Introduction 1 Preamble to the Study of Innovation

Notes

Introduction

1 . Some passages of this thesis – exclusively written by the author – have been used in Gugler et al. (2011). This conference paper was presented – and never published – at the 2011 meeting of the Academy of International Business (AIB) in Nagoya (Japan) in order to obtain feedback to improve the quality of this research.

1 Preamble to the Study of Innovation

1 . Schumpeter’s groundbreaking contribution to bringing innovation into main- stream economics will be investigated in more detail in Chapter 2. 2 . A qualitative distinction between the first innovation and its subsequent introduction(s) in new contexts may nevertheless be discussed. 3 . Although innovation could once have been reduced to the simple satisfaction of human needs, it is at best no more than a half-truth (Williams, 2000, p. 8). As put forward in some detail in Chapter 2, it is now well established in the literature that innovation is crucial for economies as they approach the frontiers of knowledge and the possibility of integrating and adapting exogenous technologies tends to disappear (Aghion and Howitt, 1992; Grossman and Helpman, 1991a, b; Lucas, 1988; Romer, 1990). For innovation-driven economies adopting existing technologies is no longer sufficient to increase productivity and, in the long run, innovation is the only means to expand standards of living (Sala-I-Martin et al., 2009, p. 7). Innovation is therefore no longer a simple means to satisfy a need but rather a sine qua non condition to maintain a competitive edge. 4 . As the term “innovation” is often associated with closely related notions such as intellectual property, invention, patent, R&D, science, technical progress or technology, Appendix 1 provides a brief glossary of these concepts. Some of these notions will naturally receive greater attention within this text as they are at the core of this research. 5 . The notion of patent will be analyzed in detail in Chapter 3. 6 . Similarly, many inventions in the automotive industry (such as the electric car, the solar car or the hydrogen engine) seem to take a disproportionately long time to enter the market because they are being purposefully delayed by the oil and automotive industry lobbies. 7 . Other examples of radical innovations are those which make a particular technology or know-how obsolete overnight. The development of digital printing and digital photography has, for instance, particularly challenged the offset printing industry and the photographic film industry (think about Kodak’s struggle to tran- sition towards digital technologies). 8 . The term “product” is used to cover both goods and services. 9 . For more detail about the definitions of the different types of innovation, please refer to the OECD (2005).

236 Notes 237

10 . Not to be confused with Vernon’s famous product life-cycle theory (Vernon, 1966). Although related, Vernon’s theory did not intend to develop a theory of technological evolution per se but an explanation of foreign production and FDI activity. 11 . The SPRU innovations database lists significant technological innovations intro- duced into the United Kingdom. It was developed by the Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU) at the University of Sussex, UK. 12 . A good literature review on organizational innovation has been provided by Lam (2005). 13 . Statistics on R&D are collected on the basis of the standard established by the OECD Frascati Manual (2002, p. 30): “R&D comprise creative work undertaken on a systematic basis in order to increase the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of man, culture and society, and the use of this stock of knowledge to devise new applications .” 14 . The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) provides the facility to seek patent rights in a large number of countries by filing a single international application with a single patent office. In other words, PCT patents can be seen as a “worldwide patent application” (OECD, 2009b, p. 64). 15 . The role of universities and other institutes of higher learning in the innovation process must nevertheless not be underestimated. They play a key role in science – defined as “the unfettered search for knowledge for the sake of understanding ” (Feldman, 2004, p. 5) – which can be the source of many innovations. Moreover, without specific government incentives, private firms are less likely to engage in basic research due to its very uncertainty and the unpredictable returns on investment (Feldman, 2004, p. 5ss). 16 . Copyright requirements did not permit to reproduce the value chain model in multiple sections of this book.

2 Innovation and Economic Performance

1 . The dynamics of the system described by Smith and Ricardo can be summarized as follows: capital accumulation leads to an increase in work demand which transiently causes an upward pressure on wages until demography picks up. A larger pool of workers brings about a larger demand for grains thus inducing the cultivation of less productive lands, generating a rise in grain price, land income and nominal wages (minimum living wage). Wages and land income grow at the expense of profit, which decreases until no further investment is undertaken. The cessation of capital accumulation stops the demographic growth and leads to a stabilization of the whole economic system, defined as the stationary state (Guellec and Ralle, 2003, p. 27–28). 2 . It is worth noting that Smith was not the first thinker to stress the benefits of the division of labor. In his book on the history of economic thought, Friboulet (2009, p. 43) reported that Plato, Aristotle, Hutcheson and Mandeville already recognized, to some extent, the virtues of the division of labor. 3 . Economic evolution was described by Schumpeter as “ the changes in the economic process brought about by innovation, together with all their effects, and the response to them by the economic system ” (Schumpeter, 1939, vol. I, p. 86). 4 . For detailed information on Marx’s works, please refer to the three volumes of his book “ Capital: A Critique of Political Economy ” (Marx, 1954/1956/1959). 238 Notes

5 . As noted by Schumpeter (1939, p. 103–104): “ The failure ... to visualize clearly entrepreneurial activity as a distinct function sui generis, is the common fault of both the economic and the sociological analysis of the classic and of Karl Marx .” 6 . It is worth noting that the notion of “cluster” used by Schumpeter refers more to a series of innovations (geographically concentrated or not), triggered by an important discovery (such as the invention of the Internet, which has generated a wide array of inventions and innovations in many different fields), rather than the concept of “cluster” popularized by Porter (1990, 1994) to reflect the benefits of agglomeration. Although related, the notion of “cluster” used by Schumpeter is distinct from Porter’s concept of “cluster” central to this thesis and rooted in the works of Marshall (1890/1916) and early economic geographers such as von Thünen (1826), Weber (1909/1929) or Hotelling (1929) (cf. Chapter 5). 7 . Maddison (2001) provided a rich analysis reviewing the major stylized facts about growth. 8 . It is worth noting that there had been attempts to model the growth process since the late 1930s. However, technological change was not integrated as a potential factor of sustained growth in the long run. The Keynesian growth model of Domar (1947) and Harrod (1948) is particularly representative. Economic growth was explained in terms of productivity of capital and intensity of saving (Lecaillon et al., 2008, p. 232ss.). According to these authors, a balanced growth of the economy was unlikely to be reached as it implied a parallel increase in the rate of investment and of the ratio between the share of savings and the productivity of capital (Lecaillon et al., 2008, p. 233). Although Harrod and Domar were very pessimistic about the possibility of a lasting growth in the long term, they developed a production function in which output (Y ) was a function of capital ( K ), which set the foundation of subsequent exogenous and endogenous growth models (Guellec and Ralle, 2003, p. 30). 9 . K encompassed both human and physical capital. 10 . The marginal product F '( k ) is positive but diminishes as K increases because of the decreasing marginal productivity of capital. 11 . It is worth noting that post Second World War growth models (Domar, 1947; Harrod, 1948) and the Cobb-Douglas function (Cobb and Douglas, 1928; Douglas, 1976) (explaining growth of production (output) as a function of two factors (capital and labor raised to the power α and β –constant values representing capital and labor elasticity, determined by available technology) and a factor A capturing total factor productivity (or the non-explained share of productivity growth – implicitly technological progress) have been particularly popular among scholars and business cycle research institutes to evaluate and forecast production’s potential growth rate (OECD, 2012b). For instance, in Switzerland the explanation of growth has long relied on a Cobb-Douglas framework (i.a. IMF, 2005; Minsch and Sturm, 2011). 12 . Please refer to Jones and Manuelli (2005) for a synthetic presentation of neoclassical models of growth. 13 . AK models have been named after the production function they rely on. As emphasized in equation (1), output in AK models is a function of a fixed coefficient “A” and capital “K”. 14 . Landes (1998) estimated that while the divergence in productivity and income per capita between the richest and the poorest country in the world 250 years ago was approximately 5:1, this ratio has increased roughly to 400:1 today. 15 . A good literature review has been provided by Pianta (2005). Notes 239

16 . Literature reviews have been provided by Petit (1995), Chennells and Van Reenen (1999) or Spiezia and Vivarelli (2002). 17 . The work of Sauvy (1981) presented in Chapter 1 (Section 1.1) can be included in this stream of research. 18 . The debate on compensation mechanisms dates back to Ricardo and Marx and refers to the idea that the economic system has the ability to counterbalance the initial labor-saving effects of some innovations (Pianta, 2005, p. 580). For instance, Spiezia and Vivarelli (2002, p. 102) put forward that new machines could trigger compensation mechanisms: “the same process innovations that displace workers in the user industries create jobs in the capital sectors where the new machines are produced .” Decrease in prices, new investment, decrease in wages, increase in income or new products are other examples of sources of compensation mechanisms (Pianta, 2005, p. 581). 19 . While classical economists such as Smith were interested in understanding growth patterns at country level, this issue has been relatively overlooked in neoclassical economics, more concerned with developing mechanical equilibrium models of static resource allocation and efficiency (Cantwell, 2005, p. 543). 20 . Please refer to Cantwell (2005) for an in-depth literature review. 21 . These 12 pillars are: institutions, infrastructure, macroeconomic environment, health and primary education, higher education and training, goods market efficiency, labor market efficiency, technological readiness, market size, business sophistication and innovation (WEF, 2012, p. 4–8).

3 The Measurement of Innovation

1 . For detailed information about these categories, please refer to OECD (2002, p. 30ss.). 2 . As emphasized by the OECD (2002, p. 22), indicators of R&D facilities could be envisaged but are seldom collected and indicators of national R&D effort can be derived for international comparison from gross expenditure on R&D (GERD) to GDP. 3 . However, it does not mean that returns on investment in R&D are low. It just signifies that innovating may require important R&D investment (as discussed in this section). 4 . Hall et al. (2010, p. 1052ss.) provides an in-depth review of an impressive number of econometric studies analyzing returns on R&D at firm, industry and country levels. 5 . Other less common indicators could have been presented but because of their minor impact on the assessment of innovation activity they are not developed here. Among these indicators are: bibliometric data, technometric indicators, synthetic indicators developed for scoreboard, such as those of the Global Competitiveness Report (WEF, 2011), or small-scale databases elaborated by researchers for specific research projects such as the MERIT-CATI database or the DISKO surveys (Smith, 2005, pp. 152–153). 6 . An overview of their analyses can be found in OECD (1994). 7 . An important legal issue concerns the exhaustion of patent rights and parallel imports. As noted by the European Union (2013, Internet source): “The term parallel imports is used when products manufactured and marketed by the patent holder in one country are imported by another company. The legal principle here is “exhaustion”, the idea that once [for example] a pharmaceutical company has 240 Notes

sold its product its patent rights are exhausted and it no longer has any rights over what happens to the product. This therefore allows any other company to buy the product in a country where the selling price is lower and import it in order to profit financially from the difference in prices. The TRIPS agreement points out that disputes relating to these parallel imports cannot be handled by the WTO. This means in effect, as stated in the Doha Declaration, that each member of the WTO remains free to establish its own regime for exhaustion.” As noted by the Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property (2013b, Internet source), there are three basic variants of patent rights’ exhaustion: the national exhaustion, the regional exhaustion and the international exhaustion. For further details please refer to Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property (2013, Internet source) or WIPO (2013, Internet source). 8 . A recent paper by De Rassenfosse (2010, pp. 7–9) investigates in more details the propensity to patent. He identified 6 dimensions influencing patent propensity: (1) Invention characteristics and the invention process, (2) Firm’s characteristics, (3) Firm’s attitude towards the use of patents, (4) Regime of appropriability, (5) Market factors, and (6) IP-related policies. Please refer to this article for further information.

5 The Clustering of Innovative Activity

1 . This framework has been used to design the New Global Competitiveness Index (GCI), reported by the World Economic Forum (WEF) in its Global Competitiveness Report (GCR) (WEF, 2008). 2 . The ineluctable interdependent relationship between firms’ and regions’ competitiveness has also been emphasized by Ketels (2008, p. 112): “The more productive companies can be at a location, the more successful this location will be in competition with other locations. And the more productive the companies located there, the higher the level of prosperity the location can sustain.” 3 . Although the benefits of agglomeration had long been acknowledged in the economic literature and the word “cluster” had already been used by some authors, Porter was the one who truly popularized the notion of cluster (see Note 22). 4 . See Gordon and McCann (2000) or Malmberg et al. (1996) for a good review of the antecedents of cluster theory. 5 . The ground-breaking work of Krugman and Porter was influenced by and triggered a wide array of research on the phenomenon of spatial agglomeration and the role of location in economics. The literature on growth pole and backward and forward linkages (Hirschman, 1958), agglomeration economies (Weber, 1909/1929; Lösch, 1954; Lloyd and Dicken, 1977; Goldstein and Gronberg, 1984; McCann, 1995; Ciccone and Hall, 1996; Fujita and Thisse, 1996), economic geography (Amin and Thrift, 1992; Stoper, 1997; Stoper and Salais, 1997), urban and regional economics (Scott, 1991; Glaeser, 1994; Henderson, 1996), regional science (Giarratani, 1994; Markusen, 1995), industrial districts (Becattini, 1987; Harrison, 1992; Pyke and Sengenberger, 1992), and social networks (Nohria, 1992; Fukuyama, 1995; Burt, 1997; Harrison and Weiss, 1998) can here be cited (Porter, 1998a, p. 207). 6 . Although innovation scholars had identified the characteristics of the innovation process before the 1990s (Chapter 4), it was only with the revival of geographical questions in economics that they started to embrace spatial and innovation issues in a common perspective. Notes 241

7 . In a more recent paper, Foray et al. (2011) nevertheless pointed out the difficulties faced by policy makers in the implementation of smart specialization-oriented policies.

6 The Geography of Innovation in a Globalized Economy

1 . The enduring role of location in a globalizing economy has also been conscien- tiously studied in the literature on the regional nature of multinational enterprises. Rugman has been one of the most important contributors to this literature (i.a. Rugman and Hodgetts, 2001; Rugman, 2005; Rugman and Collinson, 2005, 2008; Rugman and Oh, 2006, 2007, 2008; Rugman and Verbeke, 2004a, b, 2008a, b; Rugman et al., 2007). 2 . According to the OECD (2008c, pp. 48–49) “Foreign direct investment reflects the objective of establishing a lasting interest by resident enterprise in one economy (direct investor) in an enterprise (direct investment enterprise) that is resident in an economy other than that of the direct investor. The lasting interest implies the existence of a long-term relationship between the direct investor and the direct investment enterprise and a significant degree of influence on the management of the enterprise. The direct or indirect ownership of 10 percent or more of the voting power of an enterprise resident in one economy by an investor resident in another economy is evidence of such relationship.” 3 . BRIC countries = Brazil, Russian Federation, India and China. Figures are at current prices and current exchange rates. FDI data for the Russian Federation was not available before 1992. 4 . It is worth noting that because of differences in their collection processes, OFDI and IFDI are not directly comparable with each other (Dunning and Lundan, 2008, p. 30; Gugler and Tinguely, 2011a/b). This explains, for instance, why the aggre- gated figures differ between tables 6.1 and 6.2. 5 . Rugman (1981, 1982, 2008), Rugman and Verbeke (2009), and Verbeke (2009) provided interesting alternative and complementary theories of MNE activity. They nevertheless do not supplant Dunning’s eclectic paradigm in the explanation of MNE activity. 6 . Given the fact that firms from factor-driven economies such as India or efficiency- driven economies such as China are beginning to perform strategic asset-seeking investments in innovation-driven economies and to compete with established Western firms, it would be better to speak of “firms that have reached the knowledge frontiers”. Nevertheless, the terminology used above and developed by the World Economic Forum (WEF, 2008) reflects the general idea. 7 . Although diversifying the research base is particularly important for increasing the probability of success of the innovation process, it is worth noting that this kind of investment is often primarily undertaken to penetrate the high-potential Chinese market. 8 . It is important to note that although clusters provide an environment conducive to innovation, firms may still be interested in the knowledge produced by “non- cluster” regions. 9 . It is worth noting that the capacity of firm X to constantly extend its competitive position and knowledge base is dependent on its ability to manage an increasingly complex network of geographically dispersed activities. 242 Notes

Part III

1 . Please refer to chapter three for detailed information on the strengths and weaknesses of patent data as an indicator of inventive/innovative activities.

