include new management techniques, new organization forms, new kind of workforce skills, new infrastructure, government policies, public organizations etc. Path creation processes require the importance of trial and error. Stable processes of path creation and diffusion can generate positive results if all actors of an innovation system cooperate, review each other’s change processes and finally adapt to them. In addition, continuous exchange of information and knowledge in dialogues and multilogues is required for stabilizing a new development path. In this regard, Schienstock (1996) explained that the government plays a key role in the path creation process. Furthermore, path creation also needs new forms of coordinating and various innovation activities such as vision creation and discursive coordination. Schienstock (2007a) identify five factors that explain the emergence of a new techno-organizational development path. These are a window of new opportunities opened up by a new knowledge paradigm, a market promising long term profits, economic pressures to adapt to the new paradigm, change events that trigger and support the transformation process as well as courses of action that steer technoeconomic development into a new direction and introduction of techno-organizational and institutional changes. 4

Concerning the technological aspect, the functions of the information and communication technology (ICT) represent a fundamental change even for new comers, while the network model focusing on intra- and inter-organizational knowledge flows can be regarded as a new logic of organizing businesses more effectively in the organizational aspect. This is a new techno-organizational trajectory in the globalization era. Bassanini and Dosi (2001) explain that by understanding the new trajectory it is not wise to focus only on objective factors such as new opportunities, economic pressures, change events etc. Instead of the objective factors it is also important to emphasize human will. The reason for it is that path creation is regarded as a process of cautious deviation by people understanding the opportunities that the new paradigm offers. Accordingly, Schienstock (2007a) urges that the transformation process to a great extent use to be dependent on the engagement of social pioneers such as scientists, politicians and entrepreneurs who prepared to initiate and conduct anticipatory institutional change. Moreover, Teubal (1998) also stress that it is important to reestablish a good match between the new techno-organizational paradigm and the institutions that facilitate its full deployment through the economy by unleashing a multitude of social and institutional innovations. Additionally, Schienstock (2007b) distinguishes a theory of socio-economic development between evolutionary phases of path dependence and revolutionary phases of path creation. This means that the systemic benefits and historical success of the old business system can become a structural burden in rapidly changing environment. Therefore, local policy makers to create paths in new industries need to focus on long term success. Otherwise region’s transformation based on path creation may fail. In line with path dependency and creation theory Chesbrough (2003a) develops closed and open innovation theories that are based on firm level. The paradigm of closed innovation uses to be said that successful innovation requires control for new product development cycle inside the company. By contrary the paradigm of open innovation is regarded that firms should use external ideas as well as internal ideas, and internal and external paths to market, as the firms look to advance their technology. The paradigm of closed innovation had been eroded by the following four factors: increasing availability and mobility of skilled workers, growth of the venture capital market, external options for ideas and increasing capability of external suppliers. These factors have resulted in a new market of knowledge that resides in employees, suppliers, customers, competitors, universities etc. Under this circumstance other companies will use it if a company does not use the knowledge created. Chesbrough (2003b) explains this phenomenon that innovation has shifted from being closed to being open. In sum, it seems to be a theoretical discursive relation between the closed and open innovation theory and the path dependency and creation theory. The current paper is based on the path creation theory and focuses on whether this theory can be applied to the East Asian approach to transform the existing science cities into the globally recognized innovative clusters or not. In fact, the path creation theory is a creation of the western context that results from a strong collaboration 5

between innovative actors as well as initiatives of private sector to a high extent. By contrary, the four Northeast Asian science cities mainly led by the central and local governments are in weak positions that innovative actors can create their own innovative environment by themselves without a strong intervention of the central and local governments. Despite such a contextual difference, the paper examines the empirical analysis on characteristics and types of science cities, their development strategies, habitat, and competitiveness compared to their benchmarking, Silicon Valley. 3. Starting points of science cities in East Asian countries Successful global science cities such as Silicon Valley in the USA, Cambridge Science Park in the UK, Sophia Antipolis in France have similarities which are based on technology innovation as well as sustainable regional development. Additionally, these areas have created a strong linkage between academia and industry that contributes to generating spin-off effects on R & D activities. In fact, universities and research institutes located in the science cities play significant roles not only in attracting high-tech companies, but also in supplying highly qualified engineers and scientists. The world-class universities such as Stanford University, the University of California at Berkely in Silicon Valley, Cambridge University in Cambridge Science Park, Nice University in Sophia Antipolis have developed through collaborating with industry closely. High-tech industries require R & D activities continuously so that highly qualified engineers and scientists are always needed who prefer to reside in attractive and comfortable areas. These global science cities are regarded as brains of the regions and generate technology innovation and synergy effects such as new jobs, valueadded production etc. As a result, these major science cities become new regional development models, which eventually strengthen regional and national competitiveness. (Park, 2004) In fact, it is a truly difficult task to become a successful model of science cities because it takes much longer time than to be expected on the one hand, and various indigenous and external factors influence on the other. In spite of these difficulties, many nations and regions are keen to build or to expand their science cities. At the same time, newly industrialized countries (NICs) are aggressively building their hightech oriented clusters, which are linked to strategies for national and regional technology development. This global trend has become stronger than ever with emerging a new global economic order that underlines the significance of technology development capacity. (Park, 2000) Under these circumstances, it may be valuable to research on the science cities in East Asia, notably Tsukuba Science City in Japan, Daedeok Innopolis in South Korea, Hsinchu Science Based Industrial Park in Taiwan, and Zhongguancun Science Park in China. These science cities are regarded as rapid growing science cities, which create technological innovation as well national and regional development. Since 1948, Japanese governmental and private investment in science and technology has increased in order that the government could rebuild the nation through science. Historically, science in Japan always has had a strong practical 6

