IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v182y2022ics0040162522003201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring science park location choice: A stated choice experiment among Dutch technology-based firms

Author

Listed:
  • Ng, Wei Keat Benny
  • Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne
  • Cloodt, Myriam
  • Arentze, Theo

Abstract

Technology development is increasingly important for creating efficient and sustainable economies. Policy-makers have encouraged the co-location of technology-based firms that could lead to innovation benefits. One of the innovation policies are science parks, area developments where technology-based firms, universities and research institutes co-locate. Science parks enable firms to focus on their core activities. However, the trade-off that technology-based firms make regarding the science park location choice and the impact of organisational characteristics on these trade-offs is unknown. To collect tenant preference data, an exploratory survey with a stated choice experiment is distributed among technology-based firms both on and off science parks in the Netherlands. This approach allows for the estimation of the utilities that firms assign to design-related attributes and their willingness to pay for these attributes. Results show that science park tenants prefer locations with universities within the same area, shared business support and leisure facilities and near station locations relatively more than off-park counterparts do. Tenant firms are most eager to pay for the proximity of the university followed by provided R&D facilities, accessibility of the location, provided shared facilities, technological focus of the area and lastly events held in the area.

Suggested Citation

  • Ng, Wei Keat Benny & Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne & Cloodt, Myriam & Arentze, Theo, 2022. "Exploring science park location choice: A stated choice experiment among Dutch technology-based firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:182:y:2022:i:c:s0040162522003201
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121796
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162522003201
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121796?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elisa Salvador, 2011. "Are science parks and incubators good “brand names” for spin-offs? The case study of Turin," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 203-232, April.
    2. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Martin Woerter, 2012. "Technology proximity between firms and universities and technology transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(6), pages 828-866, December.
    4. Albahari, Alberto & Pérez-Canto, Salvador & Barge-Gil, Andrés & Modrego, Aurelia, 2017. "Technology Parks versus Science Parks: Does the university make the difference?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 13-28.
    5. Francesco Lamperti & Roberto Mavilia & Simona Castellini, 2017. "The role of Science Parks: a puzzle of growth, innovation and R&D investments," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 158-183, February.
    6. Edler, Jakob & Georghiou, Luke, 2007. "Public procurement and innovation--Resurrecting the demand side," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 949-963, September.
    7. Clarysse, Bart & Wright, Mike & Bruneel, Johan & Mahajan, Aarti, 2014. "Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1164-1176.
    8. Michael Storper & Anthony J. Venables, 2004. "Buzz: face-to-face contact and the urban economy," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 351-370, August.
    9. Yang, Chih-Hai & Motohashi, Kazuyuki & Chen, Jong-Rong, 2009. "Are new technology-based firms located on science parks really more innovative?: Evidence from Taiwan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 77-85, February.
    10. Albert Link & John Scott, 2006. "U.S. University Research Parks," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 43-55, April.
    11. Martijn Burger & Evert Meijers, 2012. "Form Follows Function? Linking Morphological and Functional Polycentricity," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 49(5), pages 1127-1149, April.
    12. Özgecan Koçak & Özge Can, 2014. "Determinants of inter-firm networks among tenants of science technology parks," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 23(2), pages 467-492.
    13. Rui Baptista & Joana Mendonça, 2010. "Proximity to knowledge sources and the location of knowledge-based start-ups," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 45(1), pages 5-29, August.
    14. Roderik Ponds & Frank Van Oort & Koen Frenken, 2007. "The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 86(3), pages 423-443, August.
    15. de Bok, Michael & van Oort, Frank, 2011. "Agglomeration economies, accessibility, and the spatial choice behavior of relocating firms," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 4(1), pages 5-24.
    16. Vásquez-Urriago, Ángela Rocío & Barge-Gil, Andrés & Modrego Rico, Aurelia, 2016. "Science and Technology Parks and cooperation for innovation: Empirical evidence from Spain," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 137-147.
    17. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2010. "Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 306-333, March.
    18. David Norburn, 1989. "The chief executive: A breed apart," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(1), pages 1-15, January.
    19. Audretsch, David B. & Lehmann, Erik E. & Warning, Susanne, 2005. "University spillovers and new firm location," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1113-1122, September.
    20. Ladenburg, Jacob & Olsen, Søren Bøye, 2014. "Augmenting short Cheap Talk scripts with a repeated Opt-Out Reminder in Choice Experiment surveys," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 39-63.
    21. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    22. Maryann Feldman, 1999. "The New Economics Of Innovation, Spillovers And Agglomeration: Areview Of Empirical Studies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1-2), pages 5-25.