7 Geographical Distribution of Inventive Activities and Inventive Performance in Switzerland

1 . Detailed methodological information will follow in the next section. 2 . For information, among the 131,010 entries recording inventors established in Switzerland and the 93,788 entries recording applicants established in Switzerland, respectively 3,009 (or 2.3 percent) and 1,309 (or 1.4 percent) were misallocated. 3 . Although having similar information would be utopic, multiple columns recording the different elements of an address (zip code, city, street, street number, etc.) would be much more convenient from an analytical standpoint. 4 . I would like to address special thanks to my friend and colleague Mr. Michael Keller for his precious help in the cleaning process. 5 . Our classification relies on the 2010 official classification of geographical levels in Switzerland (Les niveaux géographiques de la Suisse 2010 ) provided by the Swiss Federal Statistics Office. As the number of municipalities sharply decreased in Switzerland between 1977 and 2010 (because of mergers), inventors and applicants located in a defunct municipality have been reallocated to the new municipality as in 2010. 6 . An extract of the first page of a patent application at the EPO is presented in Appendix 2. 7 . Switzerland is a member state of the European Patent Organization (www.epo. org/about-us/organisation/member-states.html). 8 . While implementing a new policy at the level of single political jurisdiction is already challenging, if the region of analysis encompasses multiple jurisdictions, the task is even more complicated. Furthermore, it is worth noting that important discrepan- cies exist between similar types of political jurisdiction. For example, the political reality of Zurich, which has almost 400,000 inhabitants and is the economic heart of Switzerland, can be difficult to compare with the political reality of a municipality like Bure in the canton of Jura, which records only 600 inhabitants. 9 . Cantons can be compared to States in the U.S. and districts to Counties. In 2010, Switzerland recorded 26 cantons and 150 districts. 10 . Main regions and employment basins correspond to analytical regions designed by the Swiss Federal Statistics Office (FSO). In 2010, Switzerland recorded 7 main regions and 16 employment basins. While main regions are groups of cantons and have been created to match the NUTS 2 level of the Eurostat classification of regions, employment basins are an aggregation of the 106 spatial mobility regions elaborated on the basis of commuter flows. For more information about these analytical regions, please refer to FSO (2013a). 11 . Although main regions and employment basins go beyond official political jurisdictions, they still represent arbitrary geographical breakdowns. Furthermore, the innovation process tends to spill over national borders. This analysis does not account for inventors located in neighboring foreign regions and may therefore underestimate the inventive performance of Swiss border regions such as Geneva or Basel. This issue will nevertheless be taken into account in chapter nine. Notes 243

12 . Although the inventor’s address provided in a patent document can be his professional address (OECD, 2009b, p. 63), the patent analysis performed in the following sections has shown that inventors regularly list their private address. 13 . For more information about reference date, please refer to OECD (2009b). 14 . Full databases can be obtained by contacting the author of this thesis. 15 . In absolute terms, they nevertheless still recorded a large number of patent applications over the period 2000–2008. 16 . The gini coefficient is a widely used measure of statistical dispersion measuring the inequality of a distribution. It ranges from 0 to 1. A value of 0 represents perfect equality and a value of 1 total inequality. It is graphically measured as a ratio of the area between the line of perfect equality and the observed values represented by the Lorenz curve. Please refer to Dorfman (1979, p. 146), Audretsch and Feldman (1996), or Milanovic (1997) for more information. 17 . No data available before 1981. As mentioned by the Federal Statistics Office (FSO, 2012c), data on population levels started to be compiled in 1981. 18 . This breakdown is explained by data availability at the time of writing. Employment data come from the Business Census performed by the Federal Statistics Office and harmonized employment data (NOGA, 2008) were available only for the years 2001, 2005, and 2008 (FSO, 2012d). 19 . Basel-City, Basel-Country, Neuchâtel, Schaffhausen, St.Gallen, Vaud, Zug, and Zurich. 20 . The canton of Valais had 109,927 employees (full-time equivalent (FTE)) in 2005, the canton of Basel-Country 100,489, and the canton of Solothurn 95,666 (FSO, 2013b). 21 . Please refer to Gugler et al. (2010) for an overview of the main issues related to the lack of regional statistical data in Switzerland.

8 Sectoral Distribution of Inventive Activity and Specialization Patterns – Towards an Identification of Switzerland’s Main Inventive Clusters

1 . This chapter focuses on the identification of “inventive clusters” and not clusters in their strictest sense (cf. Chapter 5, Section 5.1). As emphasized in previous chapters, clusters are more than strong concentrations of inventive activity. Further investigations would therefore be necessary to determine whether the inventive clusters identified in this chapter have the critical mass to be defined as clusters in Porter’s sense. 2 . Patents applied for at the EPO are classified under the International Patent Classification (IPC) system, which is the system most commonly used to classify patents by technical classes (OECD, 2009b, p. 24). 3 . NACE (or Nomenclasture statistique des activités économiques dans la Communité européenne) is the official European statistical classification of economic activities (Eurostat, 2012, Internet source). 4 . 919.4997 (or 1.1 percent) patent applications had to be removed from the applicant database and 622.9725 (or 1.02 percent) from the inventor database. 5 . Data for the periods 1977–2008 and 2000–2008 can be generated on request. 6 . Results at the level of cantons, districts, and main regions can be generated on request. Refer to note no. 73 for more information about employment basins. 7 . Full rankings can be generated on request. 244 Notes

8 . As sector (33.5) Watches, clocks ranked 11th at the applicant level, it does not appear in table 7.9. Nevertheless, the employment basins of Neuchâtel, Biel/Bienne, and Geneva form the top three with respectively 27.74 percent, 25.55 percent, and 21.90 percent of total patent applications – explaining why Geneva is cited. 9 . Calculations have been made at all geographical level of analysis (cantons, districts, main regions, and employment basins). Detailed regional inventive profiles can be generated on request. 10 . RTA indexes have been calculated for all geographical level (districts, cantons, main regions, and employment basins) and for the periods 1977–2005 and 2000– 2005 and the year 2005. Detailed regional inventive profiles can be generated on request. 11 . Location quotients are the equivalent of RTA indexes and were used by Keller (2009) to measure the sectoral specialization patterns of the Swiss economy on the basis of employment data.

9 Clusters and the New Geography of Invention – An Empirical Analysis of Pharmaceutical Patents Applied for in the Basel Employment Basin

1 . In order to facilitate the discussion, a semi-structured form of interview was adopted (Ba Rgn and While, 1994; Wengraf, 2001; Flick et al., 2004). A set of questions articulated around four themes – (1) General questions about the interviewee, (2) In-house innovation management, (3) Cluster, environment, and innovation, (4) Cross-cluster relationships and the management of the innovation network – was prepared and questions were posed in accordance with the direction taken by the interview. The interview protocol can be consulted in Appendix 4. 2 . Countries identified in Table 9.2 have been classified as developed or developing on the basis of UNCTAD (1995, 2005, 2008). 3 . Czech Republic (CZ), Slovakia (SK) and Slovenia (SI) were considered as developing countries by UNCTAD in 1995 (UNCTAD, 1995). 4 . AU: States, CA: Provinces, CN: Provinces, IN: States, JP: Prefectures, U.S.A.: States. 5 . It is worth specifying that eliminating regional inequalities in terms of inventive performance is not possible because of the structural reality of each region (Appenzell Innerrhoden cannot be compared to Zurich). It has nevertheless been clearly shown that regions with similar profiles show marked inventive discrepan- cies, which points to Switzerland’s remaining inventive potential. References

Abraham-Frois, G. (1995), Dynamique économique , Huitième édition, Paris: Dalloz. Abramovitz, M. (1986), Catching-up, Forging Ahead, and Falling Behind, Journal of Economic History 46: 386–406. Abramovitz, M. (1994), “The Origins of the Postwar Catch-Up and Convergence Boom,” in J. Fagerberg, B. Verspagen, and N. von Tunzelmann (eds), The Dynamics of Technology, Trade and Growth , Aldershot: Edward Elgar, 21–52. Acemoglu, D. (2002), Technical Change, Inequality and the Labor Market, Journal of Economic Literature , 40 (1): 7–72. Acemoglu, D. and Zilibotti, F. (2001), Productivity Differences, Quarterly Journal of Economics 116: 563–606. Acs, Z.J. and Audretsch, D.B. (1988), Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis, The American Economic Review 78 (4): 678–690. Acs, Z.J. and Audretsch, D.B. (1990), Innovation and Small Firms, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Acs, Z.J., Audretsch, D.B. and Feldman, M.P. (1992), Real Effects of Academic Research: Comment, The American Economic Review 82 (1): 363–367. Acs, Z.J., Audretsch, D.B. and Feldman, M.P. (1994), R&D Spillovers and Recipient Firm Size, The Review of Economics and Statistics 76 (2): 336–340. Acs, Z.J., Anselin, L. and Varga, A. (2002), Patents and Innovation Counts as a Measures of Regional Production of New Knowledge, Research Policy 31 (7): 1069–1085. Adams, J.D. (2002), Comparative Localization of Academic and Industrial Spillovers, Journal of Economic Geography 2: 253–278. Addison, J. and Teixeira, P. (2001), Technology, Employment and Wages, Labour 15 (2): 191–219. Adner, R. and Levinthal, D. (2001), Demand Heterogeneity and Technology Evolution: Implications for Product and Process Innovation, Management Science 47 (5): 611–628. Agarwal, R. and Cockburn, I. (2003), The Anchor Tenant Hypothesis: Exploring the Role of Large, Local, R&D-Intensive Firms in Regional Innovation Systems, International Journal of Industrial Organization 21 (9): 1227–1253. Agarwal, R., Ganco, M. and Ziedonis, R.H. (2009), Reputations for Toughness in Patent Enforcement: Implications for Knowledge Spillovers via Inventor Mobility, Strategic Management Journal 30 (13): 1349–1374. AGEFI (2011), La Suisse accuse une baisse des dépôts de brevets, édition du jeudi 10 février 2011, p. 9. Aghion, P. and Howitt, P. (1992), A Model of Growth Through Creative Destruction, Econometrica 60 (2) (March): 323–351. Aghion, P. and Howitt, P. (1998), Endogenous Growth Theory , Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Aghion, P. and Howitt, P. (2010), L’Économie de la Croissance , Corpus Économie, Paris: Economica Alcacer, J. (2006), Location Choices Across the Value Chain: How Activity and Capability Influence Co-Location, Management Science 52 (10): 1457–1471.

245 246 References

Alcacer, J. and Zhao, M. (2009), Local R&D Strategies and Multi-Location Firms: The Role of Internal Linkages, Harvard Business School Working Paper 10–064. Aldieri, L. (2012), Knowledge Technological Proximity: Evidence from US and European Patents, SSRN working paper , November 1, 2012. Alecke, B., Alsleben, C., Scharr, F. and Untiedt, G. (2003), New Evidence on the Geographic Concentration of German Industries: Do High-Tech Clusters Really Matter?, Presented at the Uddevalla Symposium on Entrepreneurship, Spatial Industrial Clusters and Inter-Firm Networks, Uddevalla. Aliber, R.Z. (1970), “A Theory of Direct Foreign Investment,” in C.P. Kindleberger and D.B. Audresch (eds), The International Corporation: A Symposium, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Aliber, R.Z. (1971), “The Multinational Enterprise in a Multiple Currency World,” in J.H. Dunning (eds), The Multinational Enterprise , London: Allen and Unwin. Aliber, R.Z. (1983), “Money, Multinationals and Sovereigns,” in C.P. Kindleberger and D.B. Audresch (eds), The Multinational Corporation in the 1980s, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Almeida, P. (1996), Knowledge Sourcing by Foreign Multinationals: Patent Citation Analysis in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, Strategic Management Journal 17: 155–165. Almeida, P. and Kogut, B. (1997), The Exploration of Technological Diversity and the Geographic Localization of Innovation, Small Business Economics 9: 21–31. Ames, E. (1961), Research, Invention, Development and Innovation, American Economic Review 51 (3): 370–81. Amin, A. and Thrift, N. (1992), Neo-Marshallian Nodes in Global Networks, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 16 (4): 571–587. Amsden, A.H. (1989), Asia’s Next Giant: South Korea and Late Industrialization, New York: Oxford University Press. Anselin, L., Varga, A. and Acs, Z.J. (2000), Geographic and Sectoral Characteristics of Academic Knowledge Externalities, Papers in Regional Science 79 (4): 435–43. Antonucci, T. and Pianta, M. (2002), The Employment Effects of Product and Process Innovations in Europe, International Review of Applied Economics 16 (3): 295–308. Aoki, M. (1988), Information, Incentives and Bargaining in the Japanese Economy , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Archibugi, D. (1992), Patenting as an Indicator of Technological Innovation: A Review, Science and Public Policy 19 (6): 357–68. Archibugi, D. and Michie, J. (1995), The Globalization of Technology: A New Taxonomy, Cambridge Journal of Economics 19: 121–40. Archibugi, D. and Pianta, M. (1996), “Innovation Surveys and Patents as Technology Indicators: The State of the Art,” in OECD, Innovation, Patents and Technological Strategies , Paris: OECD. Arestis, P., Baddeley, M. and McCombie, J.S.L. (2007), Economic Growth: New Directions in Theory and Policy , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Arezki, R. and Van der Ploeg, F. (2007), Can the Natural Resource Curse be Turned into a Blessing? The Role of Trade Policies and Institutions, IMF Working papers 07/55. Argote, L. and Ingram, P. (2000), Knowledge Transfer: A Basis for the Competitive Advantage in Firms, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 82 (1): 150–169. Arora, A., Ceccagnoli, M. and Cohen, W. (2003), R&D and the Patent Premium, Working Paper No. 9431, Cambridge, MA: NBER. References 247

Arora, A., Ceccagnoli, M. and Cohen, W. (2008), R&D and the Patent Premium, International Journal of Industrial Organization 26 (5): 1153–1179. Arrow, K.J. (1962), “Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Inventions,” in R. Nelson (eds), The Rate and Direction of Innovative Activity, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Arrow, K.J. (1969), “The Organizational of Economic Activity: Issues Pertinent of the Choice of Market and Non-Market Considerations,” in Joint Economic Committee, The Analysis and Evaluation of Public Expenditures: the PPB System, Washington DC: US Government Printing Office. Arrow, K.J. (1984), “Statistical Requirements for Greek Economic Planning,” Collected Papers of Kenneth J. Arrow, Volume 4, The Economics of Information, Oxford: Blackwell. Arthur, W.B. (1994), Increasing Returns and Path Dependency in the Economy , Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Arundel, A. (2001), The Relative Effectiveness of Patents and Secrecy for Appropriation, Research Policy 30: 611–624. Arundel, A. and Kabla, I. (1998), What Percentage of Innovations are Patented?: Empirical Estimates for European Firms, Research Policy 27 (2), 127–141. Arundel, A. (2003), Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy: Report of the Know Survey , Maastricht: MERIT, University of Maastricht. Asheim, B.T. (1996), Industrial Districts as “Learning Regions”: A Condition for Prosperity? European Planning Studies 4 (4): 379–400. Asheim, B.T. (2000), “Industrial Districts: The Contributions of Marshall and Beyond,” in G. Clark, M.P. Feldman, and M. Gertler (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 413–431. Asheim, B.T. (2001), Learning Regions as Development Coalitions: Partnership as Governance in European Workfare States? International Journal of Action Research and Organizational Renewal 6 (1): 73–101. Asheim, B.T. and Coenen, L. (2005), Knowledge Bases and Regional Innovation Systems: Comparing Nordic Clusters, Regionalization of Innovation Policy 34 (8): 1173–1190. Asheim, B.T. and Cooke, P. (1999), “Local Learning and Interactive Innovation Networks in a Global Economy,” in E. Malecki and P. Oinas (eds), Making Connections: Technological Learning and Regional Economic Change , Aldershot: Ashgate, 154–178. Asheim, B.T. and Gertler, M.S. (2005), “The Geography of Innovation – Regional Innovation Systems,” in J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery and R. R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 291–317. Asheim, B.T. and Isaksen, A. (1997), Location, Agglomeration and Innovation: Towards Regional Innovation Systems in Norway? European Planning Studies 5 (3): 299–330. Asheim, B.T. and Isaksen, A. (2002), Regional Innovation Systems: The Integration of Local “Sticky” and Global “Ubiquitous” Knowledge, Jour nal of Technology Transfer 27 (1): 77–86. Asmussen, C.G., Pedersen, T. and Dhanaraj, C. (2009), Host-Country Environment and Subsidiary Competence: Extending the Diamond Network Model, Journal of International Business Studies 40 (1): 42–57. Astebro, T. (2004), Key Success Factors for Technological Entrepreneurs’ R&D Projects, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 51 (3): 314–21. Atherton, A. and Johnston, A. (2008), “Clusters Formation from the “Botton-up”: A Process Perspective,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Cluster Theory , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 93–113. 248 References

Audretsch, D.B. (2001), The Role of Small Firms in US Biotechnology Clusters, Small Business Economics 17: 3–15. Audretsch, D.B. and Aldridge, T.T. (2008), “The Knowledge Spillover Theory of Entrepreneurship and Spatial Clusters,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Cluster Theory , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 67–77. Audretsch, D.B. and Feldman, M.P. (1996), R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production, The American Economic Review , 86 (3): 630–640. Audretsch, D.B. and Stephan, P.E. (1996), Company-Scientist Locational Links: The Case of Biotechnology, American Economic Review 86 (3): 641–652. Audretsch, D.B., Lehmann, E.E. and Warning, S. (2005), University Spillovers and New Firm Location, Research Policy 34: 1113–1122. Augier, M. and Teece, D.J. (2006), Understanding Complex Organization: The Role of Know-How, Internal Structure and Human Behavior in the Evolution of Capabilities, Industrial and Corporate Change 15 (2): 395–416. Autor, D., Katz, L. and Krueger, A. (1998), Computing Inequality: Have Computers Changed the Labor Market?, Quarterly Journal of Economics 113: 1,169–214. Avnimelech, G., Schwartz, D. and Teubal, M. (2008), “Venture Capital Emergence and Startup-Intensive High-Tech Cluster Development: Evidence from Israel,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Innovation and Clusters , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 124–148. Ba Rgn, K.L.B. and While, A. (1994), Collecting Data Using a Semi-Structured Interview: A Discussion Paper, Journal of Advanced Nursing 19: 328–335. Balachandra, R. and Friar J.H. (1997), Factors for Success in R&D Projects and New Product Innovation: A Contextual Framework, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 44 (3): 276–87. Balconi, M., Breschi, S. and Lissoni, F. (2004), Network of Inventors and the Role of Academia: An Exploration of Italian Patent Data, Research Policy 33 (1): 127–45. Balconi, M., Brusoni, S. and Orsenigo, L. (2008), In Defense of the Linear Model: An Essay, Working Paper 216 , Milan: Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi. Baldwin, R.E. and Martin, P. (2004), “Agglomeration and Regional Growth,” in J. Vernon Henderson and J.-F. Thisse (eds), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics , Volume 4, Cities and Geography, Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2: 671–711. Baptista, R. (2001), Geographical Clusters and Innovation Diffusion, Technological Forecasting and Social Change 66 (1): 31–46. Baptista, R. and Swann, P. (1998), Do Firms in Clusters Innovate More?, Research Policy 27: 525–540. Barrell, R. and Pain, N. (1999), Domestic Institutions, Agglomerations and Foreign Direct Investment in Europe, European Economic Review 43: 925–34. Barro, R.J. (1990), “Government Spending in a Simple Model of Endogenous Growth,” Journal of Political Economy 98 (5): 103–25. Bartlett, C.A. and Ghoshal, S. (1986), Tap your Subsidiaries for Global Reach, Harvard Business Review, November 1986. Bartlett, C.A. and Ghoshal, S. (1989), Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution , Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Basadur, M. and Gelade, G.A. (2006), The Role of Knowledge Management in the Innovation Process, Creativity and Innovation Management 15 (1): 45–62. Basberg, B.L. (1987), Patents and the Measurement of Technological Change: A Survey of the Literature, Research Policy 16: 131–41. BaselArea (2012), Life Science: Facts from Switzerland’s Leading Economic Region , Basel: BaselArea Economic Promotion. References 249