orientation, while science in Western countries has evolved over a long period. This historical background made Japanese politicians believe in the ability of science to contribute to economic development in the 1950s and 1960s. As a result, government agencies and ministries were mainly interested in applied research rather than basic research. (Dearing, 1995) In order to control science and technology, the three government organizations such as Ministry of Economics and Industry (METI), Science and Technology Agency (STA), and Ministry of Education and Science (MOES) often compete with one another intensively. It is also remarkable that factionalism has long played a role in Japanese science. These government-led science and technology organizations, particularly in the field of basic and applied research, enabled large-scale projects to be set up. The Tsukuba Science City project was also a government-led large-scale project. Therefore, in Japan, a science city project can be simply a method for funnelling direct public subsidies to private enterprise. Additionally, building sites can allow narrowly selected industries and individual firms to be targeted and supported. (Lambert, 2000) The development process of Tsukuba Science City (TSC) can be divided into three periods: a planning phase in the 1960s, a construction phase during the 1970s, and a collaboration phase since the 1980s. In the planning phase, purchasing land from farmers proved to be the most difficult barrier in realising the concept of the science city. The national government and landowners could not agree on the use of land owing to their different points of view. In order not to aggravate local farmers, the government chose an acquisition policy of “tochikukaku seiri”, which shares common interests through a land readjustment procedure for combining individual landholdings. The reason for the government’s policy has been related to the Japanese political system. A major political supporting group for the leading politicians of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has been farmers, so that they have had to be concerned about farmers’ protests against the government’s land-purchasing policy. Leading politicians in the ruling party influenced the government to carry out a united landpurchasing policy. As the result, the farmer could sell plots of land, which were least suitable for agriculture. This is why TSC has a modified form compared to the original concept. In all, the government bought 4,446 acres of the total 6,669 acres in the education and research district from 2,600 separate farmers. (Dearing, 1995) In the Korean case, a master plan for Daedeok Science Town (DST) construction was approved in Dec. 1973 and a construction of basic facilities and institutes started in 1974. Moreover, Daedeok Industrial Base Development Area was announced in 1977. By the end of 1978, the four institutes moved to the Science Town that was a relocation of government research institutes from Seoul. Additionally, the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) opened its management office, and the basic planning of Daedeok Industrial Base Development was also announced in the beginning of the 1980s. As the result, the west section of the Science Town was completed in 1985. It was the first stage of the project. In the second stage of the project, a land construction by a public development system was introduced. Finally, the basic construction for DST was completed in 1992 and a year 7

later, the Daedeok Science Town Act was passed (Castells & Hall, 1994). Moreover, the former government revised the act to the Daedeok Science Town Special Zone Act in the end of 2004. Since Jan. 2005 Deadeok Science Town special Zone has been redesigned as Daedeok Innopolis (DI). DST is located in Daejeon City, sixth largest city in South Korea and a transportation network hub located 170 kilometres south of Seoul. Originally, it covered 1,134 acres, of which 46 percent was for institutions for research and education, 7 percent for residence and community services, and the rest was for greenery. However, it has been enlarged up to 6,680 acres. The land is shared for three different functions by 47 percent, 9 percent and 44 percent respectively. People can reach there from Seoul in about two hours by car and in about 50 minutes by "KTX", Korean version fast train. At the end of the 1970s, the Taiwanese export processing zone policy carried out by the Department of Industry met stagnation due to the rising cost of labour, which resulted in unattractive environment of a local investment for foreign investors. In order to attract them, the Taiwanese government upgraded its industrial infrastructure that made a shift in industrial policy from a labour-intensive to a capital-intensive industry. During the rearrangement of the industrial structure the government targeted strategic industries such as precision machinery, electronics, and information industries, which were based on high-technology and value-added productivity. Under this circumstance, Taiwan needed to establish a science-based industrial park (SBIP) in order to attract high-technology industries and at the same time to obtain qualified manpower for the technology transfer. (Cheung, 1990) The legal framework for the science-based industrial park is represented by the “Laws Pertaining to the Establishment and Management of Science-Based Industrial Park”. This law was passed on July 27. 1979 and the government started to build in 1980. The Hsinchu Science-Based Industrial Park (HSIP) is located on the west coast of Taiwan. It is about 70 Km away from Taipei and located 6 Km west of Hsinchu city. The Sun Yat-Sen Freeway provides easy access to Taipei as well as Taichung. It takes about an hour and a half to reach to Taipei by car and about forty minutes to the Chiang Kai-Shek International Airport. Travel time to the major harbour of Taichung is approximately two hours. There are also railways from Keelung to Kaoshiung, the west coast’s north-south rail line. In 1996, the HSIP included about 580 hectares of developed land. It has expanded continuously up to 699 hectares in 2009. It is divided into industrial, residential, and research zones. 335 companies and 98,685 employees are working in the park in the end of 2009. In Mainland China, the Zhongguancun Science Park (ZSP) was initiated by Dr. Chen Chunxian, a member of the Chinese Academy of Science (CAS) in 1981 who came up with the idea for a Silicon Valley in China after visiting to the USA as a part of a government-sponsored trip. The ZSP was officially recognized by the central government in 1988 and given the wordy name of Beijing High-Technology Industry Development Experimental Zone. (www.wikipedia.org) The ZSP covers all the Beijing’s highly concentrated educational, scientific 8

research and high-tech industrial zones. With its center piece in the city’s northwest, the ZSP comes up with landscape of seven multiple sub-parks and industrial bases including Haidian, Fengtai, Changping, Yizhuang and others located in Beijing. The total area of the ZSP accounts for 232 square kilometres. (www.zgc.gov.cn) 4. Characteristics of the four East Asian science cities In 2010, over 25,000 employees are working in Tsukuba Science City (TSC). Among these employees over 13,000 is researcher. About 40% of the total budget and the personnel of national research institutions are concentrated in Tsukuba. (www.tsukuba-network.jp) Although the roles of high-tech-oriented private research institutes in TSC have increased continuously, particularly in domestic and international patent enrolments and technology transfers, their capability is still limited. There are several reasons for this. These are first, TSC has government-led large-sized research institutes that focus on major national research projects. Second, Japanese major private companies still prefer to locate their research institutes in Tokyo. Third, research expenditures between the national research institutes and the private research institutes are fairly different. 24 of 32 national research institutes spent their research expenditures more than 100 million yen in 2008, while 45 of 92 private research institutes invested more than 100 million yen in the same period. This indicates that a higher portion of national research institutes focus on large sized research activities than the portion of private research institutes. Additionally, more than 205 venture businesses have started in TSC since 2005. The most of venture companies were created by Tsukuba University. (www.tsukuba-network.jp) In 2010, 18,796 South Korea's leading researchers and engineers are working on R & D activities in Daedeok Innopolis (DI). The total residential population has reached 83,202 among who 40,338 are employees in R & D units, R & D support organizations. For them, about 16,000 housing units have been constructed. The numbers of in-town organizations have reached 977 institutes including private firms. In DI, there are 977 institutes. Among these, 28 private research institutes and 898 venture businesses are operating. Although the private research institutes and venture businesses account for over 94 percent of the total institute numbers, its man powers is lower than in the national research institutes. Among the 28 private research institutes, there are 4 research institutes with less than 30 employees and 10 research institutes with less than 100 employees. By contrary, the numbers of large sized research institutes with more than 100 employees account for 15 institutes. However, most of venture businesses have lees than 30 employees (www.ddi.or.kr ). Similar to Japan’s TSC and South Korea’s DI, the main actor of Hsinchu Science based Industrial Park (HSIP) was Taiwan’s national government, which carried out major investments for the development of the park and still manages its daily activities. HSIP is managed under the R.O.C. Executive Yuan’s National Science Council (NSC) while the Export Processing Zones are operated under the auspices of the Department of Industry. 9