    23. Ng, Wei Keat Benny & Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne & Cloodt, Myriam & Arentze, Theo, 2021. "Perceptual measures of science parks: Tenant firms’ associations between science park attributes and benefits," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    24. Wang, Zhaoxing & He, Qile & Xia, Senmao & Sarpong, David & Xiong, Ailun & Maas, Gideon, 2020. "Capacities of business incubator and regional innovation performance," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    25. Paul Westhead & Stephen Batstone, 1999. "Perceived benefits of a managed science park location," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 129-154, April.
    26. Danny Soetanto & Sarah Jack, 2013. "Business incubators and the networks of technology-based firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 432-453, August.
    27. Elisa Salvador & Ilaria Mariotti & Fabrizio Conicella, 2013. "Science Park or Innovation Cluster?" Similarities and differences in physical and virtual firms' agglomeration phenomena," Post-Print hal-02273841, HAL.
    28. Bhat, Chandra R., 2003. "Simulation estimation of mixed discrete choice models using randomized and scrambled Halton sequences," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 837-855, November.
    29. Eva-María Mora-Valentín & Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado & Juan-José Nájera-Sánchez, 2018. "Mapping the conceptual structure of science and technology parks," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1410-1435, October.
    30. Albahari, Alberto & Pérez-Canto, Salvador & Landoni, Paolo, 2010. "Science and Technology Parks impacts on tenant organisations: a review of literature," MPRA Paper 41914, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    31. Danilo Liberati & Marco Marinucci & Giulia Martina Tanzi, 2016. "Science and technology parks in Italy: main features and analysis of their effects on the firms hosted," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 694-729, August.
    32. Alberto Albahari & Andrés Barge‐Gil & Salvador Pérez‐Canto & Aurelia Modrego, 2018. "The influence of science and technology park characteristics on firms' innovation results," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(2), pages 253-279, June.
    33. Ng, Wei Keat Benny & Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne & Cloodt, Myriam & Arentze, Theo, 2019. "Towards a segmentation of science parks: A typology study on science parks in Europe," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 719-732.
    34. Link, Albert N. & Scott, John T., 2003. "U.S. science parks: the diffusion of an innovation and its effects on the academic missions of universities," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1323-1356, November.
    35. Mike Wright & Xiaohui Liu & Trevor Buck & Igor Filatotchev, 2008. "Returnee Entrepreneurs, Science Park Location Choice and Performance: An Analysis of High–Technology SMEs in China," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 32(1), pages 131-155, January.
    36. Richard Ferguson & Christer Olofsson, 2004. "Science Parks and the Development of NTBFs-- Location, Survival and Growth," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 5-17, January.
    37. Henry Renski, 2011. "External economies of localization, urbanization and industrial diversity and new firm survival," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 90(3), pages 473-502, August.
    38. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, September.
    39. Siegel, Donald S. & Westhead, Paul & Wright, Mike, 2003. "Assessing the impact of university science parks on research productivity: exploratory firm-level evidence from the United Kingdom," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1357-1369, November.
    40. André Spithoven, 2015. "Technology transfer as a driver for location of R%D active firms on science parks," International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(1), pages 80-101.
    41. Kholekile L. Gwebu & Jeffrey Sohl & Jing Wang, 2019. "Differential performance of science park firms: an integrative model," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 193-211, January.
    42. Jacques-Laurent Ravix, 2014. "Localization, innovation and entrepreneurship: an appraisal of the analytical impact of Marshall's notion of industrial atmosphere," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(2), pages 63-81.
    43. Maruf Sanni & A.A. Egbetokun & W.O. Siyanbola, 2010. "A model for the design and development of a Science and Technology Park in developing countries," International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1), pages 62-81.
    44. Hensher,David A. & Rose,John M. & Greene,William H., 2015. "Applied Choice Analysis," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107465923, September.
    45. Fernando Ubeda & Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado & Eva-María Mora-Valentín, 2019. "Do firms located in science and technology parks enhance innovation performance? The effect of absorptive capacity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 21-48, February.
    46. Mariagrazia Squicciarini, 2008. "Science Parks’ tenants versus out-of-Park firms: who innovates more? A duration model," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 45-71, February.
    47. Ron Boschma & Koen Frenken, 2010. "The Spatial Evolution of Innovation Networks: A Proximity Perspective," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    48. Lori Rosenkopf & Atul Nerkar, 2001. "Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 287-306, April.
    49. Alberto Albahari & Magnus Klofsten & Juan Carlos Rubio-Romero, 2019. "Science and Technology Parks: a study of value creation for park tenants," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1256-1272, August.
    50. Koh, Francis C. C. & Koh, Winston T. H. & Tschang, Feichin Ted, 2005. "An analytical framework for science parks and technology districts with an application to Singapore," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 217-239, March.
    51. Good, Matthew & Knockaert, Mirjam & Soppe, Birthe & Wright, Mike, 2019. "The technology transfer ecosystem in academia. An organizational design perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 35-50.
    52. Link, Albert N & Link, Kevin R, 2003. "On the Growth of U.S. Science Parks," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 81-85, January.