Baumol, W.J., Blackman, S.A.B, and Wolff, E.N. (1989), Productivity and American Leadership , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Beasley, W.G. (1990), The Rise of Modern Japan , New York: St. Martin’s Press. Becattini, G. (1987), Mercato e Forze Locali: Il Ditretto Industriale , Bologna: Il Mulino. Becker, G.S. (1964), Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis , Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Beckmann, M. (1958), City Hierarchies and the Distribution of City Sizes, Economic Development and Cultural Change 3: 343–348. Behrman, J.N. (1972), The Role of International Companies in Latin American: Autos and Petrochemicals , Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Belleflamme, P., Picard, P. and Thisse, J.F. (1999), An Economic Theory of Regional Clusters, Journal of Urban Economics , 48: 158–184. Bengisu, M. and Nekhili, R. (2006), Forecasting Emerging Technologies with the Aid of Science and Technology Databases, Technological Forecasting and Social Change 73 (7): 835–844. Bengtsson, M. and S ö lvell, Ö . (2004), Climate of Competition, Clusters and Innovative Performance, Scandinavian Journal of Management 20: 225–244. Benner, M. and Tushman, M.L. (2003), Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited, Journal of Management Review 28 (2): 238–256. Berger, S. (2006), How we Compete: What Companies Around the World are Doing to Make it in Today’s Global Economy , New York: Crown Business. Berman, E., Bound, J., and Griliches, Z. (1994), Changes in the Demand for Skilled Labor Within US Manufacturing Industries: Evidence from the Annual Survey of Manufactures, Quarterly Journal of Economics 109: 367–398. Bernstein, B. and Singh, P.J. (2006), An Integrated Innovation Process Model Based on Practices of Australian Biotechnology Firms, Technovation 26: 561–572. Beeson, P. (1987), Total Factor Productivity Growth and Agglomeration Economies in Manufacturing, 1959–73, Journal of Regional Science 27 (2): 183–199. Beeson, P. and Montgomery, E. (1992), The Effect of Colleges and Universities on Local Labor Markets, Review of Economics and Statistics 75: 753–61. Bichowsky, F.R. (1942), Industrial Research , New York: Chemical Publishing. Bilbao-Osorio, B. and Rodriguez-Pose, A. (2004), From R&D to Innovation and Economic Growth in the EU, Growth and Change 35 (4): 434–55. Birkinshaw, J. (1996), How Multinational Subsidiary Mandates Are Gained and Lost, Journal of International Business Studies 27 (3): 467–95. Birkinshaw, J. and Hood, N. (1998), Multinational Corporate Evolution and Subsidiary Development , London: Macmillan. Birkinshaw, J. and Hood, N. (2000), Characteristics of Foreign Subsidiaries in Industry Clusters, Journal of International Business Studies 31 (1): 141–154. Birkinshaw, J. and Morrison, A.J. (1995), Configurations of Strategy and Structure in Subsidiaries of Multinational Corporations, Journal of International Business Studies 26: 729–753. Birkinshaw, J. and S ö lvell, Ö . (2000), Preface, International Studies of Management and Organization 30 (2): 3–9. Birkinshaw, J., Hood, N. and Jonsson, S. (1998), Building Firm-Specific Advantages in Multinational Corporations: The Role of Subsidiary Initiative, Strategic Management Journal 19: 221–241. Blanchard, O. (1985), Debt, Deficits, and Finite Horizons, Journal of Political Economy , 93: 223–247. 250 References

Blaug, M. (1985), Economic Theory in Retrospect, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Blind, K., Edler, J., Frietsch, R. and Schmoch, U. (2006), Motives to Patent: Empirical Evidence from Germany, Research Policy 35 (5): 655–672. Bottazzi, L. and Peri, G. (2003), Innovation and Spillovers in Regions: Evidence from European Patent Data, European Economic Review 47 (4): 687–710. Braczyk, H.J. (1998), Regional Innovation Systems , London: UCL Press. Breschi, S. (1999), “Spatial Patterns of Innovation: Evidence from Patent Data,” in A. Gambardella and F. Malerba (eds), The Organization of Economic Innovation in Europe , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 71–102. Breschi, S. (2008), “Innovation-Specific Agglomeration Economies and the Spatial Clustering of Innovative Firms,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Innovation and Clusters , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 167–192. Breschi, S. and Lissoni, F. (2001), Knowledge Spillovers and Local Innovation Systems: A Critical Survey, Industrial and Corporate Change 10 (4): 975–1005. Breschi, S. and Lissoni, F. (2003), Mobility and Social Networks: Localized Knowledge Spillovers Revisited, CESPRI Working Paper No. 142. Breschi, S. and Malerba, F. (2005), “Clusters, Networks, and Innovation: Research Results and New Directions,” in S. Breschi and F. Malerba (eds), Clusters, Networks, and Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–27. Breschi, S., Lissoni, F. and Montobbio, F. (2005), “The Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: Conceptual Issues and Measurement Problems,” in S. Breschi and F. Malerba (eds), Clusters, Networks, and Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 343–376. Bresnahan, T. and Trajtenberg, M. (1992), General Purpose Technologies: Engines of Growth?, NBER Working Paper 4148. Bresnahan, T., Brynjolfsson, E. and Hitt, L.M. (2002), Information Technology, Workplace Organization and the Demand for Skilled Labor: Firm-Level Evidence, Quarterly Journal of Economics 117: 339–376. Brock, W. and Mirman, L. (1972), Optimal Economic Growth under Uncertainty: The Discounted Case, Journal of Economic Theory 4: 497–513. Brouwer, E., Kleinknecht, A. and Reijnen, J.O.N. (1993), Employment Growth and Innovation at the Firm Level: An Empirical Study, Journal of Evolutionary Economics 3: 153–159. Brouwer, E. and Kleinknecht, A. (1997), Measuring the Unmeasurable: A Country’s non-R&D Expenditure on Product and Service Innovation, Research Policy 25 (1): 235–1242. Brouwer, E. and Kleinknecht, A. (1999), Innovative Output and a Firms Propensity to Patent: An Empirical Investigation, Research Policy 28 (6): 615–24. Br ü lhart, M. and Torstensson, J. (1996), Regional Integration, Scale Economies and Industry Location in the European Union, CEPR Discussion Paper No. 1435 . Bruland, K. and Mowery, D.C. (2005), “Innovation through Time,” in J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery and R. R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 349–379. Brusoni, S. and Geuna, A. (2003), An International Comparison of Sectoral Knowledge Bases: Persistence and Integration in the Pharmaceutical Industry, Research Policy 32: 1897–1912. Buckley, P.J. (1987), The Theory of the Multinational Enterprise , Uppsala: Acta Universitas Upsalienis, Almquist and Wiksell International. Buckley, P.J. (1990), Problems and Developments in the Core Theory of International Business, Journal of International Business Studies 21: 657–666. References 251

Buckley, P.J. and Casson, M.C. (1976), The Future of Multinational Enterprise, London: Macmillan. Buckley, P.J. and Casson, M.C. (1985), The Economic Theory of the Multinational Enterprise: Selected Papers , London: Macmillan. Buckley, P.J., Cross, A.R., Tan, H., Liu, X. and Voss, H. (2008), Historic and Emergent Trends in Chinese Outward Direct Investment, Management International Review 48 (6), 715–748. Buckley, P.J. and Ghauri, P.N. (2004), Globalization, Economic Geography and the Strategy of Multinational Enterprises, Journal of International Business Studies 35: 81–98. Buijs, J. (2003), Modelling Product Innovation Processes, from Linear Logic to Circular Chaos, Creativity and Innovation Management 12 (2): 76–93. Burt, R. (1997), The Contingent Value of Social Capital, Administrative Science Quarterly 42 (2): 339–365. Bush, V. (1945), Science: The Endless Frontier. 1995. Reprint, North Stratford, NH: Ayer Co. BusinessWeek (2005), Avoiding the Inventor’s Lament, http://www.businessweek. com/smallbiz/content/nov2005/sb20051109_124661.htm, March 16th, 2012. BusinessWeek (2012), A Creative Corporation Toolbox – The Problem, http://images. businessweek.com/ss/05/07/toolbox/source/1.htm, January 17, 2012. Caballero, R. and Jaffe, A. (1993), How High are the Giant’s Shoulders: An Empirical Assessment of Knowledge Spillovers and Creative Destruction in a Model of Economic Growth, NBER Working Paper , no. 4370. Cairncross, F. (2000), The Death of Distance: How the Communications Revolution will Change our Lives , Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Cantwell, J. (1991), “The Theory of Technological Competence and its Application to International Production,” in D.G. McFetridge (eds), Foreign Investment, Technology and Economic Growth , Calgary: University of Calgary Press. Cantwell, J. (1992), “The Internationalization of Technological Activity and its Implications for Competitiveness,” in O. Granstrand, L. Hakanson and S. Sjölander (eds), The Internationalization of R&D and Technology, Chichester: John Wiley, 75–95. Cantwell, J. (1993), “Corporate Technological Specialization in Industrial Industries,” in M.C. Casson and J. Creedy (eds), Industrial Concentration and Economic Inequality , Aldershot: Edward Elgar, 216–232. Cantwell, J. (1995), The Globalization of Technology: What Remains of the Product Cycle Model? Cambridge Journal of Economics 19 (1): 155–174. Cantwell, J. (1999), From the Early Internationalization of Corporate Technology to Global Technology Sourcing, UNCTAD Transnational Corporations 8 (2): 71–92. Cantwell, J. (2005), “Innovation and Competitiveness,” in J. Fagerberg, D.C. Mowery and R.R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 543–567. Cantwell, J. and Janne, O. (1999), Technological Globalization and Innovative Centers: The Role of Corporate Technological Leadership and Locational Hierarchy, Research Policy 28: 119–144. Cantwell, J. and Janne, O. (2000), The Role of Multinational Corporations and National States in the Globalization of Innovatory Capacity: The European Perspective, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 12 (2): 243–262. Cantwell, J. and Iammarino, S. (2001), EU Regions and Multinational Corporations: Change, Stability and Strengthening of Technological Comparative Advantages, Industrial and Corporate Change 10 (4): 1007–1037. 252 References

Cantwell, J. and Kosmopoulou, E. (2000), What Determines the Internationalization of Corporate Strategy Technology?, Department of Economics University of Reading Working Paper, no. 284. Cantwell, J. and Mudambi, R. (2005), MNE Competence-Creating Subsidiary Mandates, Strategic Management Journal 26 (12): 1109–1128. Cantwell, J. and Narula, R. (2003), International Business and the Eclectic Paradigm: Developing the OLI Framework , London and New York: Routledge. Cantwell, J. and Piscitello, L. (1999), The Emergence of Corporate International Networks for the Accumulation of Dispersed Technological Competences, Management International Review 39 (1): 123–147. Cantwell, J. and Piscitello, L. (2005), Recent Location of Foreign-owned Research and Development Activities by Large Multinational Corporations in the European Regions: The Role of Spillovers and Externalities, Regional Studies 39 (1): 1–16. Cantwell, J. and Santangelo, G.D. (2000), Capitalism, Profits, and Innovation in the New Techno-Economic Paradigm, Journal of Evolutionary Economics 10: 131–158. Cantwell, J., Glac, K. and Harding, R. (2004), The Internationalization of R&D – The Swiss Case, Management International Review 44 (3): 57–82. Capello, R. (2007), Regional Economics , London: Routledge. Carlsson, B. and Stankiewicz, R. (1991), On the Nature, Function and Composition of Technological Systems, Journal of Evolutionary Economics 1: 93–118. Carlsson, B., Jacobsson, S., Homen, M. and Rickne, A. (2002), Innovation Systems: Analytical and Methodological Issues, Research Policy 31 (2): 233–245. Carneiro, A. (2000), How does Knowledge Management influence Innovation and Competitiveness, Journal of Knowledge Management 4 (2): 87–98. Carrin, J.B. (2003), Science-Technology-Industry Network – The Competitiveness of Swiss Biotechnology: A Case Study of Innovation, RIETI Discussion Paper Series 04-E-007. Carter, A.P. (2007), “Measurement of the Clustering and Dispersion of Innovation,” in K. R. Polenske (eds), The Economic Geography of Innovation, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2–29. Carty, J.J. (1916), The Relation of Pure Science to Industrial Research, Reprint and Circular Series 14, Washington D.C.: National Research Concil. Casavola, P., Gavosto, A. and Sestito, P. (1996), Technical Progress and Wage Dispersion in Italy: Evidence from Firms’ Data, Annales d’Economie et de Statistique Jan–June: 387–412. Casson, M.C. (1979), Alternatives to the Multinational Enterprise , London: Macmillan. Casson, M.C. (1987), The Firm and the Market , Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Casson, M.C. (1991), Global Research Strategy and International Competitiveness , Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell. Caves, E.R. (1971), International Corporations: The Industrial Economics of Foreign Investment, Economica 38: 1–27. Caves, E.R. (1982), Multinational Enterprise and Economic Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Caves, E.R. (1996), Multinational Enterprise and Economic Analysis, Second Edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chandler, A.D. (1990), Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Chennells, L. and Van Reenen, J. (1999), Has Technology Hurt Less Skilled Workers? An Econometric Survey of the Effects of Technical Change on the Structure of Pay and Jobs, Working Paper 27, London Institute for Fiscal Studies. References 253

Chiesa, V. (1996), Managing the Internationalization of R&D Activities, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 43 (1): 7–23. Chiesa, V. and Chiaroni, D. (2005), Industrial Clusters in Biotechnology: Driving Forces, Development Processes and Management Practices , London: Imperial College Press. Christensen, C.M. (1997), The Innovator’s Dilemma. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Christopherson, S. and Storper, M. (1986), The City as Studio, the World as Back Lot: The Impact of Vertical Disintegration on the Location of the Motion Picture Industry, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 4: 305–320. Ciccone, A. and Hall, R. (1996), Productivity and the Density of Economic Activity, American Economic Review 86 (1): 54–70. Clark, J. and Guy, K. (1998), Innovation and Competitiveness: A Review, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 10 (3): 363–395. Clark, K.B. (1985), The Interaction of Design Hierarchies and Market Concepts in Technological Evolution, Research Policy 14 (5): 235–251. CNN Money (1998), The Second Coming of Apple Through a Magical Fusion of Man – Steve Jobs – and Company, Apple is Becoming Itself Again: The Little Anticompany that Could, http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_ archive/1998/11/09/250834/index.htm, April 22nd, 2012. Co, C. (2003), Evolution of the Geography of Innovation: Evidence from Patent Data, Growth and Change 33 (4): 393–423. Coase, R.H. (1937), The Nature of the Firm, Economica 4: 386–405. Coase, R.H. (1960), The Problem of Social Cost, Journal of Law and Economics 3: 1–44. Cobb, C. W. and Douglas, P. H. (1928), A Theory of Production, American Economic Revew 8 (1): 139–165. Cockburn, I.M. (2004), The Changing Structure of the Pharmaceutical Industry, Health Affairs 23 (1): 10–22. Coe, D.T. and Helpman, E. (1995), International R&D Spillovers, European Economic Review 39: 859–887. Coenen, L., Moodysson, J. and Asheim B. (2004), Nodes, Networks and Proximities: On the Knowledge Dynamics of the Medicon Valley Biotech Cluster, European Planning Studies 12 (7): 1003–1018. Cohen, W.M and Levinthal, D. (1989), Innovation and Learning: The Two faces of R&D, The Economic Journal 99: 569–596. Cohen, W.M. and Levinthal, D. (1990), Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation, Administrative Science Quarterly 35: 123–133. Cohen, W.M., Nelson, R.R and Walsh, J.P. (2000), Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Apropriability Conditions and Why US Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not), NBER Working Paper No. W7552. Cohen, W.M., Goto, A., Nagata, A., Nelson, R. and Walsh, J. (2002), R&D Spillovers, Patents and the Incentives to Innovate in Japan and in the United States, Research Policy 31: 1349–1367. Cooke, P. (1992), Regional Innovation Systems: Competitive Regulation in the New Europe, Geoforum 23: 365–382. Cooke, P. (1998), “Introduction: Origins of the Concept,” in H. Braczyk, P. Cooke and M. Heidenreich (eds), Regional Innovation Systems , London: UCL Press, 2–25. Cooke, P. (2001), Regional Innovation Systems, Clusters, and the Knowledge Economy, Industrial and Corporate Change 10 (4): 945–974. Cooke, P. (2005a), “Regional Knowledge Capabilities and Open Innovation: Regional Innovation Systems and Clusters in the Asymmetric Knowledge Economy,” in 254 References