The Electronics Research and Service Organization (ERSO) was already located in Hsinchu in 1976 before the NSC decided on the site of HSIP in Hsinchu. ERSO founded by the Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) is the most prominent research institute and has played a crucial role in the development of the electronics industry in Taiwan. In 1973, ITRI was established by the Ministry of Economy and funded by the National Science Council (NSC). Its major role is technology transfers. The government’s budget policy for the Electronics Research and Service Organization (ERSO) is unique and smart. It provides only 50 per cent of budget in order to maintain the stable linkage between ERSO and private companies. The other 50 per cent of budget ought to be met through service contracts and sales of technology to private companies. This has contributed to the upgrading of the technological level in Taiwan’s electronics industry. (Science Park Administration, 2009) The number of companies in HSIP has increased continuously. There were 150 companies in 1994, and eight years later it grew to 335. Its output also grew quickly. In 1994, it reached 4.8 billion US dollar and it grew to 20 billion US dollar in 2002. In fact, its highest output reached 29.8 billion US dollar in 2000 along with IT sector’s upswing. Additionally, total investment reached 27.8 billion US dollar at the end of 2002. It increased by 113 per cent from 1994 to 2002. As a late comer Zhongguancun Science Park (ZSP) was approved the establishment by the State Council of China as the first state level high tech industrial zone in 1988. After more than twenty years of development, the ZSP has grown into a city-wide park consisted of eight high tech parks, which are scattered in different districts of Beijing. The ZSP has constituted a distinctive and vibrant lay out of high tech industrial belt along with Five Ring Road. (Ying, 2009) The ZSP includes 39 universities such as Tsinghua University, Peking University and Renmin University of China, which have over 400 thousands students. 213 research institutions represented by Chinese Academy of Science (CAS) are also located in the area. These include 41 national engineering centers, 42 key laboratories and 10 state-level enterprise technical centers. Moreover, about 20,000 private companies are operating in the area in the end of 2009. (www.zgc.gov.cn) The common characters of the four science parks and cities in East Asian countries are initiated by the central governments and set their role model for Silicon Valley in the USA. At the same time there are differences in terms of geographical distances and targeted industrial areas. TSC and HSIP are located in the metropolitan areas while DI is located in the mid of the country. ZSP is located in the capital, Beijing. Their targeted industrial areas vary to fairly high extent. TSC and DI do have various industrial and scientific areas, while HSIP and ZSP focus strongly on IT and bio technological areas. (Table 1)

10

Table 1: Characteristics of Four Science Parks and Cities

Tsukuba Science City

Common Characters Initial driving Role model force Central government Silicon Valley

Daedeok Innopolis

Central government

Silicon Valley

Hsinchu Science based Industrial Park Zhoungguancun Science Park

Central government

Silicon Valley

Metropolitan area (60Km)

IT

Central government

Silicon Valley

Capital

IT and Bio

Name

Different Characters Geographical Industrial areas pattern Metropolitan Various area (70Km) technological areas Mid of the Various country technological (160Km) areas

Source: Author’s own adaptation 5. Strategies and habitat In Tsukuba Science City (TSC), there were 544 institutions and establishments in 2010, which were mainly national and public research institutions, and private companies with capital exceeding 10 million yen. Among these, 326 institutions and establishments carried out their activity strongly in the area. These were offices, business offices, factories, research institutes, and others. The number of pure research institute reached 134, and 146 institutions and companies had research facilities, irrespective of their classification. The main strategy of TSC is focused on exploring various basic and applied technologies that can contribute to creating original technologies as well as to commercializing new products by transferring technologies to private companies. TSC has a unique habitat. This is as follows: First, a strong support of central and local governments The central government has supported TSC from the planning phase based on the Academic New Town Construction Promotion Headquarters and the Tsukuba Science City Construction Act. Additionally, the local governments, Ibaraki Prefecture and related municipalities have developed public service facilities. Second, strong roles of national research institutes In TSC, over 13,000 employees are working at national institutions, and 8,500 of which are researchers. These members account for about 40% of the total personnel of national research institutes are concentrated in TSC. Therefore, research activities of national research institutes are dominant in the science city. Third, a weak role of Tsukuba University

11

A role of Tsukuba University is limited. The research activity of Tsukuba University is mainly based on basic research so that collaboration with national and private research institutes is rare. Recently, Tsukuba University generated many venture companies and was ranked number two nationally in terms of creating high-tech venture businesses. Despite such a activity, collaboration of the university with private companies is still regarded as weak. Fourth, rapid increasing private research institutes Private research institutes conduct mainly their research activities in ten industrial parks and research parks, which locate in the suburban district. Their activities increase and mainly focus on product development that contributes to regional development and economic revitalization. In sum, the habitat of TSC is formed by supports of central and local governments, activities of national and private research institutes. (See fig. 1) (Park, 2004) Figure 1: The Habitat of Tsukuba Science City