    53. Laura Lecluyse & Mirjam Knockaert & André Spithoven, 2019. "The contribution of science parks: a literature review and future research agenda," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 559-595, April.
    54. Richard Shearmur & David Doloreux, 2000. "Science Parks: Actors or Reactors? Canadian Science Parks in Their Urban Context," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(6), pages 1065-1082, June.
    55. Almeida, Paul & Kogut, Bruce, 1997. "The Exploration of Technological Diversity and the Geographic Localization of Innovation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 21-31, February.
    56. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    57. Stuart, Toby & Sorenson, Olav, 2003. "The geography of opportunity: spatial heterogeneity in founding rates and the performance of biotechnology firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 229-253, February.
    58. Agrawal, Ajay & Cockburn, Iain, 2003. "The anchor tenant hypothesis: exploring the role of large, local, R&D-intensive firms in regional innovation systems," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1227-1253, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ng, Wei Keat Benny & Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne & Cloodt, Myriam & Arentze, Theo, 2021. "Perceptual measures of science parks: Tenant firms’ associations between science park attributes and benefits," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    2. Alberto Albahari & Andrés Barge-Gil & Salvador Pérez-Canto & Paolo Landoni, 2023. "The effect of science and technology parks on tenant firms: a literature review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1489-1531, August.
    3. T. Theeranattapong & D. Pickernell & C. Simms, 2021. "Systematic literature review paper: the regional innovation system-university-science park nexus," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 2017-2050, December.
    4. Laura Lecluyse & Mirjam Knockaert & André Spithoven, 2019. "The contribution of science parks: a literature review and future research agenda," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 559-595, April.
    5. Ng, Wei Keat Benny & Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne & Cloodt, Myriam & Arentze, Theo, 2019. "Towards a segmentation of science parks: A typology study on science parks in Europe," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 719-732.
    6. Fernando Ubeda & Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado & Eva-María Mora-Valentín, 2019. "Do firms located in science and technology parks enhance innovation performance? The effect of absorptive capacity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 21-48, February.
    7. Taiane Quaresma Leite & André Luis Silva & Joaquim Ramos Silva & Sérgio Evangelista Silva, 2023. "A Multilevel Analysis of the Interaction Between Science Parks and External Agents: a Study in Brazil and Portugal," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(2), pages 1790-1829, June.
    8. Alberto Albahari & Magnus Klofsten & Juan Carlos Rubio-Romero, 2019. "Science and Technology Parks: a study of value creation for park tenants," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1256-1272, August.
    9. Kelsi G. Hobbs & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2017. "Science and technology parks: an annotated and analytical literature review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 957-976, August.
    10. Laspia, Alessandro & Sansone, Giuliano & Landoni, Paolo & Racanelli, Domenico & Bartezzaghi, Emilio, 2021. "The organization of innovation services in science and technology parks: Evidence from a multi-case study analysis in Europe," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    11. Good, Matthew & Knockaert, Mirjam & Soppe, Birthe & Wright, Mike, 2019. "The technology transfer ecosystem in academia. An organizational design perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 35-50.
    12. Wei Keat Benny Ng & Robin Junker & Rianne Appel-Meulenbroek & Myriam Cloodt & Theo Arentze, 2020. "Perceived benefits of science park attributes among park tenants in the Netherlands," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1196-1227, August.
    13. Eduardo Cadorin & Magnus Klofsten & Hans Löfsten, 2021. "Science Parks, talent attraction and stakeholder involvement: an international study," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 1-28, February.
    14. Lecluyse, Laura & Knockaert, Mirjam, 2020. "Disentangling satisfaction of tenants on science parks: A multiple case study in Belgium," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    15. Corrocher, Nicoletta & Lamperti, Francesco & Mavilia, Roberto, 2019. "Do science parks sustain or trigger innovation? Empirical evidence from Italy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 140-151.
    16. Albahari, Alberto & Pérez-Canto, Salvador & Barge-Gil, Andrés & Modrego, Aurelia, 2017. "Technology Parks versus Science Parks: Does the university make the difference?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 13-28.
    17. Eva-María Mora-Valentín & Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado & Juan-José Nájera-Sánchez, 2018. "Mapping the conceptual structure of science and technology parks," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1410-1435, October.
    18. Marisa Ramírez-Alesón & Marta Fernández-Olmos, 2018. "Unravelling the effects of Science Parks on the innovation performance of NTBFs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 482-505, April.
    19. Laura Lecluyse & Mirjam Knockaert & Annelore Huyghe, 2023. "It is not because it is offered that it is used: an investigation into firm-level determinants of use intensity of buffering services in science parks," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 85-104, June.
    20. Klofsten, Magnus & Lundmark, Erik & Wennberg, Karl & Bank, Megan, 2019. "Incubator specialization and size: divergent paths towards operational scale," Ratio Working Papers 326, The Ratio Institute.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Science park; Technology-based firm; Preference; Stated choice experiment; Trade-off;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights
    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:182:y:2022:i:c:s0040162522003201. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.