S. Breschi and F. Malerba (eds), Clusters, Networks, and Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 80–110. Cooke, P. (2005b), Regionally Asymmetric Knowledge Capabilities and Open Innovation Exploring “Globalization 2” – A New Model of Industry Organization, Research Policy 34: 1128–1149. Cooke, P. (2006), Global Bioregional Networks: A New Economic Geography of Bioscientific Knowledge, European Planning Studies 14 (9): 1265–1285. Cooke, P. (2008), “Biotechnology Dynamics at the Global Scale,” in T. Brenner and H. Patzelt (eds), Handbook of Bioentrepreneurship , New York: Springer, 7–33. Cooke, P. and Morgan, K. (1994), “The Creative Milieu: A Regional Perspective on Innovation,” in M. Dodgson and R. Rothwell (eds), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Cooke, P. and Morgan, K. (1998), The Associational Economy: Firms, Regions and Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cooke, P., Uranga, G. and Etxebarria, G. (1997), Regional Innovation Systems: Institutional and Organizational Dimensions, Research Policy 26: 475–491. Cooper, R.G. (2005), Product Leadership – Pathways to Profitable Innovation, Second Edition, New York: Basic Books. Cornwall, J. (1977), Modern Capitalism: Its Growth and Transformation, London: St. Martin’s Press. Coronado Guerrero, D. and Acosta Sero, M. (1997), Spatial Distribution of Patents in Spain: Determining Factors and Consequences on Regional Development, Regional Studies 31 (4): 381–390. Corriveau, L. (1991), Entrepreneurs, Growth and Cycles, PhD Dissertation, University of Western Ontario. Cortright, J. and Mayer, H. (2002), Signs of Life: The Growth of Biotechnology Centers in the U.S., Washington, DC: Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy, The Brookings Institution. Council on Competitiveness (2001), Clusters of Innovation: Regional Foundations of U.S. Competitiveness , USA: M. E. Porter and Monitor Group. Cox, H., Frenz, M. and Prevezer, M. (2002), Patterns of Innovation in UK Industries: Exporing the CIS Data to Contrast High and Low Technology Industries, Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics 13 (1–3): 267–304. Credit Suisse (2012), Concurrence fiscale intercantonale: pas d’affaiblissement en vue , Swiss Issues Régions, Credit Suisse Economic Research: Zurich. Crescenzi, R., Rodriguez-Pose, A. and Stoper, M. (2007), The Territorial Dynamics of Innovation: A Europe-United States Comparative Analysis, Journal of Economic Geography 7: 673–709. Criscuolo, P. (2004), R&D Internationalisation and Knowledge Transfer: Impact on MNEs and their Home Countries. Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology. Criscuolo, P. (2005), The Home Advantage Effect and Patent Families: A Comparison of OECD Triadic Patents, the USPTO and the EPO , Paper presented at the EPIP Conference, Copenhagen, March 10–11. Cumbers, A., MacKinnon, D. and Chapman, K. (2008), “Innovation, Collaboration and Learning in Regional Clusters: A Study of SMEs in the Aberdeen Oil Complex,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Innovation and Clusters, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 300–317. References 255

Curran, P.J. (2000), Competition in UK Higher Education: Competitive Advantage in the Research Assessment Exercise and Porter’s Diamond Model, Higher Education Quarterly 54 (4): 386–410. D’Agostino, L.M., Laursen, K. and Santangelo, G.D. (2012), The Impact of R&D Offshoring on the Home Knowledge Production of OECD Investing Regions, Journal of Economic Geography 12 (6): 1–31. Daim, T.U., Rueda, G., Martin, H. and Gerdsri, P. (2006), Forecasting Emerging Technologies: Use of Bibliometrics and Patent Analysis, Technological Forecasting and Social Change 73 (8): 981–1012. De Beule, F., Van Den Bulcke, D. and Zhang, H. (2008), “The Reciprocal Relationship between Transnationals and Clusters: A Literature Review,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Cluster Theory , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. De Rassenfosse, G. (2010), How much do we know about Firms’ Propensity to Patent and should we worry about it?, Presentation at the Summer Conference 2010, Imperial College London Business School , June 16–18, 2010: 1–36. De Vecchio, N. (1995), Entrepreneurs, Institutions and Economic Change: The Economic thought of J. A. Schumpeter (1905–1925) , Aldershot: Edward Elgar. DeBresson, C. (1996), Economic Interdependence and Innovative Activity, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Deiss, J. and Gugler, P. (2012), Politique Economique et Sociale , Bruxelles: De Boeck. Delgado, M., Porter, M.E. and Stern, S. (2010a), Clusters, Convergence, and Economic Performance, US Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies Paper No. CES-WP- 10–34 . Delgado, M., Porter, M.E. and Stern, S. (2010b), Clusters and Entrepreneurship, Journal of Economic Geography 10 (4): 495–518. Deng, P. (2007), Investing for Strategic Resources and its Rationale: The Case of Outward FDI from Chinese Companies, Business Horizons 50 (1), 71–81. Diamond, J. (1998), Guns, Germs and Steel: A Short History of Everybody for the Last 13000 Years, London: Vintage. Dicken, P. (2007), Global Shift: Mapping the Changing Contours of the World Economy , London: SAGE Publications. DiMasi, J.A., Hansen, R.W. and Grabowski, H.G. (2003), The Price of Innovation: New Estimates of Drug Development Costs, Journal of Health Economics 22: 151–185. Dixit, A. and Stiglitz, J.E. (1977), Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity, American Economic Review 67: 297–308. Doloreux, D. and Parto, S. (2005), Regional Innovation Systems: Current Discourse and Unresolved Issues, Technology in Society 27 (2): 133–153. Domar, E.D. (1947), Expansion and Employment, American Economic Review , 37 . Doms, M., Dunne, T. and Trotske, K. (1997), Workers, Wages, and Technology, Quarterly Journal of Economics 112: 253–89. Dorfman, N.S. (1987), Innovation and Market Structure: Lessons from the Computer and Semiconductor Industries , Cambridge, MA: Ballinger. Dorfman, R. (1979), A Formula for the Gini Coefficient, The Review of Economics and Statistics 61 (1): 146–149. Dosi, G. (1982), Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories, Research Policy 11: 147–162. Dosi, G. (1988), Sources, Procedures and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation, Journal of Economic Literature 26: 1120–1171. 256 References

Dosi, G. (1990), “The Nature of the Innovation Process,” in G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R.R. Nelson, G. Silverberg and L. Soete (eds), Technical Change and Economic Theory , London: Frances Pinter, 221–238. Douglas, P. H. (1976), The Cobb-Douglas Production Function Once Again: Its History, Its Testing, and Some New Empirical Values, Journal of Political Economy 84 (5): 903–916. Dowrick, S. (2003), A Review of the Evidence on Science, R&D and Productivity, Working Paper , Department of Education, Science and Training. Doz, Y.L. (1986), Strategic Management in Multinational Companies , Oxford: Pergamon. Drews, J. (1997), Strategic Choices Facing the Pharmaceutical Industry: A Case for Innovation, Drug Discovery Today 2 (2): 72–78. Duflos, G. (2005), Les Déterminants des Comportements d’Innovation dans l’Industrie Pharmaceutique Américaine, Séminaire 13 juillet 2005, R.E.P.E.R.E.S , France. Dunning, J.H. (1977), “Trade, Location of Economic Activity and the MNE: A Search for an Eclectic Approach,” in B. Ohlin, P.O. Hesselborn, and P.M. Wijkman (eds), The International Allocation of Economic Activity , London: Macmillan. Dunning, J.H. (1979), Explaining Changing Patterns of International Production: In Defense of the Eclectic Theory, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 41 (4): 269–295. Dunning, J.H. (1988), The Eclectic Paradigm of International Production: A Restatement and Some Possible Extensions, Journal of International Business Studies 19 (1): 1–31. Dunning, J.H. (1993a), Multinational Enterprises and the Global Economy , Workingham: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Dunning J.H. (1993b), “Trade, Location of Economic Activity and the Multinational Enterprise: A Search for an Eclectic Approach,” in J.H. Dunning (eds), The Theory of Transnational Corporations , Volume 1, London: Routledge. Dunning, J.H. (1995), What’s Wrong – and Right – with Trade Theory? The International Trade Journal 9 (2): 163–202. Dunning, J.H. (1998), Location and the Multinational Enterprise: A Neglected Factor? Journal of International Business Studies 29 (1): 45–66. Dunning, J.H. (2000), “Regions, Globalization, and the Knowledge Economy: The Issues Stated,” in J.H. Dunning (eds), Regions, Globalization, and the Knowledge Economy , Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dunning, J.H. (2001), The Eclectic (OLI) Paradigm of International Production: Past, Present and Future, International Journal of the Economics of Business 8 (2): 173–190. Dunning, J.H. (2003), Some Antecedents of Internalization Theory, Journal of International Business Studies 34 (1): 108–115. Dunning, J.H. (2008), “Space, Location and Distance in IB Activities: A Changing Scenario,” in J.H. Dunning and P. Gugler (eds), Foreign Direct Investment, Location and Competitiveness , Oxford: Elsevier, 83–110. Dunning, J.H. and Boyd, G. (2003), Alliance Capitalism and Corporate Management , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Dunning, J.H and Lundan, S.M. (2008), Multinational Enterprises and the Global Economy , Second Edition, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Dunning, J.H. and Narula, R. (1995), The R&D Activities of Foreign Firms in the US, International Studies in Management Organization 25: 39–73. Dunning, J.H. and Rugman, A.M. (1985), The Influence of Hymer’s Dissertation on the Theory of Foreign Direct Investment, The American Economic Review 75 (2): 228–232. References 257

Eckey, H.F. (2008), Regionalökonomie , Wiesbaden: Gabler. Economiesuisse (2010), La recherche et le développement dans l’économie privée en Suisse 2008 , Zurich: Stämpfli AG. Eden, L. and Dai, L. (2010), Rethinking the O in Dunning’s OLI/Eclectic Paradigm, Multinational Business Review 18 (2): 13–34. Eden, L., Thomas, D.E. and Olibe, K.O. (2003), “Why Multinationality Matters: Exploring the “L” in the OLI Paradigm,” in H.P. Gray (eds), Extending the Eclectic Paradigm in International Business: Essays in Honor of John Dunning, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 31–54. Edgerton, D. (2004), “The Linear Model did not Exist,” in K. Grandin, N. Worms and S. Widmalm (eds), The Science-Industry Nexus: History, Policy, Implications , New York: Science History Publication, 31–57. Edquist, C. (1997), System of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations , London: Pinter. Edquist, C. (2005), “Systems of Innovation – Perspectives and Challenges,” in J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery and R. R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 181–208. Edquist, C. and Hommen, L. (1999), Systems of Innovation: Theory and Policy for the Demand Side, Technology In Society 21: 63–79. Edquist, C. Hommen, L. and McKelvey, M. (2001), Innovation and Employment: Product versus Process Innovation , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Edquist, C. and Johnson, B. (1997), “Institutions and Organizations in Systems of Innovation,” in C. Edquist (eds), Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Organizations, and Institutions , London: Pinter Publishers/Casell Academic, 41–63. Egert, B., Kozivk, T. and Sutherland, D. (2009), “Infrastructure and Growth: Empirical Evidence,” OECD Working Paper 685. Ejermo, O. (2009), Regional Innovation Measured by Patent Data – Does Quality Matter? Industry and Innovation 16 (2): 141–165. Enright, M.J. (1994), Regional Clusters and Firm Strategy, Paper Presented at the Prince Bertil Symposium on the Dynamic Firm: The Role of Regions, Technology, Strategy and Organization, Stockholm, June 12–15. Enright, M.J. (1998), The Globalization of Competition and the Localization of Competitive Advantage: Policies toward Regional Clustering, Paper presented at the Workshop on the Globalization of Multinational Enterprise Activity and Economic Development, Glasgow, Scotland. Enright, M.J. (2000), Regional Clusters and Multinational Enterprises: Independence, Dependence, or Interdependence? International Studies of Management and Organization 30 (2): 114–138. Erdener, C. and Shapiro, D.M. (2005), The Internationalization of Chinese Family Enterprises and Dunning’s Eclectic MNE Paradigm, Management and Organization Review 1 (3): 411–436. Ernst, H. (2001), Patent applications and Subsequent Changes of Performance: Evidence from Time-Series Cross-Section Analyses on the Firm Level, Research Policy 30 (1): 143–157. Ethier, W.J. (1986), The Multinational Firm, Quarterly Journal of Economics 101: 806–833. European Cluster Observatory (2013), Cluster Mapping, available at: http://www.clus- terobservatory.eu. European Union (2013), Agreement on Intellectual Property Rights Relating to Trade and Pharmaceutical Patents, available at: http://europa.eu/ 258 References

legislation_summaries/internal_market/single_market_for_goods/ pharmaceutical_and_cosmetic_products/l21168_En.htm. European Patent Office (2013a), Granted patents, available at: http://www.epo.org/ about-us/statistics/granted-patents.html. European Patent Office (2013b), Document original: EP2105736 (A1) – 2009–09–30 , Espacenet – Recherche de brevet, available at: http://worldwide.espacenet.com /publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=EP&NR=2105736A1&KC=A1&FT=D&N D=3&date=20090930&DB=EPODOC&locale=fr_EP Eurostat (2008), Statistics in Focus, Science and Technology 107, Luxemburg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Eurostat (2012), NACE backgrounds, available at: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/ statistics_Explained/index.php/NACE_backgrounds. Evangelista, R. and Savona, M. (2002), The Impact of Innovation on Employment in Services: Evidence form Italy, International Review of Applied Economics 16 (3): 309–318. Eveleens, C. (2010), Innovation Management: A Literature Review of Innovation Process Models and their Implications , Lectoraat Innovatie Publieke Sector. Fagerberg, J. (1994), Technology and International Differences in Growth Rates, Journal of Economic Literature 32: 1147–1175. Fagerberg, J. (2003), “Schumpeter and the Revival of Evolutionary Economics: An Appraisal of the Literature,” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 13: 125–159. Fagerberg, J. (2005), “Innovation, A Guide to the Literature,” in J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery and R. R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–26. Fagerberg, J. and Godinho, M.M. (2005), “Innovation and Catching-up,” in J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery and R. R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 514–542. Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D.C. and Nelson, R.R. (2005), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fagerberg, J. and Verspagen, B. (2009), Innovation Studies – The Emerging Structure of a New Scientific Field, Research Policy , 38 (2): 218–233. Farrell, C. (2005), Mining the Vein of Great Ideas – Patent Can Clue Smart Investors in to the Next Big Thing from Innovative Companies, BusinessWeek , December 26, 3695: 110–112. Farrell, J. and Klemperer, P. (2006), Coordination and Lock-In: Competition with Switching Costs and Network Effects, Working Paper , Berkeley: University of California. Felder, L, Licht, G., Nerlinger, E. and Stahl, H. (1996), “Factors determining R&D and innovation expenditures in German manufacturing industries,” in A. Kleinknecht (eds), Determinants of Innovation. The Message from New Indicators , London: Macmillan Press, 125–154. Feldman, M.P. (1994), The Geography of Innovation, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Feldman, M.P. (2000), “Location and Innovation: The New Economic Geography of Innovation, Spillovers, and Agglomeration,” in G.L. Clark, M.P. Feldman and M.S. Gertler (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 373–394. Feldman, M.P. (2001), Where Science Comes to Life: University Bioscience, Commercial Spin-offs, and Regional Economic Development, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 2: 345–361. References 259

Feldman, M. (2003), The Locational Dynamics of the US Biotech Industry: Knowledge Externalities and the Anchor Hypothesis, Industry and Innovation 10 (3): 311–329. Feldman, M.P. (2004), The Significance of Innovation, Paper Prepared for the Swedish Institute for Growth Policy Studies. Feldman, M.P. (2008), “The Entrepreneurial Event Revisited: Firm Formation in a Regional Context,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of research on Innovation and Clusters , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 318–342. Feldman, M.P. and Lichtenberg, F.R. (1998), The Interaction between Public and Private R&D Investment: Cross-Country Evidence from European Community’s R&D Information Service, Annales d’Economie et de Statistique 49–50: 199–222. Feldman, M.P., Francis, J. and Bercovitz, J. (2005), Creating a Cluster While Building a Firm: Entrepreneurs and the Formation of Industrial Clusters, Regional Studies 39 (1): 129–141. Financial Times (2010), Lenovo Proves it is a Somebody , by K. Hille, January 4th. Fingleton, B., Igliori, D. and Moore, B. (2008), “Employment Growth in ICT Clusters: New Evidence from Great Britain,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Innovation and Clusters , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 79–106. Fischer, M.M. and Varga, A. (2003), Spatial Knowledge Spillovers and University Research: Evidence from Austria, The Annals of Regional Science 37 (2): 303–322. Fleck, J. (2004), “The Structure of Technological Evolutions: Linear Models, Configurations, and Systems of Development,” in K. Grandin, N. Worms and S. Widmalm (eds), The Science-Industry Nexus: History, Policy, Implications , New York: Science History Publication, 229–255. Flick, U., Von Kardorff, E. and Steinke, I. (2004), A Companion to Qualitative Research , London: Sage Publications Ltd. Flores, R.G. and Aguilera, R.V. (2007), Globalization and Location Choice: An Analysis of US Multinational Firms in 1980 and 2000, Journal of International Business Studies 38: 1187–1210. Florida, R. (1995), Toward the Learning Region, Futures 27: 527–536. Florida, R. (1997), The Globalization of R&D: Results of a Survey of Foreign-Affiliated R&D Laboratories in the USA, Research Policy 26: 85–103. Foray, D., David, P.A. and Hall, B.H. (2009), “Smart Specialization: The Concept,” in European Union Report EUR 24047, Knowledge for Growth: Prospects for Science, Technology and Innovation . Foray, D., David, P.A. and Hall, B.H. (2011), Smart Specialization: From Academic Idea to Political Instrument, the Surprising Career of a Concept and the Difficulties Involved in its Implementation, MTEI Working Paper 2011–001 , EPFL. Freeman, C. (1982), The Economics of Industrial Innovation, Second Edition, London: Frances Pinter Publishers. Freeman, C. (1987), T echnology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan , London: Pinter. Freeman, C. (1991), Networks of Innovators: A Synthesis of Research Issues, Research Policy 20: 499–514. Freeman, C. (1995), The National System of Innovation in Historical Perspective, Cambridge Journal of Economics 19: 5–24. Freeman, C. (2002), Continental, National and Sub-National Innovation Systems – Complementarity and Economic Growth, Innovation Systems 31 (2): 191–211. Freeman, C., Clark, J. and Soete, L. (1982), Unemployment and Technical Innovation: A Study of Long Waves and Economic Development , London: Pinter. 260 References