Source: Author’s own adaptation Similar to TSC, Daedeok Innopolis (DI) covers various technological areas from IT to nuclear energy. Most of all national research institutions are located in DI. This means that the government has strong intention to upgrade its scientific and technological level. Particularly, the government focuses on developing strategic technological areas such as IT, life science, nuclear energy, machine engineering etc. Therefore, applied and developing technologies have been preferred than basic technologies in DI. (Park, 2004) The main actors of DI are national and private research institutes as well as universities. Additionally, venture businesses take part in R & D activity and 12

manufacturing strongly. However, these actors seem to have limited power to act as independent actors. The reason for it is that the national research institutes and universities are controlled by the central government, while the private research institutes have to adopt a centralized R & D policy carried out by their headquarters. Only venture businesses obtain their R & D activities relatively free. However, they are mainly small sized and heavily dependent on venture capital. The local government built four industrial parks in order to create spin off effects (See Fig. 2) Figure 2: The Habitat of Daedeok Innopolis

Source: Author’s own adaptation The main strategy of Hsinchu Science Based Industrial Park (HSIP) combines dynamic R & D activities in the IT sector to final products that results in regional economic growth and technological development. Therefore, HSIP is not targeted to strengthen national scientific and technological capability, but to focus on specific technological areas in the IT sectors that can enable to create new products by collaborating with universities and national research institutes. (Park, 2004) A habitat of HSIP is based on dynamism that is very similar to Silicon Valley although there is a clear difference. The former was initiated by the central government, and private companies and universities started the latter. Despite this difference, HSIP explored basic functions of Silicon Valley consisted of interaction between R & D and new products. Additionally, HSIP created an efficient one-stop support system carried out by Science Park Administration. This is a unique system created by a sub-organization of a central government in science parks. A systematic technology transfer from ITRI to private companies has also contributed to a rapid development of the Park. In sum, the central government has encouraged cooperation between private companies, universities, and research institutes. Additionally, research institutes have carried out technology transfer to high-tech oriented private firms as well as created new start-up companies operating in the Park. This is a major function of HSIP that 13

attract domestic and international companies. (See fig. 3) Figure 3: The Habitat of Hsinchu Science-based Industrial Park

Source: Author’s own adaptation The Zhoungguancun Science Park (ZSP) has long been renowned as China’s largest intellectual area. However, the commercial values of scientific and technological knowledge were not recognized by the central government until the early 1980s although the Chinese government had heavily invested in the area for decades for the purpose of promoting R & D. (Tan, 2006) Innovative atmosphere emerged with the economic reforms in the mid 1980s. The state government managed to restructure the existing research institutions by establishing some market-oriented mechanisms. Furthermore, the state initiated projects to directly support certain R & D initiatives aiming at narrowing the gap between China and the advanced nations in terms of high-tech development (Wang, 1999) After the restructuring of research institutions and universities in the ZSP, a favourable environment for high-tech development have been formed that encouraged state owned institutes to set up research intensive and market-driven ventures to materialize their innovative potential. (Abramson, 1989) This is the main strategy for the ZSP. The habitat of ZSP is strongly based on collaboration between government, national research institutions and universities that encourage creating high-tech ventures in the area. These high-tech firms have an incentive to cluster to enhance legitimacy and avoid the liability of newness. One primary method for enhancing legitimacy is to have the backing of government agencies. In the ZSP, the Management Commission of the Beijing Experimental Zone (BEZ) for New Technology Industries plays its roles as a regulatory and supporting institution. It 14

handles affairs such as licensing, taxation, international trade, finance and investment, employment and intellectual property for high-tech ventures that is largely in accordance with the stipulations of national policy but also with slightly local modifications. Moreover, the Management Commission of BEZ invests some initial capital in the infrastructure for the new high-tech ventures and provides managerial guidance. It also operates as a liaison between the new start-ups and sources of finance. (Tan, 2006) If an initial site of a cluster is established by spontaneous spin-off or location factors, there must be economic and institutional reasons for new start-ups to locate near competitors that are regarded as agglomeration economies. (Rauch, 1993; Scott, 1992) Agglomeration economies encourage growth of new firms operating in the ZSP, which are either attracted by the technical and resource base or created from spin-offs in the region. Geographical proximity for shared resource arrangements and an emerging cluster identity have contributed to strengthening innovative environment. Most of high-tech firms in the ZSP have been organized under the four self principles encouraged by the government. These are self chosen partners, self financing, self operation and self responsibility. As a result, spin-off ventures served as the engine behind the ZSP’s growth. (Tan, 2006) Overall the habitat of the ZSP is seen as the figure. (Figure 4) Figure 4: The Habitat of the Zhongguancun Science Park

Source: Author’s own adaptation 6. SWOT Analysis Four East Asian science cities such as TSC, DI, HSIP and ZSP have developed rapidly since their initial periods although their historical backgrounds are rather shorter than that of their common benchmarking, Silicon Valley. Despite their short operating periods, the four East Asian cities represent national innovative clusters in their nations in terms of technological innovation, output, number of employees etc.

15

Therefore, it may be wise to analyze how these clusters possess strength and opportunity and face weakness and threaten as well as focuses on roles of venture businesses. TSC demonstrates that the large-scale organization of science can be used to solve various problems such as those of agglomeration, political conflicts and long-term economic development. As the national government announced the concept of a new science city, the host local government, Ibaraki Prefecture, welcomed and expected regional development since the region was relatively underdeveloped in spite of its geographical proximity to Tokyo. With a vast capital investment supported by the national and local governments as well as massive relocation of national and public institutes, TSC has been developed continuously. However, due to its original plan as a part of capital region development TSC’s dependency on Tokyo is still high. In particular, transportation, communication, information and cultural sources are highly dependent on Tokyo metropolitan area, although a new tendency for self-sustaining attempts in certain areas is improving. There are many critical points of view on TSC since it has not yet created sufficient local synergy and industrial spin-off effects, despite the vast capital investment and strong political support. The main arguments of critics are based on inefficient resource allocation focused on hardware-oriented investment in huge facilities as well as Tokyo metropolitan-oriented regional development instead of harmonious national development. Political support creating tax revenues and employment as well as supply of labour are in general the most important factors in improving industrial development. TSC has always gained political support from the national and prefectural governments. However, the supply of labour has been always a chronic problem because high-technology-oriented industry needs highly qualified personnel such as managers and engineers. Moreover, the supply of engineers having independent minds is small compared to the United States. This means that to accumulate scientific and research resources would take a long time. (Rogers & Larsen, 1984) In addition, many private companies refused to locate in TSC because of its lack of production facilities, subcontractors, marketing expertise etc., although the number of private companies has increased after Tsukuba Expo’85. (Dearing, 1995) In order to overcome these problems, the government pushed hard to create strong collaboration with innovative actors such as university, research institutes, and private companies. Tsukuba University has been keen to create high-tech venture businesses for spreading strong entrepreneurship and commercializing final products in TSC. However, these activities are still minor in the city. In sum, although TSC experiences some problems in attracting high-tech industry, its physical development continues. Following Tsukuba Expo’85, the occupancy of land had rapidly increased owing to investment by the private sector. At present, only the Expo area is available to private industry. Therefore, the Land Restructuring Agency needs to provide more land for latecomer institutes. For it, the Ibaraki Prefecture Government is offering for sale two lots in Tsukuba’s northern business and Research Park in 2002. 16