Freeman, C. and Lou ç a, F. (2001), As Times Goes By. From the Industrial Revolutions to the Information Revolution , Oxford: Oxford University Press. Freeman, C. and Soete, L. (1997), The Economics of Industrial Innovation, Third Edition, London: Pinter. Friboulet, J.-J. (2009), Histoire de la pensée économique – XVIIIè-XXè siècles , Deuxième édition, Zurich: Bruylant, LGDJ et Schulthess. Friedman, T.L. (2005), The World is Flat – A Brief History of the Globalized World in the 21st Century , New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Fritsch, M. (2002), Measuring the Quality of Regional Innovation Systems: A Knowledge Production Function Approach, International Regional Science Review 25 (1): 86–101. Froot, K.A. (1990), “Multinational Corporations, Exchange Rates, and Direct Investment,” in W. Branson, J.F. and M. Goldstein (eds), International Policy Coordination and Exchange Rate Fluctuations, Chicago: Chicago University Press, 307–346. Frost, T. (2001), The Geographic Sources of Foreign Subsidiaries’ Innovations, Strategic Management Journal 22: 101–123. FSO (2007), R-D en biotechnologie en Suisse, Indicateurs “Science et Technologie,” Neuchâtel: FSO. FSO (2011), Aspects internationaux de la recherche et développement suisse en 2008 , Neuchâtel: FSO. FSO (2012a), Output S-T: Brevets et familles de Brevet, Comparaison internationale, available at: http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/fr/index/themen/15/09.html. FSO (2012b), STAT-TAB: la banque de données statistiques interactive , available at: http:// www.pxweb.bfs.admin.ch/dialog/statfile.asp?lang=2. FSO (2012c), Enquêtes, sources – Statistique de l’état annuel de la population (ESPOP), 1981–2010 , avaiblable at: http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/fr/index/infothek/ erhebungen__quellen/blank/blank/espop/01.html. FSO (2012d), Enquêtes, sources – Recensement des entreprises (RE) , available at: http:// www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/fr/index/infothek/erhebungen__quellen/blank/ blank/bz/01.html. FSO (2012e), Régions d’analyse: introduction, available at: http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/ portal/fr/index/regionen/11/geo/analyse_regionen/01.html. FSO (2013a), Régions d’analyse: introduction, available at: http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/ portal/fr/index/regionen/11/geo/analyse_regionen/01.html. FSO (2013b), Recensement fédéral des entreprises 2005 , Neuchâtel: FSO. FSO (2013c), Dépenses intra-muros de R-D à l’étranger selon la branche économique, evolution 2000–2008 , available at: http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/fr/index/ themen/15/09/key/ind2.html. Fujita, M. and Thisse, J.F. (1996), Economics of Agglomeration, Journal of the Japanese and International Economies 10 (4): 339–378. Fujita, M. and Thisse, J.F. (2003), Does Geographical Agglomeration Foster Economic Growth? And Who Gains and Loses from It? Japanese Economic Review 54 (2): 121–145. Fukuyama, F. (1995), Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity, New York: The Free Press. Furman, J.L., Kyle, M.K., Cockburn, I. and Henderson, R. (2006), Public and Private Spillovers, Location, and the Productivity of Pharmaceutical Research, Annales d’Economie et Statistique 79/80. References 261

Furman, J.L., Porter, M.E. and Stern, S. (2002), The Determinants of National Innovative Capacity, Research Policy 31: 899–933. Furnas, C.D. (1948), Research in Industry: Its Organization and Management , Princeton, NJ: D. van Nostrand. Galan, J.L., Gonzalez-Benito, J. and Zuniga-Vincente, J.A. (2007), Factors Determining the Location Decisions of Spanish MNEs: An Analysis Based on the Investment Development Path, Journal of International Business Studies 38: 975–997. Galanakis, K. (2006), Innovation Process. Make Sense Using Systems Thinking, Journal of Technovation 26: 1222–1232. Galor, O. (2011), Unified Growth Theory , Princeton: Princeton University Press. Gambardella, A., Harhoff, D. and Verspagen, B. (2008), The Value of European Patents, European Management Review 5 (2): 69–84. Gancia, G. and Zilibotti, F. (2005), “Horizontal Innovation in the Theory of Growth and Development,” in P. Aghion and S.N. Durlauf (eds), Handbook of Economic Growth , Amsterdam: Elsevier North-Holland. Garud, R. (1997), “On the Distinction between Know-How, Know-Why and Know- What in Technological Systems,” in J. Walsh and A. Huff (eds), Advances in Strategic Management , Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 81–101. Garud, R. and Lampel, J. (1997), Product Announcements and Corporate Reputations, Corporate Reputation Review 1 (1, 2): 114–118. Gassmann, O. (2006), Opening Up the Innovation Process: Towards an Agenda, R&D Management 36 (3): 223–228. Gassmann, O. and Reepmeyer, G. (2005), Organizing Pharmaceutical Innovation: From Science-Based Knowledge Creators to Drug-Oriented Knowledge Brokers, Creativity and Innovation Management 14 (3): 233–245. Gassmann, O., Reepmeyer, G. and von Zedtwitz, M. (2008), “Innovation: Key to Success in the Pharmaceutical Industry,” in O. Gassmann, G. Reepmeyer and M. von Zedtwitz (eds), Leading Pharmaceutical Innovation: Trends and Drivers for Growth in the Pharmaceutical Industry, Second edition, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1–18. Geroski, P. (1994), Market Structure, Corporate Performance and Innovative Activity , Oxford: Clarendon Press. Gerschenkron, A. (1962), Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective, Cambridge, MA, USA: Belknap Press. Gertler, M.S. (2003), Tacit Knowledge and the Economic Geography of Context, or the Undefinable Tacitness of Being (There), Journal of Economic Geography 3: 75–99. Gertler, M.S. and Levitte, Y.M. (2005), Local Nodes in Global Networks: The Geography of Knowledge Flows in Biotechnology Innovation, Industry and Innovation 12 (4): 487–507. Giarratani, F. (1994), Nuture the Symbiosis Between Economics and Regional Science (It’s Worth the Trouble), International Regional Science Review 17 (3): 343–346. Gilbert, J., Henske, P. and Singh, A. (2003), Rebuilding Big Pharma’s Business Model, In Vivo 21 (10): 1–10. Gille, B. (1978), Histoire des techniques , Paris: Gallimard. Glaeser, E. (1994), Cities, Information, and Economic Growth, Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research 1 (1): 87–97. 262 References

Glaeser, E., Kallal, H.D., Scheinkman, J.A. and Shleifer, A. (1992), Growth in Cities, Journal of Political Economy 100 (6): 1126–1152. Godin, B. (2002a), Outline for a History of Science Measurement, Science, Technology and Human Values 27 (1): 3–27. Godin, B. (2002b), Measuring Output: When Economics Drives Science and Technology Measurements, Project on the History and Sociology of S&T Statistics , Working Paper no. 14. Godin, B. (2006), The Linear Model of Innovation: The Historical Construction of an Analytical Framework, Science, Technology, & Human Values 31 (6): 639–667. Goldstein, G. and Gronberg, T. (1984), Economies of Scale and Economies of Agglomeration, Journal of Urban Economics 16 (1): 91–104. Gomulka, S. (1971), Inventive Activity, Diffusion and the Stages of Economic Growth , Report No. 24, Institute of Economics, Aarhus University, Aarhus. Gordon, R.J. (2012), Is U.S. Economic Growth Over? Faltering Innovation Confronts the Six Headwinds, NBER Working Paper 18315 , Cambridge, MA. Gordon, I.R. and McCann P. (2000), Industrial Clusters: Complexes, Agglomeration and/or Social Networks? Urban Studies 37 (3): 513–532. Ghoshal, S. and Bartlett, C.A. (1990), The Multinational Corporation as an Interorganizational Network, Academy of Management Review 15 (4): 603–625. Ghoshal, S. and Nohria, N. (1989), Internal Differentiation within Multinational Corporations, Strategic Management Journal 10 (4): 323–337. Gow, I. and Kells, S. (1998), The Theory and Measurement of Profitability, Melbourne Institute Working Paper no. 7/98. Grabowski, H. (2002), Patents, Innovation and Access to New Pharmaceuticals, Journal of International Economic Law 5 (4): 849–860. Granstrand, O., Hakanson, L. and Sj ö lander, S. (1993), Internationalization of R&D – A Survey of Some Recent Reseach, Research Policy 22 (5–6), 413–430. Gray, P. (1996), The Eclectic Paradigm: The Next Generation, Transnational Corporation 5 (2): 51–65. Gray, P. (2003), Extending the Eclectic Paradigm in International Business: Essays in Honor of John Dunning , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Greenan, N. and Guellec, D. (2000), Technological Innovation and Employment Reallocation, Labour 14 (4): 547–590. Griffith, R., Redding, S. and Van Reenen, J. (2000), Mapping the Two Faces of R&D: Productivity Growth in a Panel of OECD Industries, LSE Centre for Economic Performance Discussion Paper , 2457: 1–74. Griliches, Z. (1979), Issues in Assessing the Contribution of R&D to Productivity Growth, Bell Journal of Economics 10: 92–116. Griliches, Z. (1987), Comment, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 3. Griliches, Z. (1990), Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey Part I, NBER Working Paper , no. 3301. Griliches, Z. (1998), “Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey,” in Z. Griliches (eds), R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence , Chicago: University of Chicago Press: 287–343. Griliches, Z., Pakes, A. and Hall, B.H. (1987), “The Value of Patents as Indicators of Inventive Activity,” in P. Dasgupta and P. Stoneman (eds), Economic Policy and Technological Performance , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Grossman, G. (1997), “Introduction,” in G. Grossman (eds), Imperfect Competition and International Trade , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. References 263

Grossman, G. and Helpman, E. (1991a), Innovation and Growth in the World Economy , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Grossman, G. and Helpman, E. (1991b), Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth, Review of Economic Studies 58: 43–61. Guellec, D. and Ralle, P. (2003), Les nouvelles théories de la croissance, Cinquième édition, Collection Repères, Paris: La Découverte. Guellec, D. and van Pottelsberghe, B. (2007), The Economics of the European Patent System , Oxford University Press . Gugler, P. and Michel, J. (2010), Foreign Direct Investment in R&D Activities: Location and Motivations of Swiss Foreign R&D, Paper Presented at the 69th International Atlantic Economic Conference, Prague, March 24–27. Gugler, P. and Tinguely, X. (2011a), “Swiss Inward FDI and its Policy Context, 2010,” in K.P. Sauvant, T. Jost, K. Davis and A.-M. Poveda Garcèc, Inward and Outward FDI Country Profiles, Vale Columbia Center on Sustainable International Investment, New York: Columbia University: 198–207. Gugler, P. and Tinguely, X. (2011b), “Swiss Outward FDI and its Policy Context, 2010,” in K.P. Sauvant, T. Jost, K. Davis and A.-M. Poveda Garcèc, Inward and Outward FDI Country Profiles, Vale Columbia Center on Sustainable International Investment, New York: Columbia University, 208–217. Gugler, P., Keller, M. and Tinguely, X. (2010), Compétitivité de la région de la Riviera , Center for Competitiveness, University of Fribourg, Switzerland. Gugler, P., Keller, M. and Tinguely, X. (2011), Foreign Direct Investment in R&D Activity: Unveiling the Knowledge Enhancing Process through Cross-Cluster Relationships – Evidence from Patent Data in the Basel Pharmaceutical Cluster, Switzerland, Paper presented at the 2011 AIB Conference, Nagoya, Japan, June 24–28. Gulbrandsen, M. (2009), “The Role of Basic Research in Innovation,” in W. Ostreng (eds), Confluence: Interdisciplinary Communication 2007–2008, Oslo: Center for Advanced Study, 55–58. Gylfason, T., Herbertson, T.T. and Zoega, G. (1997), A Mixed Blessing: Natural Resources and Economic Growth, Discussion paper no. 1668, CEPR London. Hagedoorn, J. (1996), “Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Schumpeter Revisited,” Industrial and Corporate Change 5 (3): 883–896. Hagedoorn, J. and Cloodt, M. (2003), Measuring Innovative Performance: Is There an Advantage in Using Multiple Indicators? Research Policy 32 (8): 1365–1379. Hagemann, H. and Seiter, S. (2003), Growth Theory and Growth Policy, New York: Routledge. Hakansson, H. (1989), Corporate Technological Behavior – Co-operation and Networks , London: Routledge. Haldin-Herrgard, T. (2000), Difficulties in the Diffusion of Tacit Knowledge in Organizations, Journal of Intellectual Capital 1 (4): 357–365. Hall, B.H. (2008), “Patents,” in S.N. Durlauf and L.E. Blume (eds), The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics Online , Second Edition, Palgrave MacMillan, http://www. dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_P000039&edition=current&q=Pat ents&topicid=&result_number=1, February 28th, 2012. Hall, B.H. and Rosenberg, N. (2010) (eds), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation , Volume 1, Amsterdam: Nort-Holland. Hall, B.H. and Ziedonis, R.H. (2001), The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979–1995, RAND Journal of Economics 32 (1): 101–128. 264 References

Hall, B.H., Jaffe, A. and Trajtenberg, M. (2001), The NBER Patent Citations Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools, NBER Working Paper no. 8498. Hall, B.H., Jaffe, A. and Trajtenberg, M. (2005), Market Value and Patent Citations, Rand Journal of Economics 36 (1): 16–38. Hall, B.H., Mairesse, J., and Mohnen, P. (2010), “Measuring the Returns to R&D,” in B.H. Hall and N. Rosenberg (eds), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation , Volume 2, Amsterdam: Nort-Holland, 1033–1082. Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C. (1994), Competing for the Future, Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Hansen, M.T. and Birkinshaw, J. (2007), The Innovation Value Chain, Harvard Business Review , June: 1–13. Haour, G. (2012), “La Suisse de l’innovation” devrait inspirer l’Europe, Le Temps , édition du mercredi 8 février 2012, p. 16. Harhoff, D., Narin, F., Scherer, F.M. and Voper, K. (1999), Citations Frequency and the Value of Patented Innovation, The Review of Economics and Statistics 88 (3): 511–515. Harhoff, D. and Reitzig, M.G. (2002), Determinants of Opposition Against EPO Patent Grants – The Case of Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals, CEPR Discussion Paper , No 3645. Harrison, B. (1992), Industrial Districts: Old Wine in New Bottles? Regional Studies 26: 469–483. Harrison, B., Kelley, M.R. and Grant, J. (1996), Innovative Firm Behavior and Local Milieu: Exploring the Intersection of Agglomeration, Firm Effects, and Technological Change, Economic Geography 72 (3): 233–258. Harrison, B. and Weiss, M. (1998), Workforce Development Networks, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Harrod, R. (1948), Towards a Dynamic Economics , London: Macmillan. Hart, S.L. (1995), A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm, The Academy of Management Review 20 (4): 986–1014. Hedlund, G. (1986), The Hypermodern MNC – A Heterarchy? Human Resource Management 25 (1): 9–35. Held, D. and McGrew, A. (2000), The Global Transformations Reader: An Introduction to the Globalization Debate , Cambridge: Polity Press. Helfat, C.E. (1997), Know-How and Asset Complementarity and Dynamic Capability Accumulation: The Case of R&D, Strategic Management Journal 18: 339–360. Helpman, B. and Krugman, P. (1985), Market Structure and Foreign Trade , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Henderson, V. (1983), Industrial Base and City Size, American Economic Review 73: 164–168. Henderson, V. (1996), Ways to Think About Urban Concentration: Neoclassical Urban Systems versus the New Economic Geography, International Regional Science Review 19 (1–2): 31–36. Henderson, V. (2000), The Effect of Urban Concentration on Economic Growth, NBER Working Paper No. 7503 , Cambridge, MA. Henderson, R.M. and Clark, K.B. (1990), “Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established Firms,” Administrative Science Quarterly 35: 9–30. Hendy, S.C. and Sissons, C.M. (2011), Re-Setting Science and Innovation for the Next 20 Years – Innovators, Innovation and Increasing Returns to Scale: Solving New Zealand’s Productivity Paradox, New Zealand Science Review 68 (1): 28–32. References 265

Hennart, J.-F. (1982), A Theory of Multinational Enterprise, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Hennart, J.-F. (1986), What is Internalization?, Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv 122: 791–806. Herrera, R. (2000), Pour une critique de la nouvelle théorie néoclassique de la croissance, Working Paper , CNRS, Paris. Hertner, P. and Jones, G. (1986), Multinational: Theory and History, Farnham: Ashgate Publishing. Hervas-Oliver, J.-L. and Albors-Garrigos, J. (2008), Local Knowledge Domains and the Role of MNE Affiliates in Bridging and Complementing a Cluster’s Knowledge, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development 20: 581–598. Hervas-Oliver, J.-L. and Albors-Garrigos, J. (2009), The Role of the Firm’s Internal and Relational Capabilities in Clusters: When Distance and Embeddedness are not Enough to Explain Innovation, Journal of Economic Geography 9: 263–283. Hervas-Oliver, J.-L., Albors-Garrigos, J. and Hidalgo, A. (2011), Global Value Chain Reconfiguration through External Linkages and the Development of Newcomers: A Global Story of Clusters and Innovation, International Journal of Technology Management 55 (1–2): 82–109. Hinloopen, J. (2003), Innovation Performance across Europe, Economics of Innovation and New Technology 12 (2): 145–161. Hinze, S. and Schmoch, U. (2004), “Opening the Black Box: Analytical Approaches and their Impact on the Outcome of Statistical Patent Analyses,” in W. Glänzel, H. Moed and U. Schmoch (eds), Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies on R&D Systems , Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 215–235. Hirschman, A. (1958), The Strategy of Economic Development, New Haven: Yale University Press. Hitt, M.A., Keats, B.W. and DeMarie, S.M. (1998), Navigating in the New Competitive Landscape: Building Strategic Flexibility and Competitive Advantage in the 21st Century, Academy of Management Perspectives 12 (4): 22–42. Hobday, M. (2000), “East versus Southeast Asian Innovation Systems: Comparing OEM- and TNC-led Growth in Electronics,” in L. Kim and R.R. Nelson (eds), Technology, Learning and Innovation: Experiences of Newly Industrializing Economies , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hocking, J.B., Brown, M. and Harzing, A.-W. (2004), A Knowledge Transfer Perspective of Strategic Assignment Purposes and their Path-Dependent Outcomes, International Journal of Human Resources Management 15 (3): 565–586. Hodgetts, R.M. (1993), Porter’s Diamond Framework in a Mexican Context, Management International Review 33: 41–54. Holm, U. and Pedersen, T. (2000), The Emergence and Impact of MNC Center of Excellence , Basingstoke: Macmillan. Hong, E. and Sun, L. (2006), Dynamics of Internationalization and Outward Investment: Chinese Corporations’ Strategies, The China Quarterly 187 (2), 610–634. Hoover, E.M. (1937), Location Theory and the Shoe and Leather Industries , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Horrobin, D.F. (2000), Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Industry, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 93: 341–345. Hospers, G.-J. and Beugelsdijk, S. (2002), Regional Cluster Policies: Learning by Comparing, Kyklos 55 (3): 381–402. Hotelling, H. (1929), Stability in Competition, Economic Journal 39: 41–57. 266 References

Howell, D. (1996), “Information Technology, Skill Mismatch and the Wage Collapse: A Perspective on the US Experience,” in OECD, Employment and Growth in the Knowledge-Based Economy , Paris: OECD, 291–306. Howell, D. and Wolff, E. (1992), Technical Change and the Demand for Skills by US Industries, Cambridge Journal of Economics 16: 128–146. Howells, J. (1997), Rethinking the Market-Technology Relationship for Innovation, Research Policy 25 (8): 1209–1219. Howells, J. (2002), Tacit Knowledge, Innovation and Economic Geography, Urban Studies 39 (5–6): 871–884. Howells, J. (2005), The Management of Innovation and Technology , London: Sage. Hughes, T.P. (1983), Networks of Power, Electrification in Western Society 1880–1930 , Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Hunter, J. and Stephens, S. (2010), Is Open Innovation the Way Forward for Big Pharma? Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 9: 87–88. Hymer, S.H. (1960), The International Operations of National Firms: A Study of Direct Foreign Investment, PhD Dissertation, Published posthumously, The MIT Press, 1976, Cambridge, Mass. Hymer, S.H. (1972), “The Multinational Corporation and the Law of Uneven Development,” in J. Bhagwati (eds), Economics and World Order, London: MacMillan, 113–140. Hymer, S.H. (1976), The International Operations of National Firms , Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Iammarino, S. and McCann, P. (2006), The Structure and Evolution of Industrial Clusters: Transactions, Technology and Knowledge Spillovers, Research Policy 35 (7): 1018–1036. IMF (2005), Switzerland: Selected Issues, IMF Country Report No. 05/188, IMF: Washington IMF (2012), World Economic Outlook, April 2012 , Washington: International Monetary Fund, Public Data Explorer available at: http://www.google.com/publicdata/ explore?ds=k3s92bru78li6_. Interpharma (2011), Importance de l’industrie pharmaceutique pour la Suisse , Basel: Interpharma. Isaksen, A. (2008), “The Clustering of Software Consultancy in Oslo: Reason for and Effects of Clustering,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Innovation and Clusters , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 193–207. Jacobs, D. and de Jong, M.W. (1992), Industrial Clusters and the Competitiveness of the Netherland, De Economist 140 (2): 233–252. Jaffe, A.B. (1986), Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms’ Patents, Profits and Market Value, American Economic Review 76 (5): 984–999. Jaffe, A.B. (1989), Real Effects of Academic Research, The American Economic Review 79 (5): 957–970. Jaffe, A.B. and Trajtenberg, M. (1996), Flows of Knowledge from Universities and Federal Labs: Modeling the Flow of Patent Citations Over Time and Across Institutional and Geographic Boundaries, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 93: 12671–12677. Jaffe, A.B. and Trajtenberg, M. (1999), International Knowledge Flows: Evidence from Patent Citations, Economics of Innovation and New Technology 8: 105–136. References 267

Jaffe, A.B., Trajtenberg, M. and Henderson, R. (1993), Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 108 (3): 577–598. Jaumotte, F. and Pain, N. (2005), From Ideas to Development: The Determinants of R&D and Patenting, Economics Department Working Papers, No. 457, Paris: OECD. Jensen, R.J. and Szulanski, G. (2007), Template Use and the Effectiveness of Knowledge Transfer, Management Science 53 (11): 1716–1730. Johansson, B. and Forslund, U. (2008), “The Analysis of Location, Colocation and Urbanization Economies,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Cluster Theory , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 39–66. Johnson, C.A. (1982), MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industrial Policy, 1925–1975 , Stanford: Stanford University Press. Jones Lang LaSalle (2011), Life Sciences Cluster Report , Jones Lang LaSalle IP, Inc. Jones, L.E. and Manuelli, R.E. (2005), “Neoclassical Models of Endogenous Growth,” in P. Aghion and S.N. Durlauf (eds), Handbook of Economic Growth, Amsterdam: Elsevier North-Holland. Kaitin, K.I. and DiMasi, J.A. (2011), Pharmaceutical Innovation in the 21st Century: New Drug Approvals in the First Decade, 2000–2009, Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 98 (2): 183–188. Kaldor, N. (1957), A Model of Economic Growth, Economic Journal 67: 591–624. Kamien, M.I. and Schwartz, N.L. (1982), Market Structure and Innovation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kane, R. and Sell, H. (2002), Revolution in Lamps: A Chronicle of 50 Years of Progress , Second Edition, Lilburn: Fairmont Press. Kaplan, R. and Norton, D. (1992), The Balanced Scorecard – Measures that Drive Performance, Harvard Business Review , January–February, 70–79. Karlsson, C. (2008), Handbook of Research on Cluster Theory , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Karlsson, C. (2008), “Introduction,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Cluster Theory , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1–19. Keller, W. (1998), Are International R&D Spillovers Trade-Related? Analyzing Spillovers among Randomly Matched Trade Partners, European Economic Review 42 (8): 1,469–81. Keller, M. (2009), Swiss Cluster-Mapping Project: An Empirical Report , Center for Competitiveness, University of Fribourg, Switzerland. Ketels, C.H.M. (2002), The Boston Life-Science Cluster , National Council for Harvard Medicine, Boston, November 22. Ketels, C.H.M. (2006), Michael Porter’s Competitiveness Framework – Recent Learnings and New Research Priorities, Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade 6 (2): 115–136. Ketels, C.H.M. (2008), “Microeconomic Determinants of Location Competitiveness for MNEs,” in J.H. Dunning and P. Gugler (eds), Foreign Direct Investment, Location and Competitiveness , Oxford: Elsevier, 111–131. Ketels, C.H.M. and S ö lvell, Ö . (2006), Clusters in the EU-10 New Member Countries , Europe Innova. Kettler, H.E. (2000), Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology Industries Coalescing , Presentation at the American Enterprise Institute, Washington DC. 268 References

Khilji, S.E., Mroczkowski, T. and Bernstein, B. (2006), From Invention to Innovation: Toward Developing an Integrated Innovation Model for Biotech Firms, Journal of Product Innovation Management 23: 528–540. Kim, Y.G., Suh, J.H and Park, S.C. (2008), Visualization of Patent Analysis for Emerging Technology, Expert Systems with Applications 34 (3): 1804–1812. Kyffin, S. and Gardien, P. (2009), Navigating the Innovation Matrix: An Approach to Design-Led Innovation, International Journal of Design 3 (1): 57–69. Kleinert, J. (2004), The Role of Multinational Enterprises in Globalization, Berlin: Springer. Kleinknecht, A., Van Montfort, K. and Brouwer, E. (2002), The Non-Trivial Choice Between Innovation Indicators, Economics of Innovation and New Technology 11 (2): 109–21. Klepper, S. (1996), Entry, Exit, Growth and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle, American Economic Review 86 (3): 562–583. Kline, S.J ., and Rosenberg, N. (1986), “An Overview of Innovation,” in R. Landau and N. Rosenberg (eds), The Positive Sum Strategy: Harnessing Technology for Economic Growth , Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 275–304. Kogut, B. (1984), Normative Observations on the International Value-Added Chain and Strategic Groups, Journal of International Business Studies 15 (2), 151–167. Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1993), Knowledge of the Firm and the Evolutionary Theory of the Multinational Corporation, Journal of International Business Studies 24 (4): 625–645. Koh, A. (2005), John Dunning: A Profile, Otago Management Graduate Review 3: 37–49. Kojima, K. (1973), Reorganization of North-South Trade: Japan’s Foreign Economic Policy for the 1970s, Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics 13: 1–28. Kojima, K. (1978), Direct Foreign Investment: A Japanese Model of Multinational Business Operations , London: Croom Helm. Kojima, K. (1982), Macroeconomic versus International Business Approach to Foreign Direct Investment, Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics 23: 630–640. Koopmans, T.C. (1965), “On the Concept of Optimal Economic Growth,” in The Econometric Approach to Development Planning , Amsterdam: North Holland. Kotabe, M. and Murray, J.Y. (2004), Global Sourcing Strategy and Sustainable Competitive Advantage, Industrial Marketing Management 33: 7–14. Kotabe, M., Dunlap-Hinkler, D., Parente, R. and Mishra, H.A. (2007), Determinants of Cross-National Knowledge Transfer and its Effect on Firm Innovation, Jour nal of International Business Studies 38 (2): 259–282. Krugman, P.R. (1990), Increasing Returns and Economic Geography, Working Paper No. 3275 , Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Krugman, P.R. (1991a), Geography and Trade , Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Krugman, P.R. (1991b), Increasing Returns and Economic Geography, Journal of Political Economy 99: 483–499. Krugman, P.R. (1994), Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession, Foreign Affairs 73 (2): 62–78. Krugman, P.R. (1996), Making Sense of the Competitiveness Debate, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 12 (3): 17–25. Krugman, P.R. (1998), Space: The Final Frontier, The Journal of Economic Perspectives 12 (2):161–174. Krugman, P.R. and Obstfeld, M. (2006), International Economics: Theory and Policy , Paris: Pearson Education. References 269

Kuemmerle, W. (1996), Home Base and Foreign Direct Investment in R&D , Unpublished PhD dissertation, Boston: Harvard Business School. Kuemmerle, W. (1997), Building Effective R&D Capabilities Abroad, Harvard Business Review , March–April. Kuemmerle, W. (1999), The Drivers of Foreign Direct Investment into R&D: An Empirical Investigation, Journal of International Business Studies 30 (1): 1–24. L’Hebdo (2009), Le Delaware, paradis des firmes suisses, by Y. Steiner, June 3rd, available at: http://www.hebdo.ch/le_delaware_paradis_des_firmes_suisses_39672_.html Lam, A. (2005), “Organizational Innovation,” in J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery and R. R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 115–147. Lamoreaux, N.R. and Sokoloff, K.L. (2000), The Geography of Invention in the American Glass Industry, 1870–1925, The Journal of Economic History 60 (3): 700–729. Landes, D. (1998), The Wealth and Poverty of Nations , London: Abacus. Layard, R. and Nickell, S. (1985), The Causes of British Unemployment, National Institute Economic Review 111: 62–85. Lazonick, W. (2005), “The Innovative Firm,” in J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery and R. R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 29–55. Le Bas, C. and Sierra, C. (2002), Location Versus Home Country Advantages’ in R&D Activities: Some Further Results on Multinationals’ Locational Strategies, Research Policy 31 (4): 589–609. Lecaillon, J.D., Le Page, J.M. and Ottavj, C. (2008), Economie contemporaine: Analyse et diagnostics , De Boeck. Lee, C. and Chan-Olmsted, S.M. (2004), Competitive Advantage of Broadband Internet: A Comparative Study between South Korea and the United States, Telecommunication Policy 28: 649–677. Lerner, J. (1999), The Government as Venture Capitalist: The Long Run Impact of the SBIR Program, Journal of Business 72 (3): 285–318. LesEchos.fr (2010), La Suisse, éternel paradis des multinationals, July 7, available at: http://archives.lesechos.fr/archives/2010/LesEchos/20714–41-ECH.htm. Levin, R.C., Klevorick, A.K., Nelson, R.R. and Winter, S.G. (1987), Appropriating the Returns form Industrial Research and Development, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 3: 54–58. Lewis, W.W. (2004), The Power of Productivity: Wealth, Poverty, and Threat to Global Stability , Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Leyshon, A. and Thrift, N.J. (1997), Money/Space: Geographies of Monetary Transformation , London: Routledge. Li, S. and Scullion, H. (2006), Bridging the Distance: Managing Cross-Border Knowledge Holders, Asia Pacific Journal of Management 23: 71–92. Lichtenberg, F.R. (1992), R&D Investment and International Productivity Differences, NBER Working Paper nr. 4161. Lichtenberg, F.R. (2007), The Impact of New Drug Launches on U.S. Longevity and Medical Expenditure, American Economic Review 97: 438–441. Lindqvist, M., S ö lvell, Ö . and Zander, I. (2000), Technological Advantage in the International Firm – Local and Global Perspectives on the Innovation Process, Management International Review 1: 95–126. Lindqvist, G., Protsiv, S. and S ö lvell, Ö . (2008), Regions, Innovation and Economic Prosperity: Evidence from Europe, CSC Working Paper 2008–1, Stockholm: Center for Strategy and Competitiveness. 270 References

Lissoni, F. (2001), Knowledge Codification and the Geography of Innovation: The Case of Brescia Mechanical Cluster, Research Policy 30: 1479–1500. Liu, X. and White, S. (2001), An Exploration into Regional Variation in Innovative Activity in China, International Journal of Technology Management 21 (1–2): 114–129. Lloyd, P. and Dicken, P. (1977), Location in Space , London: Harper and Row. Long, G., Cutler, D., Berndt, E.R., Royer, J., Fournier, A.-A., Sasser, A. and Cremieux, P. (2006), The Impact of Antihypertensive Drugs on the Number and Risk of Death, Stroke and Myocardial Infarction in the United States, NBER Working Paper No. 12096. L öö F, H. and Heshmati, A. (2006), On the Relationship between Innovation and Performance: A Sensitivity Analysis, Economics of Innovation and New Technology 15 (4–5): 317–344. Lorenzen, M. (2004), Knowledge and Geography, Industry and Innovation 12 (4): 399–407, L ö sch, A. (1954), The Economics of Location , New Haven: Yale University Press. Lublinski, A. (2003), Does Geographic Proximity Matter? Evidence from Clustered and Non-Clustered Aeronautic Firms in Germany, Regional Studies 37 (6): 453–467. Lucas, R.E. (1988), On the Mechanics of Economic Development, Journal of Monetary Economics 22 (1): 3–42. Lundmark, M. and Power, D. (2008), “Labor Market Dynamics and the Development of the ICT Cluster in the Stockholm Region,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Innovation and Clusters , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 208–222. Lundvall, B.A. (1988), “Innovation as an Interactive Process: From User-Producer Interaction to the National System of Innovation,” in G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg and L. Soete (eds), Technical Change and Economic Theory , London: Pinter Publishers. Lundvall, B.A. (1992), National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning , London: Pinter. Lundvall, B.A. (2009), Innovation as an Interactive Process: User-Producer Interaction to the National System of Innovation, African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 1 (2–3): 10–34. Lundvall, B.A. (2010), National System of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning , London and New York: Anthem Press. Lundvall, B.A. and Johnson, B. (1994), The Learning Economy, Journal of Industry Studies 1: 23–42. Lundvall, B.A. and Borras, S. (1999), The Globalizing Learning Economy: Implications for Innovation Policy , DGXII-TSER, The European Commission. Lundvall, B.A. and Maskell, P. (2000), “Nation States and Economic Development – From National Systems of Production to National Systems of Knowledge Creation and Learning,” in G.L. Clark, M.P. Feldman and M.S. Gertler (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 353–372. Lundvall, B.A. and Borras, S. (2005), “Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy,” in in J. Fagerberg, D.C. Mowery and R.R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 599–631. Luo, Y. (2003), Market-Seeking MNEs in an Emerging Market: How Patent-Subsidiary Links Shape Overseas Success, Journal of International Business Studies 34 (3): 290–309. References 271

Machin, S. (1996), “Changes in the Relative Demand for Skills,” in A. Booth and D. Snower (eds), Acquiring Skills, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 129–146. Machin, S. and Wadhwani, S. (1991), The Effects of Unions on Organisational Change and Employment: Evidence from WIRS, Economic Journal 101: 324–330. Machin, S. and Van Reenen, J. (1998), Technology and Changes in Skill Structure: Evidence from Seven OECD Countries, Quarterly Journal of Economics 113 (1): 215–1244. Maddison, A. (1991), Dynamic Forces in Capitalist Development, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Maddison, A. (2001), The World Economy: A Millennial Perspective , Paris: OECD. Maggioni, M.A. (2002), Clustering Dynamics and the Location of High-Tech Firms , New York: Physica-Verlag. Malecki, E.J. (1985), Industrial Location and Corporate Organization of High Technology Industries, Economic Geography 61: 345–369. Malerba, F. (2005), “Sectoral Systems: How and Why Innovation Differs across Sectors,” in J. Fagerberg, D.C. Mowery and R.R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 380–406. Malmberg, A., S ö lvell, Ö . and Zander, I. (1996), Spatial Clustering, Local Accumulation of Knowledge and Firm Competitiveness, Geografiska Annaler 78 B (2): 85–97. Malmberg, A., Malmberg, B. and Lundequist, P. (2000), Agglomeration and Firm Performance: Economies of Scale, Localization, and Urbanization among Swedish Export Firms, Environment and Planning 32: 305–321. Mankiw, N.G., Romer, D. and Weil, D.N. (1992), “A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth,” Quarterly Journal of Economics 107(2): 407–437. Mankiw, N.G. and Taylor, M.P. (2010), Economics , Andover (UK): South-Western Cengage Learning. Mansfield, E. (1968), The Economics of Technological Change , New York: W.E. Norton. Mansfield, E. (1984), “R&D and Innovation: Some Empirical Findings,” in Z. Griliches (eds), R&D, Patents, and Productivity , Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 127–154. Mansfield, E. (1986), Patents and Innovation: An Empirical Study, Management Science 32: 173–181. Maraut, S., Dernis, H., Webb, C., Spiezia, V. and Guellec, D., (2008), The OECD REGPAT Database: A Presentation, Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry, Paris: OECD. Markusen, A. (1995), Growing Pains: Thoughts on Theory, Method, and Politics for Regional Science of Future, International Regional Science Review 17 (3): 319–326. Markusen, A. (1996), Sticky Places in Slippery Space: A Typology of Industrial Districts, Economic Geography 72 (3): 293–313. Marshall, A. (1890/1916), Principles of Economics: An Introductory Volume, Seventh Edition, London: Macmillan. Martin, P. and Ottaviano, G.I.P. (2001), Growth and Agglomeration, International Economic Review 42 (4): 947–968. Martin, R. and Sunley, P. (2003), Deconstructing Clusters: Chaotic Concept or Policy Panacea? Journal of Economic Geography 3: 5–35. Martin, P., Mayer, T., and Mayneris, F. (2008), “Evaluation d’une Politique de Cluster en France: Les Systèmes Productifs Locaux,” in T. Madiès and J.C. Prager (eds), Innovation et Compétitivité des Régions , Paris: Rapport du Conseil d’Analyse Economique. 272 References