Similar to TSC, Daedeok Innopolis (DI) is mainly controlled by the central government particularly, the Ministry of Knowledge and Economy (MOKE). The host city Daejeon is only responsible for building and maintaining access roads to DI. Besides, it is also in charge of providing and managing water and sewage services. As implied, DI has no local autonomy, and the Administration Office of DI is only carrying out its managerial functions. In addition, the entire complex had no manufacturing activity as well as few connections between the research activities in DI and the productive activities in Daejeon until recently that has resulted in a poor local synergy. A main reason for the poor local synergy may be that most of the institutes and its agencies usually have a strong tendency to focus on national priorities in R & D activities instead of private company interests. It must be also pointed out that most of the institutes seem to be pushed by the government to move in DI since the research programs are composed of various fields from Ginseng and Tobacco Research to Ocean Engineering. It indicates that a scientific plan to generate synergies between institutions has not been a priority for the government. Hence, it is clear that DI is a result of the government-led project to establish R & D centers, which could contribute to the improvement of technology standards and to the Koreanization of certain strategic high technologies. (Castells & Hall, 1996; Park, 2004) DI is an entirely artificial creation. Nothing was in that area before the government started to build the town. With the beginning of the second stage of development in 1987, the government realized that without developing synergy effects technology development couldn’t be achieved efficiently. Thus, it focused on the synergy effects in a comprehensive plan in 1989. The plan is called the techno-belt concept that attempts to connect between research and industry through information and telecommunication technologies. According to the plan, Seoul and Daedeok will be technological diffusion centers connecting networks along four major techno-belts. This techno-belt concept would contribute to the formation of productive structure for the 21st century, and at the same time, the role of DI will be strengthened due to its geographical location and innovative milieu as R & D center. Furthermore, the government set up a target for DI to build South Korean Silicon Valley in the fourth National Comprehensive Land Development Plan in 2001 (Daedeok Science Town Management Office, 2002a). In addition, a recent trend to build new high-tech oriented venture businesses within and around DI can also stimulate a further development of DI. Furthermore, DI experienced a restructuring process in 2004 by being nominated as R & D Special Zone. The government authorized DI by the Daedeok R & D Special Zone Act in 2005. To become an R & D center and create synergy effects, DI has intensified cooperative relation between government supported industries, universities and industrial laboratories. For example, the Technology Innovation Centre (TIC) and Technology Business Incubator (TBI) at KAIST carry out industry oriented projects and will facilitate technological developments in the industrial sector. In 2010, there were 18 TIC and TBI in DI and 314 new started companies operating. 17

Venture businesses started in 1993 around Daedeok Science Town. However, these businesses were not able to be located within the park due to the Law for Daedeok Science Town Management that resulted in weak spin off effects between R & D and manufacturing. Therefore, the government changed this law in 1999 in order to bring venture businesses within the park. Additionally, Daejeon city government started to build four industrial parks around Daedeok Innopolis in order to link the function of R & D and the production function that enabled to spin-off effects for new venture businesses. As a result, venture businesses could receive 169 domestic patents and 23 international patents in 2002. Moreover, the number of venture businesses increased dramatically up to 898 in 2010 that resulted in 815 cases of technology transfers as well as 77,798 million won (c.a. 89 million US dollars) technology fees. The technology transfers and transfer fees had increased from 2005 to 2010 in a row. (Daedeok Innopolis, 2010) Additionally DI carried out its active strategy to nominate qualified high-tech venture businesses. As a result, 48 high-tech venture companies over 1 million US dollar’s output were operating in 2010, and 51 venture businesses could be registered in the Korea Stock Exchange (KOSDAX) from 2004 to 2010. (Daedeok Innopolis, 2010) Despite the quality oriented development since the redesigned DI, most of hightech venture businesses are rather small sized that are less than five million US dollars output. Additionally the number of qualified high-tech venture businesses accounts only for 5.3 percent of the total number of venture businesses in DI. In particular, the number of venture business has increased rapidly since the year 2005 as DI was designated as Daedeok R & D Special Zone. It means that many venture businesses need to overcome the period of a death valley. Therefore, it is still questionable how many venture businesses could survive if DI follows the Silicon Valley model. It is worth noting that DI is likely to have built a high quality hardware oriented infrastructure such as research institutes, universities, housing, roads etc, while it still lacks software based infrastructure such as financing, accounting, legal services etc. Such a software based infrastructure is mostly concentrated in the Seoul metropolitan area. Therefore, it may be a delicate barrier for DI to cope with. DI’s vision for 21st century is announced as to become one of the global innovative clusters until 2015. In order to realize this target, DI has intensified its role as a national innovation hub creating technology innovation as well as supporting other seven model innovative cluster nationwide. However, it may be easily criticized that DI’s technology portfolio is too wide spread from IT to Nuclear. Therefore, it needs to focus on its core technology areas strategically because there are no global innovative clusters in various technology areas coincidently although a technology convergence is a global trend. (Park, 2009) HSIP has developed in quantitative and qualitative perspectives since 1981. The Park met its break-though in terms of capital investment, sales revenues, and growth of companies in 1995 and expanded continuously up to 2010. Despite this positive side, several weaknesses and threatens exist. These are as follows: First, the cooperation between universities and private firms are still limited because most of private companies in the Park prefer to collaborate with the government-supported 18

institutes such as ITRI and ERSO. The reason is that the private companies in the Park are mainly interested in manufacturing high-tech products rather than in hightech research and development. In short, the linkage between universities and private companies in the Park is still weak, while the government-supported institutes and firms have created strong linkages. Second, information-related industries are still dominantly located in Taipei, although the number of companies in the information industries increased rapidly in the Park from 1995 to 2010. Many companies operate their production and part of their research activities in the Park mainly because they want to be qualified for tax benefits. Their headquarters are still located in the capital. Thus, the lack of information flow in the Park may be one of the weaknesses. Third, the Park has an IT industries-dominated structure. This resulted in severe dependency on global economic situation. In 2000, the total sales revenue of the Park reached 29.8 billion US dollar. One year later, however, this decreased to 19.6 billion US dollar due to worldwide economic downturn, particularly in the IT industries. This trend happened again in 2009 during the global economic crisis. Finally, Hsinchu as a city cannot provide residents in the Park sufficient urban amenities due to its background of emigration, and lack of industrial and commercial investment. The city still has traffic congestion and air-pollution problems because of rapidly increasing number of cars despite its small size and lacks services shopping facilities and cultural events. (Science Park Administration, 2003) Future perspective of HSIP seems to be positive despite the above weaknesses because the Park is expanding continuously. First of all the Park has been linked with satellite parks that are Chunan site and Tunglou site. The former has been built in 2002 and in operating at present. The latter is under construction Additionally, HSIP becomes a successful model for other science parks such as Tainan and Taichung Science Parks. Its growth path is likely to be in a proper track. The output of HSIP increased from about 10.9 billion US dollar in 1995 to about 35.8 billion US dollar in 2010 that accounts approximately for 328 percent growth. (www.sipa.gov.tw) HSIP supported local SMEs by providing financial resources for their R & D projects collaborated with universities located in the park. This aimed to induce companies operating at science parks to continue their R & D activities under the economic downturn period due to the global financial crisis. In the collaboration, universities have played a bigger role in the R & D process. In 2010, 95 R & D projects were supported that accounted for 14 million US dollars. (HSIP, 2011) Overall HSIP has become a model for a national strategy building science parks as well as expanding satellite parks. It means that the government is confident to build several national science parks combining R & D activity as well as production activity that have resulted in rapid development in the national economy. Being the symbol of Chinese high-technology, the ZSP undertakes the task to absorb and deliver global advanced technology, foster emerging industries, and play a role model to other domestic science parks. Relying on abundant human resources, domestic advanced technology and convenient infrastructures etc., the ZSP has 19

become a leading domestic science park. In the past ten years (1988-1998), the ZSP has met over 30 percent annual growth. (Wang, 2000) In 2008 the total industrial output of the ZSP exceeded 147 billion US dollar. Among this, the high-tech production value increased 26.3 billion US dollar that accounted for about 17 percent of the GDP of Beijing City. (Ying, 2009) However, as a developing country, the overall economic strength and technological level in China is still behind developed nations. Moreover, the market system has been improved, but is still immature. Technological innovation uses to provide windows of opportunity for the ZSP. The reason for this is that recent developments in digital technology and the widespread use of the internet create a rapid convergence between computer, communications, and consumer electronics products. In this trend, the ZSP can achieve new opportunities redirecting the global IT industry toward a multimedia and network-centric age. (Wang, 2000) The ZSP also faces competing for high-tech talents and piracy issues, which are major threatens so far. Given the venture business, ZSP has begun to attract foreign returnees to start new businesses in China since 1997. In 2010 there were 33 overseas returnees pioneer parks with a total incubation area of 3.2 million square meters. The total sum of investments in these parks accounted for 125 million US dollars, and 155 high-tech venture businesses have been operating. (www.chinadaily.com.cn) Overall, the comprehensive analysis of the four East Asian clusters looks like the table. (Table 2) Based on the analysis it is a very interesting finding that TSC and DI have similarity, while HISP and ZSP focus on similar strategies. The four East Asian clusters have been originally created by setting their role model from Silicon Valley, which represents the most successful global innovative cluster in the world. The reason why these East Asian clusters were inspired by Silicon Valley is very simple. It is because Silicon Valley is regarded as a core actor for high-tech innovation, sustainable economic growth, creating brand power etc. Therefore, it may be also valuable to compare these four East Asian clusters with Silicon Valley in order to analyze whether these also can be close to become global innovative clusters or not. The analytical categories are based on the numbers of patent, the physical size, the numbers of employees and the total output in the year 2008. (Table 3)

20

Table 2: The comprehensive SWOT analysis of the four clusters Strength Weakness Strong government Weak collaboration between support, highly developed industry and university, infrastructure, highly limited synergy effect, some TSC educated human resources, TSC high-tech ventures, weak close to market, various R amenity & D institutions Strong government Weak collaboration between support, highly developed industry and university, DI infrastructure, highly DI limited synergy effect, low educated human resources, number of capable venture various R & D institutions, businesses, weak amenity creating high number of venture businesses Strong government Weak amenity, support, highly developed developmental technology HISP infrastructure and human HISP oriented, small domestic resources, production and market, no direct approach market oriented to create venture business Strong government Low technological level, support, located in the instable market system, capital, abundant human weak intellectual property ZSP resources, various R & D ZSP right (IPR), commercial institutions, vast domestic based instead R & D market, attracting overseas oriented returnees Opportunity Threat Basic to applied Rapid growth of other TSC technological capability, TSC Northeast Asian clusters, technology transfer, matured domestic market, increasing high-tech 2nd rank in high-tech venture venture businesses businesses among universities Applied to developmental Rapid growth of other technology, technology Northeast Asian clusters, DI transfer, high-tech DI relatively matured domestic ventures, rapid growing market, weak technological possibility convergence Technological convergence Weak convergence to other in IT sectors, production technology sectors, strong HISP based and global market HISP competition with latecomers expansion, focusing new such as Tainan and industrial areas Taichung, shortage of highskilled manpower Technological convergence Competing for high-tech in IT sectors, global market talents, rampant piracy, low ZSP expansion, built-in retail ZSP quality of living sales function, cost environment competitiveness 21

Source: Author’s own adaptation Table 3: Comparison of four Asian clusters with Silicon Valley (As of 2008)

Silicon Valley Tsukuba Science City Daedeok Innopolis Hsinchu Science-based Industrial Park Zhongguancun Science Park