Martin, P., Mayer, T., and Mayneris, F. (2011), Spatial Concentration and Plant-Level Productivity in France, Journal of Urban Economics 69: 182–195. Marx, K. (1954/1956/1959), Capital: A Critique of Political Economy , Three volumes, Moscow: Progress Publishers. Maskell, P. and Malmberg, A. (1999), Localized Learning and Industrial Competitiveness, Cambridge Journal of Economics 23: 167–186. Mason, C. (2008), “Entrepreneurial Dynamics and the Origin and Growth of High- Tech Clusters,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Innovation and Clusters , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 54–78. Maxcy, G. (1982), Les multinationals de l’automobile , Paris: PUF. McCann, P. (1995), Rethinking the Economics of Location and Agglomeration, Urban Studies 32 (3): 563–577. McCann, P. (2007), Sketching Out a Model of Innovation, Face-to-Face Interaction and Economic Geography, Spatial Economic Analysis 2 (2): 117–134. McCann, P. (2008), “Agglomeration Economics,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Cluster Theory , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 23–38. McCann, P. and Mudambi, R. (2005), Analytical Differences in the Economics of Geography: The Case of the Multinational Firm, Environment and Planning A 37: 1857–1876. McKinsey (2006a), Driving Growth: Breaking Down Barriers to Global Prosperity , Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. McKinsey (2006b), The Productivity Imperative: Wealth and Poverty in the Global Economy , Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Mees, C.E.K. (1920), The Organization of Industrial Scientific Research , New York: McGraw-Hill. Mees, C.E.K. and Leermakers, J.A. (1950), The Organization of Industrial Scientific Research , New York: McGraw Hill. Meghir, C., Ryan, A., and Van Reenen, J. (1996), Job Creation, Technological Innovation and Adjustment Costs: Evidence from a Panel of British Firms, Annales d’economie et statistique 41 (2): 256–273. Mensch, G. (1979), Stalemate in Technology, Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Company. Metrobasel (2009), Metrobasel Report 2009: Perspective 2020 pour la région métropolitainre de Bâle , Basel: Metrobasel. Meyer, K.E., Mudambi, R. and Narula, R. (2011), Multinational Enterprises and Local Contexts: The Opportunities and Challenges of Multiple Embeddedness, Journal of Management Studies 48 (2): 235–252. Michel, J. (2009), Investissement directs à l’étranger dans les activités de recherche et dével- oppement: Fondements théoriques et application aux entreprises Suisses, Bern: Peter Lang. Miguelez, E. and Gomez-Miguelez, I. (2011), Singling Out Inventors from Patent Data, Document de Treball , XREAP2011–03. Milanovic, B. (1997), A Simple Way to Calculate the Gini Coefficient, and Implications, Economics Letters 56 (1): 45–49. Minsch, R. and Sturm, J.-E. (2011), La libre circulation des personnes et son impact sur la croissance potentielle de la Suisse, La Vie économique 6 (2011): 22–26. Miron, J.R. (2010), The Geography of Competition: Firms, Prices, and Localization, New York: Springer. Mokyr, J. (1990), The Lever of Riches , Oxford: Oxford University Press. References 273

Moodysson, J., Coenen, L. and Asheim B. (2008), Explaining Spatial Patterns of Innovation: Analytical and Synthetic Modes of Knowledge Creation in the Medicon Valley Life-Science Cluster, Environment and Planning 40: 1040–1056. Moore, K. and Lewis, D. (1999), Birth of the Multinational: 2000 Years of Ancient Business History, from Ashur to Augustus , Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press. Moreno, R., Paci, R. and Usai, S. (2005), Geographical and Sectoral Clusters of Innovation in Europe, The Annals of Regional Science 39 (4): 715–739. Morgan, K. (1995), Institutions, Innovation and Regional Renewal: The Development of Agency as Animateur , Paper presented at the Regional Studies Conference on Regional Futures, Gothenburg, May 6–9. Morgan, K. (2004), The Exaggerated Death of Geography: Learning, Proximity and Territorial Innovation Systems, Journal of Economic Geography 4: 3–21. Mossay, P. (2012), A Theory of Rational Spatial Agglomerations, Regional Science and Urban Economics , online release, 1–10. Mowery, D. and Oxley, J.E. (1995), Inward Technology Transfer and Competitiveness: The Role of National Innovation Systems, Cambridge Journal of Economics 19 (1): 67–93. Mowery, D. and Rosenberg, N. (1979), The Influence of Market Demand on Innovation: A Critical Review of some Recent Empirical Studies, Research Policy 81: 103–153. Mudambi, R. (2002), Knowledge Management in Multinational Firms, Journal of International Management 8: 1–9. Mudambi, R. (2008), Location, Control and Innovation in Knowledge-Intensive Industries, Journal of Economic Geography 8: 699–725. Mudambi, R. and Navarra, P. (2004), Is Knowledge Power? Knowledge Flows, Subsidiary Power and Rent-Seeking within MNCs, Journal of International Business Studies 35: 385–406. Mudambi, R. and Swift, T. (2010), “Technological Clusters and Multinational Enterprise R&D Strategy,” in T. Devinney, T. Pedersen and L. Tihany (eds), The Past, The Present and The Future of International Business and Management, Volume 23, Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing. Mudambi, R. and Swift, T. (2012), Multinational Enterprises and the Geographical Clustering of Innovation, Industry and Innovation 19 (1): 1–21. Mueller, D.C. and Tilton, J.E. (1969), “R&D Costs as a Barrier to Entry,” Canadian Journal of Economics 2: 570–579. Munos, B. (2009), Lessons from 60 Years of Pharmaceutical Innovation, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 8: 959–968. Munoz, P. (2009), From Linear Models to Innovation Systems: An Examination on the Evolution of the Innovation Process, Working paper No 4553435 , Newcastle: Newcastle University Business School. Murphy, K.M. and Topel, R.H. (2006), The Value of Health and Longevity, Journal of Political Economy 114: 871–904. Myers, S. and Marquis, D.G. (1969), Successful Industrial Innovations: A Study of Factors Underlying Innovation in Selected Firms , NSF 69–17. Washington D.C.: National Science Foundation. Myrdal, G. (1957), Rich Lands and Poor, World Perspective Series 16, New York: Harper Brothers. Nagaoka, S., Motohashi, K. and Goto, A. (2010), “Patent Statistics as an Innovation Indicator,” in B.H. Hall and N. Rosenberg (eds), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation , Volume 2, Amsterdam: Nort-Holland, 1083–1127. 274 References

Narula, R. and Dunning, J.H. (2000), Industrial Development, Globalization and Multinational Enterprises: New Realities for Developing Countries, Oxford Development Studies 28 (2): 141–167. Negassi, S. (2004), R&D Co-Operation and Innovation a Microeconometric Study on French Firms, Research Policy 33: 365–384. Nelson, R.R. (1959), The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research, Journal of Political Economy 67: 297–306. Nelson, R.R. (1968), A “Diffusion” Model of International Productivity Differences in the Manufacturing Industry, American Economic Review 58 (1): 219–248. Nelson, R.R. (1990), “Institutions Supporting Technical Change in the United States,” in G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R.R. Nelson, G. Silverberg and L. Soete (eds), Technical Change and Economic Theory , London: Frances Pinter, 312–329. Nelson, R.R. (1993), National Systems of Innovation: A Comparative Study , Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nelson, R.R. and Nelson, K. (2002), Technology, Institutions, and Innovation Systems, Innovation Systems 31 (2): 265–272. Nelson, R.R. and Winter, S.G. (1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Newlands, D. (2003), Competition and Cooperation in Industrial Clusters: The Implications for Public Policy, European Planning Studies 11 (5): 521–532. Nightingale, P. and Mahdi, S. (2006), “The Evolution of Pharmaceutical Innovation,” in M. Mazzucato and G. Dosi (eds), Knowledge Accumulation and Industry Evolution: The Case of Pharma-Biotech , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 73–111. Nohria, N. (1992), “Information and Search in the Creation of New Business Ventures: The Case of the 128 Venture Group,” in N. Nohria and R. Eccles (eds), Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action , Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Nohria, N. and Eccles, R.G. (1992), “Face-to-Face: Making Network Organizations Work,” in N. Nohria and R. Eccles (eds), Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action , Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Nohria, N. and Ghoshal, S. (1997), The Differentiated Network: Organizing Multinational Corporation for Value Creation , San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995), The Knowledge Creating Company, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Novartis (2011), Company history, available at: http://www.novartis.com/about-novartis/company-history/index.shtml. Novartis (2012), Resear ch Locations, available at: http://www.nibr.com/about/locations.shtml Novelli, M., Schmitz, B. and Spencer, T. (2006), Networks, Clusters and Innovation in Tourism: A UK Experience, Tourism Management 27 (1): 141–152. Nussbaum, B., Berner, R. and Brady, D. (2005), A Creative Corporation Toolbox, BusinessWeek , August 1, 3945: 72–4. O’Connell, A. (2007), Novartis’s Great Leap of Trust, Harvard Business Review 85 (3): 13. OECD (1992), Technology and the Economy: The Key Relationships , Paris: OECD. OECD (1993), The Measurement of Scientific and Technical Activities: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys of Research and Experimental Development (Frascati Manual), Paris: OECD. OECD (1994), The Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities: Using Patent Data as Science and Technology Indicators , Paris: OECD. References 275

OECD (2001), The Well-Being of Nations: The Role of Human and Social Capital , Paris: OECD. OECD (2002), Frascati Manual – Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development , Paris: OECD. OECD (2003), The Sources of Economic Growth in OECD Countries , Paris: OECD. OECD (2004), Patents and Innovation: Trends and Policy Challenges , Paris: OECD. OECD (2005), The Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data: Oslo Manual, Third Edition, prepared by the Working Party of National Experts on Scientific and Technology Indicators, Paris: OECD. OECD (2006), Policy Roundtables – Competition, Patents and Innovation , Paris: OECD. OECD (2007a), Human Capital: How what you Know Shapes your Life , Paris: OECD. OECD (2007b), Competitive Regional Clusters: National Policy Approaches , Paris: OECD. OECD (2008a), Compendium of Patent Statistics , Paris: OECD OECD (2008b), The Internationalization of Business R&D: Evidence, Impacts and Implications , Paris: OECD. OECD (2008c), OECD Benchmark Definition of Foreign Direct Investment , Paris: OECD. OECD (2009a), Innovation in Firms – A Microeconomic Perspective , Paris: OECD. OECD (2009b), OECD Patent Statistics Manual , Paris: OECD. OECD (2009c), Clusters, Innovation and Entrepreneurship , Paris: OECD. OECD (2010a), The OECD Innovation Strategy: Getting a Head Start on Tomorrow , Paris: OECD. OECD (2010b), OECD Science, Technology and Industry Outlook 2010 , Paris: OECD. OECD (2012a), Business Enterprise R&D Expenditure by Industry, available at: http:// www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/data/oecd-science-technology-and- r-d-statistics/business-enterprise-r-d-expenditure-by-industry_data-00183-en. OECD (2012b), Horizon 2060: perspectives de croissance économique globale à long terme , Paris: OECD. OECD.StatExtracts (2012), Patents by Regions, available at: http://stats.oecd.org/ index.aspx Ohlin, B. (1933), Interr egional and International Trade , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Oinas, P. (2002), Competition and Collaboration in Interconnected Places: Towards a Research Agenda, Geografiska Annaler 84 (B): 65–76. Ottaviano, G.I.P. (2001), Monopolistic Competition, Trade, and Endogenous Spatial Fluctuations, Regional Science and Urban Economics 31: 51–77. Owen-Smith, J. and Powell, W.W. (2004), Knowledge Networks as Channels and Conduits: The Effects of Spillovers in the Boston Biotechnology Community, Organization Science 15 (1): 5–21. Oxford Dictionaries (2013), Oxford Dictionaries – The World’s Most Trusted Dictionaries, available at: http://oxforddictionaries.com. Paci, R., Sassu, A. and Usai, S. (1997), International Patenting and National Techological Specialization, Technovation 17: 25–38. Paci, R. and Usai, S. (1999), Externalities, Knowledge Spillovers and the Spatial Distribution of Innovation, GeoJournal 49 (4): 381–390. Paci, R. and Usai, S. (2000), Technological Enclaves and Industrial Districts: An Analysis of the Regional Distribution of Innovative Activity in Europe, Regional Studies 34 (2): 97–114. 276 References

Pakes, A. and Schankerman, M. (1986), Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in European Countries during the Post-1950 Period, The Economic Journal 96: 1052–1076. Pammolli, F., Magazzini, L. and Riccaboni, M. (2011), The Productivity Crisis in Pharmaceutical R&D, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 10: 428–438. Papanastassiou, M. and Pierce, R. (2009), The Strategic Development of Multinationals: Subsidiaries and Innovation , New York: Parlgrave Macmillan. Papyrakis, E. and Gerlagh, R. (2004), Natural Resources, Innovation, and Growth, FEEM Working Paper No. 129.04. Park, W.G. (1995), International R&D Spillovers and OECD Economic Growth, Economic Inquiry 33: 571–591. Patel, P. and Pavitt, K. (1991), “Europe’s Technological Performance,” in C. Freeman, M. Sharp and W. Walker (eds), Technology and the Future of Europe: Global Competition and the Environment in the 1990s , London: Pinter, 37–58. Patel, P. and Pavitt, K. (1999), “Global Corporations and National Systems of Innovation: Who Dominates Whom?” in D. Archibugi, J. Howells and J. Michie (eds), Innovation Policy in a Global Economy , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Patel, P. and Vega, M. (1999), Patterns of Internationalization of Corporate Technology: Location vs. Home Country Advantages, Research Policy 28 (2–3): 145–155. Paul, S.M., Mytelka, D.S., Dunwiddie, C.T., Persinger, C.C., Munos, B.H., Lindborg, S.R. and Schacht, A.L. (2010), How to Improve R&D Productivity: The Pharmaceutical Industry’s Grand Challenge, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 9, 203–214. Pavitt, K. (1983), Some Characteristics of Innovation Activities in British Industry, Omega 11 (2): 113–130. Pavitt, K. (1984), Sectoral Patterns of Technological Change: Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory, Research Policy 13 (6): 343–373. Pavitt, K. (1988), “Uses and Abuses of Patent Statistics,” in A.F.J. Van Raan (eds), Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology , Elsevier Science Publishers: Amsterdam, 509–535. Pavitt, K. (1991), Key Characteristics of the Large Innovating Firm, British Journal of Management 2: 41–50. Pavitt, K. (1992), Internationalization of Technological Innovation, Science and Public Policy 19 (2): 119–123. Pavitt, K. (2002), Knowledge about Knowledge since Nelson and Winter: A Mixed Record, Electronic Working Paper Series 83, SPRU, University of Sussex. Pavitt, K. (2005), “Innovation Processes,” in J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery and R. R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 86–114. Pearce, R.D. (1990), The Internationalization of Research and Development, London: Macmillan. Pearce, R.D. (1999), Decentralized R&D and Strategic Competitiveness: Globalized Approaches to Generation and Use of Technology in MNEs, Research Policy 28 (2–3): 157–178. Pearce, R.D. and Singh, S. (1992), “Internationalization of R&D among the World’s Leading Enterprises,” in O. Granstrand, S. Sjölander and L. Hakanson (eds), Technology, Management and International Business: Internationalization of R&D and Technology , Chichester: Wiley. Pearson, A.W. (1991), “Managing Innovation: An Uncertainty Reduction Process,” in J. Henry and D. Walker (eds), Managing Innovation , London: SAGE Publications. References 277

Penn, A., Desyllas, J. and Vaughan, L. (1999), The Space of Innovation: Interaction and Communication in the Work Environment, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 26 (2): 193–218. Penrose, E.T. (1959), The Theory of the Growth of the Firm , Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Perez, C. (1983), Structural Change and the Assimilation of New Technologies in the Economic and Social System, Futures 15: 357–375. Perroux, F. (1950), Economic Space: Theory and Applications, Quarterly Journal of Economics 64: 89–104. Peters, E. and Hood, N. (2000), Implementing the Cluster Approach: Some Lessons from the Scottish Experience, International Studies of Management and Organization , 30 (2): 68–92. Petit, P. (1995), “Employment and Technological Change,” in P. Stoneman (eds), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation and Technological Change , Amsterdam: North Holland, 366–408. Pianta, M. (2000), “The Employment Impact of Product and Process Innovation,” in M. Vivarelli and M. Pianta (eds), The Employment Impact of Innovation: Evidence and Policy , London: Routledge. Pianta, M. (2001), “Innovation, Demand and Employment,” in P. Petit and L. Soete (eds), Technology and the Future of European Employment, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 142–165. Pianta, M. (2005), “Innovation and Employment,” in J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery and R. R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 568–598. Picci, L. (2010), The Internationalization of Inventive Activity: A Gravity Model Using Patent Data, Research Policy 39 (8): 1070–1081. Pitelis, C. and Pseiridis, A. (2006), “A Conceptual Framework for Firm Cooperation and Clusters, and their Impact on Productivity,” in C. Pitelis, R. Sugden and J.R. Wilson (eds), Cluster and Globalization: The Development of Urban and Regional Economies , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 17–60. Polanyi, K. (1962), Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy , Chicago: Chicago University Press. Polenske, K.R. (2004), Competition, Collaboration and Cooperation: An Uneasy Triangle in Networks of Firms and Regions, Regional Studies 38 (9): 1029–1043. Pollard, M. (1995), The Light Bulb: And How it Changed the World , History and Invention, New York: Facts on File. Porter, K., Whittington, K.B. and Powell, W.W. (2005), “The Institutional Embeddedness of High-Tech Regions: Relational Foundations of the Boston Biotechnology Community,” in S. Breschi and F. Malerba (eds), Clusters, Networks, and Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press. Porter, M.E. (1980), Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors , New York: Free Press. Porter, M.E. (1983), “The Technological Dimension of Competitive Strategy,” Research on Technological Innovation, Management and Policy 1: 1–33. Porter, M.E. (1985), Competitive Advantage , New York: Free Press. Porter, M.E. (1986), Competition in Global Industries, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Porter, M.E. (1990), The Competitive Advantage of Nations , New York: The Free Press. Porter, M.E. (1994), The Role of Location in Competition, Journal of the Economics of Business 1 (1): 35–39. 278 References