Patent 9,474

Area 2,966Km2

Employees 1,322,634

Output c.a. 220 billion US dollar

6,000

285Km2

13,000

c.a. 10 billion US dollar

4,949

27Km2

18,796

c.a. 10 billion US dollar

3,026

7Km2

98,685

30.6 billion US dollar

6,100

232Km2

170,000

147 billion US dollar

Source: Author’s own adaptation based on www.jointventure.org, www.tsukubanetwork.jp, www.ddi.or.kr, www.ebeijing.gov.cn, www.zgc.gov.cn This comparison indicates that the status of Silicon Valley is still absolutely overwhelmed toward the four East Asian clusters in all analytical categories. In particular, Silicon Valley represents the status of global innovative cluster owing to its high number of patents. ZSP and TSC follow the Silicon Valley in terms of technological innovation. However, their numbers of patent include domestic patents that are not fully recognized as a world class technology. In terms of output, ZSP can compete with Silicon Valley, and it may also be possible that ZSP can take over Silicon Valley’s position by expanding its rapid economic growth in the future. Overall, the four East Asian science cities have contributed to strengthening their R & D capability and technological level owing to a vast resource input such as capital, highly educated man power, R & D related infrastructure etc. In fact, it is also safe to say that the four East Asian science cities have functioned efficiently in terms of operating period, physical size, patent etc. At the same time, however, it can be pointed out that the four science cities expose their weaknesses in terms of the total number of employment and economic output. Therefore, it may be challenging tasks for the science cities to deal with how to cope with these weaknesses in rapidly changing global economic environment, technological development, and innovation networking. 7. Conclusions All cities and regions produce specific forms of spatial organization of the production process and create new spatial formation after hit by economic decline and restructuring. At the same time, these territories become the social spaces producing new forms of industrial, social, and technical structures. In a knowledge-based economy of the globalizing economic order the role of regions is very significant in order to create and to disperse knowledge. Particularly, geographical clusters of firms in a single sub-national region may contribute to transmitting certain kinds of knowledge between and among firms. In addition, 22

markets prefer to favour specialized firms with a coherent body of knowledge when knowledge creation and the use of new knowledge become increasingly important for maintaining and improving a firm’s competitiveness. With the formation of hard competition between nations based on the principles of a free market economy, high technology became the most important factor in achieving national competitiveness. Thus, many countries strengthened their technology policy and invested vast amounts of capital in research and development (R & D) projects. In order to carry out the R & D projects properly, they show a strong tendency to build science cities. To pursue a technology policy is to achieve three goals. The first is reindustrialisation, which can create new jobs in new industries. The second objective is regional development for those regions that are most in need. Last, but not least, is the creation of synergy resulting from technological and organizational innovations. Under these circumstances, East Asian nations have launched their national projects to build science cities since the 1960s. These are Japanese Tsukuba Science City (TSC) in 1967, South Korean Daedeok Innopolis (DI) in 1973, Taiwanese Hsinchu Science based Industrial Park (HSIP) in 1980, and Zhongguancun Science Park (ZSP) in 1988. These innovative clusters have been established as their national projects, and the governments have been deeply involved in these projects. As pointed out, these clusters are focused on upgrading technological capability and sustainable economic development at national and regional levels. Along with the national and local governments, industries and universities play important roles in these areas in order to create networks based on mutual interests and technology innovation. All clusters are keen to develop or to strengthen specific strategic technological areas such as IT technology, biotechnology, and life sciences. There are clear tendencies among these clusters. TSC and DI target on various scopes of technological areas while HSIP and ZSP mainly focuses on IT technology. The habitat of these clusters varies to a high extent as well. TSC, DI and ZSP pose mostly a centralized structure controlled by their central governments. HSIP has a unique and most proper habitat balanced between influences of the government and industry. Additionally, the major function of HSIP is combined by R & D activity and production that results in direct effects on technology innovation as well as regional economic growth. Last, but not least, ZSP includes a built-in sales outlet nearby first time in the East Asian science parks. The central government initiated approach to build a science city costs immense regardless which science cities are in East Asia. Due to such a vast capital investment and a need of highly qualified manpower, establishing of science cities use to take a long construction period. At the same time, this approach does not result in full effects expected such as technology innovation and regional economic growth. Particularly TSC and DI represent this phenomenon, while HSIP and ZSP realize their target relatively better. In order to minimize this kind of negative effects, HSIP and ZSP have created a unique approach from the starting point, which is a combined approach between R & D activities, production, and sales. Additionally, HSIP and ZSP are keen to bring 23

capital and manpower abroad in order to intensify technology innovation and transfer that link to production development directly. This approach has been succeeded in a high performance particularly after the second half of the 1990s with the upswing trend of global IT industries. Regarding high-tech venture businesses, DI and ZSP are mostly active to boost technology development and commercialization, while TSC and HSIP focus on supporting local companies indirectly based on collaboration with universities. These different approaches are fully dependent on their development strategies. In sum, the government involvement in national projects is inevitable particularly in the East Asian context. At the same time, however, a combined approach with private sectors is also significant in order to vitalize activities in science cities. Furthermore, a fundamental strategy, which is based on either only R & D activity or combining R & D activity with production and sales plays also important roles in developing science cities successfully. This holistic approach may enable the four East Asian clusters to compete with other global innovative clusters. References Abramson, M. (1989) Minban Science Firms in China, China Exchange News Vol.17, No.4, pp.12-17 Bassanini, A. P. & Dosi, G. (2001) When and how change and human will can twist the arms of clio, in R. Garud & P. Karnoe (eds.) Path dependence and creation, Mahwah, NJ & London, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Brenner, N. (1998) Global Cities, Global States: Global City Formation and State Territorial Restructuring in Contemporary Europe, Review of International Political Economy, Vol. 5, No.1, pp.1-37 Castells, M. & Hall, P. (1994) Technopoles of the World: The Making 21st Century Industrial Complexes, London/ New York: Routledge Chesbrough, H. W. (2003a) Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology, Boston: Harvard Business School Press Chesbrough, H. W. (2003b) The Era of Open Innovation, MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol.44, No.3, pp.35-41 Cheung, C. W. (1990) The New Industrial space – Science Parks in Singapore and Taiwan, Asian Geographer,, Vol.9, No.1, pp.65-85 DAEDEOK SCIENCE TOWN MANAGEMENT OFFICE (2002a) Comprehensive Plan and Mid and Long Term Development Strategy, DASTO, Daejeon DAEDEOK SCIENCE TOWN MANAGEMENT OFFICE (2002b) Comprehensive Plan and Mid and Long Term Development Strategy, DASTO, Daejeon Daedeok Innopolis (2009) Daedeok Innopolis: Hub for Korean Knowledge Economy, 24

Daejeon: Daedeok Innopolis David, P. (1985) Clio and the Economics of QWERTY, Economic History, Vol. 75, No.2, pp.227-323 David, P. (2000) Understanding Digital Technology’s Evolution and the Path of Measured Productivity Growth: Present and Future in the Mirror of the Past, in E. Brynolfsson and B. Kahin (eds.) Understanding the Digital Economy, Boston: MIT Press Dearing, J. W. (1995) Frowing a Japanese Science City: Communication in scienctific research, London & New York: Routledge Dicken, P. (2007) Global Shift: Transforming the World Economy, London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd. Dosi, G. (1982) Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technological Change, Research Policy Vol.11, No.3, pp.147-162 Florida, R (2005) The World is Spiky, The Atlantic Monthly, Oct., pp.48-51 Florida, R. (2008) Who’s Your City: How the Creative Economy is Making Where to Live the Most Important Decision of Your Life, Basic Books: Random House Garud, R. and Karnoe, P. (2000) Path Creation As a Process of Mindful Deviation, in J. T. Jussi and S. Marttila (eds.) Paper was presented in the Conference on Knowledge and Innovation, May 25-26, Helsinki Grabher, G. (1993) The Weakness of Strong Ties: The Lock-in of Regional Development in the Ruhr Area, in G. Grabher (ed.) The Embedded Firm: On the Socio-Economics of Industrial Networks, London: Routledge Lambert, B. H. (2000) Building Innovative Communities: Lessons from Japan’s Science City Projects, Stockholm: EIJS Maskell, P. & Malmberg, A. (1999) Localized Learning and Industrial Competitiveness, Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol.23, No.2, pp.167-186 Maskell, P. (2001) Knowledge Creation and Diffusion in Geographic Clusters: 25

Regional Development Implications, in D. Felsenstein/ R. McQuaid/ P. McCann/ D. Shefer (eds) Public Investment and Regional Economic Development, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc., pp.59-74 Mouleart, F. (2000) Globalization and Integrated Area Development in European Cities, Oxford: Oxford University Press OECD (2000) Science, Technology and Industry Outlook, Paris: OECD Park, S-C (2000) The Roles of High-Tech Oriented Companies in Science Cities: A Case Study on Tsukuba Science City in Japan and Daedeok Science Town in South Korea, Korea Observer, Vol.31, No.1, pp.73-102 PARK, S-C (2004) The City of Brain in South Korea: Daedok Science Town, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 28, Nos. 3/4/5/6, pp.602-614 PARK, S-C (2009) Seoul Digital Complex as a Strategy for Building Innovative Cluster, AI & Society, Vol.24, No.4, pp.393-402 Rauch, J. E. (1993) Does history matter only when it matters little? The case of city – industry location, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol.108, No.3, pp.843-867 Rogers, E. M. & Larsen, J. K. (1984) Silicon Valley Fever, Neww York: Basic Books Saxenian, A. (1994) Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128, Cambridge/ London: Harvard University Press Schienstock, G. (1996) Transformation Regionaler Ökonomien: Das Beispiel BadenWürttemberg, in J. Flecker and Hofbauer (eds.) Vernutzung und Vereinnahmung, Arbeit zwischen Internationalisierung und neuen Managementkonzepten, Österreichsche Zeitschrift für Soziologie, Sonderband 3, Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, pp.163-194 Schienstock, G. (1997) The Transformation of Regional Governance: Institutional Lock-ins and the Development of Lean Production in Baden-Württemberg, in R. Whitley and P. H. Kristensen (eds.) Governance at Work: the Social Regulation of Economic Relations in Europe, Oxford: Oxford University Press Schienstock, G. and Hämäläinen, T. (2001) Transformation of the Finnish Innovation System: A Network Approach, SITRA Reports Series 7, Helsinki: SITRA Schienstock, G. (2007a) From Path Dependency to Path Creation: Finland on Its Way to the Knowledge-based Economy, Current Sociology, Vol.55, No. 1, Special Issue: Current Economic Sociology: Problems and Prospects, January, pp.92-109 Schienstock, G. (2007b) From Path Dependency to Path Creation? Baden Württemberg and the Future of the German Model, in Hämäläinen, T. and Heiskala, R. (eds.) Social Innovations, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Making Sense of Structural Adjustment Processes in Industrial Sectors, Regions and Societies, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar 26

Schumpeter, J. A. (1942) The Theory of Economic Development, London: Oxford University Press SCIENCE PARK ADMINISTRATION (2003) Annual Report 2002, Hsinchu: Science Park Administration SCIENCE PARK ADMINISTRATION (2009) Annual Report 2008, Hsinchu: Science Park Administration Scott, A. J. (1992) the southern California medical device industry: Innovation, new firm formation, and location, Research Policy, Vol.21, No.2, pp.145-161 Scott, A. J. (1996) Regional Motors of the Global Economy, Futures, Vol. 28, No.5, pp.391-411 Shachar, A. (1997) Economic globalization and urban dynamics, in F. Moulaert & A. J. Scott (eds.) cities, enterprises and society on the eve of the 21st century, London: Pinter, pp.18-32 Tan, J. (2006) Growth of industry clusters and innovation: Lessons from Beijing Zhongguancun Science Park, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol.21, pp.827-850 Wang. J. C. (1999) In search of innovativeness: the case of Zhongguancun, In: Malecki, E. and Oina, P. (eds.) Making Connections: Technological Learning and Regional Economic Change, Ashgate, Vermont, pp.205-230 Wang, X. (2000) Zhongguancun Science Park: A SWOT Analysis, Visiting researcher series No.10 in Institute of Southeast Asian Studies Websites www.wikipedia.org www.tsukuba-network.jp, www.ddi.or.kr www.sipa.gov.tw www.jointventure.org www.ebeijing.gov.cn www.zgc.gov.cn

27

28