Porter, M.E. (1995), Competitive Advantage – Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance , New York: The Free Press. Porter, M.E. (1998a), On Competition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Porter, M.E. (1998b), Clusters and the New Economics of Competition, Harvard Business Review , November-December: 77–90. Porter, M.E. (2000), “Locations, Clusters, and Company Strategy,” in G.L. Clark, M.P. Feldman and M.S. Gertler (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 253–274. Porter, M.E. (2003a), The Economic Performance of Regions, Regional Studies 37 (6–7): 549–578. Porter, M.E. (2003b), Cluster and Regional Competitiveness: Recent Learnings, International Conference on Technology Clusters , Montreal, Canada, November 7. Porter, M.E. (2007), Toward a Dynamic Theory of Strategy, Strategic Management Journal 12 (2): 95–117. Porter, M.E. and Millar, V.E. (1985), How Information Gives you Competitive Advantage, Harvard Business Review 63 (4): 149–160. Porter, M. E. and Rivkin, J. (2012), What business should do to restore competitiveness: How companies can get America’s edge back while advancing their own Interests, CNNMoney , October 15, available at: http://management.fortune.cnn. com/2012/10/15/porter-rivlin-economy-fix/. Porter, M.E. and Stern, S. (1999), The New Challenge to America’s Prosperity: Findings from the Innovation Index , Washington, DC: Council on Competitiveness. Porter, M.E., Delgado, M., Ketels, C. and Stern, S. (2008), “Moving to a New Global Competitiveness Index,” in K. Schwab (eds), The Global Competitiveness Report 2008– 2009 , Geneva: World Economic Forum 43–63. Porter, M.E., Ketels, C.H.M., Miller, K. and Bryden, R.T. (2004), Competitiveness in Rural U.S. Regions: Learning and Research Agenda , Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business School. Potters, L. (2009), Innovation Input and Output: Differences among Sectors, IPTS Working Paper on Corporate R&D and Innovation no. 10/2009. Powell, W.W. and Grodal, S. (2005), “Networks of Innovators,” in J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery and R. R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 56–85. Powell, W.W., Koput, K.W., Bowie, J.I., Smith-Doerr, L. (2002), The Spatial Clustering of Science and Capital: Accounting for Biotech Firm-Venture Capital Relationships, Regional Studies 36 (3): 291–305. Price, D.S. (1961), Science since Babylon , New Haven: Yale University Press. Price, D.S. (1963), Little Science, Big Science , New York: Columbia University Press. PWC (2010), BioValley – Cluster Report , PricewaterhouseCoopers. Pyke, F., Becattini, G. and Sengenberger, W. (1990), I ndustrial Districts and Inter-Firm Co-Operation in Italy , International Institute for Labor Studies, Geneva. Pyke, F. and Sengenberger, W. (1992), Industrial Districts and Local Economic Regeneration , Geneva: International Institute for Labour Studies. Rainelli, M. (2001), La nouvelle théorie du commerce international , Paris: La Découverte. Ramsey, F. (1928), A Mathematical Theory of Saving, Economic Journal , 38: 543–559. Ratanawaraha, A. and Polenske, K. R. (2007), “Measuring the Geography of Innovation: A Literature Review,” in K. R. Polenske (eds), The Economic Geography of Innovation , New York: Cambridge University Press, 30–59. References 279

Rauch, J.E. (1991), Productivity Gains from Geographic Concentration of Human Capital: Evidence from the Cities, NBER Working Paper No. 3905 , Cambridge, MA. Rebelo, S. (1991), Long Run Policy Analysis and Long Run Growth, Journal of Political Economy , 99: 500–521. Redding, S.J. (2009), The Empirics of New Economic Geography, CEPR Discussion Paper No. 7307. Rees, K. (2005), Interregional Collaboration and Innovation in Vancouver’s Emerging High-Tech Cluster, Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 96 (3): 298–312. Reich, L.S. (1983), Irving Langmuir and the Pursuit of Science and Technology in the Corporate Environment, Technology and Culture 24 (4): 199–221. Ricardo, D. (1819), Traité d’économie politique et de l’impôt , édition française, Paris: Flammarion. Ricardo, D. (1821), On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation, Third Edition, London: John Murray. Rivera-Batiz, L. and Romer, P. (1991), Economic Integration and Endogenous Growth, Quarterly Journal of Economics 106: 531–555. Robson, M., Townsend, J., and Pavitt, K. (1988), Sectoral Patterns of Production and Use of Innovations in the UK: 1945–1983, Research Policy 17 (1): 1–15. Roche (2012a), Research Locations , available at: http://www.roche.com/about_roche/ roche_worldwide.htm. Roche (2012b), Media Release: Roche to Streamline Research and Development Activities, available at: http://www.roche.com/media/media_releases/med-cor- 2012–06–26.htm. Roche (2012c), Annual Report 2011 , Basel: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Rodrik, D. (2007), One Economics Many Recipes: Globalization, Institutions and Economic Growth , Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rogers, E. (1995), Diffusion of Innovations , Fourth Edition, New York: The Free Press. Rogers, M. (1998a), The Definition and Measurement of Innovation, Melbourne Institute Working Paper n°10/98. Rogers, M. (1998b), The Definition and Measurement of Productivity, Melbourne Institute Working Paper n°9/98. Roland Berger Market Research (2005), Study on the Cost of Patenting , The European Patent Office (EPO), Munich, August 2004. Romer, P. (1986), “Increasing Returns and Long Run Growth,” Jour nal of Political Economy , 94: 1002–1037. Romer, P. (1990), “Endogenous Technological Change,” Journal of Political Economy 98 (October): X71–S102. Ronstadt, R. (1984), “R&D Abroad by US Multinationals,” in R. Stobaugh (eds), Technology Crossing Borders , Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. Roozenburg, N.F.M. and Eekels, J. (1995), Product Design: Fundamentals and Methods , Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Rosenberg, N. (1974), Science, Invention and Economic Growth, The Economic Journal 84 (333): 90–108. Rosenberg, N. (1976), Perspectives on Technology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rosenberg, N. (1982), Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rosenberg, N. (1994), Exploring the Black Box: Technology, Economics, and History , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 280 References

Rothwell, R. (1992a), Developments Towards the Fifth Generation Model of Innovation, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 1 (4): 73–75. Rothwell, R. (1992b), Successful Industrial Innovation: Critical Success Factors for the 1990s, Research Policy 22 (3): 221–239. Rothwell, R. (1994), Towards the Fifth-generation Innovation Process, International Marketing Review 11 (1): 7–31. Rugman, A.M. (1980), Internalization as a General Theory of Foreign Direct Investment: A Reappraisal of the Literature, Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv 116 (2): 365–379. Rugman, A.M. (1981), Inside the Multinationals , New York: Columbia University Press. Rugman, A.M. (1982), New Theories of the Multinational Enterprise , London: Croom Helm. Rugman, A.M. (1986), New Theories of the Multinational Enterprise: An Assessment of Internalization Theory, Bulletin of Economic Research 38 (2): 102–119. Rugman, A.M. (2005), The Regional Multinationals, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rugman, A.M. and Collinson, S. (2005), Multinational Enterprises in the New Europe: Are They Really Global?, Organizational Dynamics 34 (3): 258–272. Rugman, A.M. and Collinson, S. (2008), The Regional Nature of Japanese Multinational Business, Journal of International Business Studies 39: 215–230. Rugman, A.M. and D’Cruz, J.R. (1993), The “Double Diamond” Model of International Competitiveness: The Canadian Experience, Management International Review 2: 17–39. Rugman, A.M. and Hodgetts, R. (2001), The End of Global Strategy, European Management Journal 19 (4): 333–343. Rugman, A.M. and Oh, C.H. (2006), Regional Sales of Multinationals in the World Cosmetics Industry, European Management Journal 24 (2–3): 163–173. Rugman, A.M. and Oh, C.H. (2007), Multinationality and Regional Performance, 2001–2005, Research in Global Strategic Management 13: 31–43. Rugman, A.M. and Oh, C.H. (2008), Friedman’s Follies: Insights on the Globalization/ Regionalization Debate, Business and Politics 10 (2): 1–14. Rugman, A.M. and Verbeke, A. (2001), “Location, Competitiveness, and the Multinational Enterprise,” in A.M. Rugman and T. Brewer (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Business , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 150–177. Rugman, A.M. and Verbeke, A. (2003), Multinational Enterprises and Clusters: An Organizing Framework, Management International Review 3: 151–169. Rugman, A.M. and Verbeke, A. (2004a), “A Perspective on Regional and Global Strategies of Multinational Enterprises,” Journal of International Business Studies 35 (1): 3–18. Rugman, A.M. and Verbeke, A. (2004b), Regional Transnationals and Triad Strategy, Transnational Corporation 13 (3): 1–20. Rugman, A.M. and Verbeke, A. (2008a), A New Perspective on the Regional and Global Strategies of Multinational Services Firms, Management International Review 48 (4): 397–411. Rugman, A.M. and Verbeke, A. (2008b), A Regional Solution to the Strategy and Structure of Multinationals, European Management Journal 26: 305–313. Rugman, A.M. and Verbeke, A. (2009), “Location, Competitiveness, and the Multinational Enterprise,” in A.M. Rugman (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Business , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 147–180. Rugman, A.M. Kudina, A. and Yip, G.S. (2007), The Regional Dimension of UK Multinationals, Research in Global Strategic Management 13: 297–315. References 281

Rutherford, D. (1992), Dictionary of Economics , New York: Routledge. Sachs, J.D. and Warner, A.M. (1999), The Big Push, Natural Resource Booms and Growth, Journal of Development Economics 59 (1): 43–76. Sachs, J.D. and Warner, A.M. (2001), The Curse of Natural Resources, European Economic Review , 45 (4–6): 827–838. Sahal, D. (1985), Technological Guideposts and Innovation Avenues, Research Policy 14: 61–82. Sala-I-Martin, X., Blanke, J., Drzeniek Hanouz, M. Geiger, T. and Mia, I. (2009), “The Global Competitiveness Index 2009–2010: Contributing to Long-Term Prosperity amid the Global Economic Crisis,” in K. Schwab, The Global Competitiveness Report 2009–2010 , Geneva: World Economic Forum, 3–48. Sala-I-Martin, X., Bilbao-Osorio, B., Blanke, J., Crotti, R., Drzeniek Hanouz, M, Geiger, T. and Ko, C. (2012), “The Global Competitiveness Index 2012–2013: Strengthening Recovery by Raising Productivity,” in K. Schwab, The Global Competitiveness Report 2012–2013 , Geneva: World Economic Forum, 3–48. Samuelson, P.A. (1954), The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure, Review of Economics and Statistics , 36 (4): 387–389. Sanders, M. and ter Weel, B. (2000), Skill Biased Technical Change: Theoretical Concepts, Empirical Problems and a Survey of the Evidence, Druid Working Paper , Copenhagen Business School and Aalborg University. Sauvy, A. (1981), La machine et le chômage: le progrès technique et l’emploi , Paris: Dunod. Saxenian, A. (1990), Regional Networks and the Resurgence of Silicon Valley, California Management Review 33 (1): 89–112. Saxenian, A. (1994), Regional Competitive Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128 , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Saxenian, A. (1996), Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Scherer, F.M. (1965), Firm Size, Market Structure, Opportunity, and the Output of Patented Innovations, American Economic Review 55: 1097–1123. Scherer, F.M. (2010), “Pharmaceutical Innovation,” in B.H. Hall and N. Rosenberg (eds), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation , Volume 1, Amsterdam: Nort-Holland, 539–574. Scherer, F.M. and Harhoff, D. (2000), Technology Policy for a World of Skew-Distributed Outcomes, Research Policy 29 (4–5): 559–566. Schmoch, U., Laville, F., Patel, P. and Frietsch, R. (2003), Linking Technology Areas to Industrial Sectors , Final Report to the European Commission, DG Research. Schmookler, J. (1950), The Interpretation of Patent Statistics, Jour nal of the Patent Office Society 32 (2): 123–146. Schmookler, J. (1954), The Level of Inventive Activity, Review of Economics and Statistics : 183–190. Schmookler, J. (1966), Invention and Economic Growth, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Schumpeter, J.A. (1934), The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry Into Profits, Capital, Credits, Interest, and the Business Cycle , New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. Schumpeter, J.A. (1937), Preface to the Japanese edition of Theorie der Wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung, reprinted in: Schumpeter, J.A. (1989), Essays on Entrepreneurs, Innovations, Business Cycles, and the Evolution of Capitalism. (eds) by R.V. Clemence, New Brunswick/London: Transaction Publishers, 165–168. 282 References

Schumpeter, J.A. (1939), Business Cycles – A Theoretical, Historical, and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process, Volume I and II, New York and London: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Schumpeter, J.A. (1949), Economic Theory and Entrepreneurial History, in: Change and the Entrepreneur, Prepared by the Research Center in Entrepreneurial History, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 63–84, reprinted in: Schumpeter, J.A. (1989), Essays on Entrepreneurs, Innovations, Business Cycles, and the Evolution of Capitalism. (eds) by R.V. Clemence, New Brunswick/London: Transaction Publishers, 253–271. Scienceindustries (2012), L’industrie chimique et pharmaceutique Suisse , Zurich: Scienceindustries. Scotchmer, S. (2004), Innovation and Incentives , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Scott, A.J. (1991), The Aerospace-Electronics Industrial Complex of Southern California: The Formative Years, 1940–1960, Research Policy 20 (5): 439–456. Scott, A.J. (2000), “Economic Geography: The Great Half-Century,” in G.L. Clark, M.P. Feldman and M.S. Gertler (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 18–44. Scott, A.J. (2006), Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Industrial Development: Geography and the Creative Field Revisited, Small Business Economics 26 (1): 1–24. Segarra-Blasco, A. and Arauzo-Carod, J.-M. (2008), Sources of Innovation and Industry-University Interaction: Evidence from Spanish Firms, Research Policy 37 (8): 1283–1295. Segerstrom, P.S., Anant, T. and Dinopoulos, E. (1990), A Schumpeterian Model of the Product Life Cycle, American Economic Review 80: 1077–1092. Sethi, D., Guisinger, S.E., Phelan, S.E. and Berg, D.M. (2003), Trends in Foreign Direct Investment Flows: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, Journal of International Business Studies 34: 315–326. Setterfield, M. (2010), “An Introduction to Alternative Theories of Economic Growth,” in M. Setterfield (eds), Handbook of Alternative Theories of Economic Growth , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Shaver, J.M. and Flyer, F. (2000), Agglomeration Economies, Firm Heterogeneity, and Foreign Direct Investment in the United States, Strategic Management Journal 21: 1175–1193. Shaw, G., Curth, L. and Alexander, A. (2004), Selling Self-Service and the Supermarket: The Americanization of Food Retailing in Britain, 1945–60, Business History 46 (4): 568–582. Shin, J.-S. (1996), The Economics of Latecomers: Catching-up, Technology Transfer and Institutions in Germany, Japan and South Korea , London: Routledge. Sidrauski, M. (1967), Rational Choice of Patterns of Growth in a Monetary Economy, American Economic Review , 57: 534–544. Simmie, J. (2002), Knowledge Spillovers and Reasons for the Concentration of Innovative SMEs, Urban Studies 39 (5–6): 885–902. Simmie, J. (2005), Innovation and Space: A Critical Review of the Literature, Regional Studies 39 (6): 789–804. Simmie, J. (2008), “The Contribution of Clustering to Innovation: From Porter I Agglomeration to Porter II Export Base Theories,” in C. Karlsson (eds), Handbook of Research on Innovation and Clusters: Cases and Policies , Chelthenham: Edward Elgar, 19–32. References 283

Simonetti, R., Archibugi, D. and Evangelista, R. (1995), “Product and Process Innovations: How Are They Defined? How Are They Quantified?,” Scientometrics 32 (1): 77–89. Simonetti, R, Taylor, K. and Vivarelli, M. (2000), “Modelling the Employment Impact of Innovation: Do Compensation Mechanisms Works?” in M. Vivarelli and M. Pianta (eds), The Employment Impact of Innovation: Evidence and Policy , London: Routledge. Simonetti, R. and Tancioni, M. (2002), A Macroeconomic Model for the Analysis of the Impact of Technological Change and Trade on Employment, Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics 13: 185–221. Smith, A. (1776), Essai sur la nature et les causes de la richesse des nations, édition française, Paris: Gallimard. Smith, A. (1776/1863), An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations , New Edition, Edinburgh: Adam and Charles Black. Smith, D. and Florida, R. (1994), Agglomeration and Industry Location: An Econometric Analysis of Japanese-Affiliated Manufacturing Establishments in Automotive Related Industries, Journal of Urban Economics 36: 23–41. Smith, K. (2005), “Measuring Innovation,” in J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery and R. R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 148–177. Smolny, W. (1998), Innovation, Prices and Employment: A Theoretical Model and an Application for West German Manufacturing Firms, Journal of Industrial Economics 46: 359–381. Snowdon, B. and Stonehouse, G. (2006), Competitiveness in a Globalized World: Michael Porter on the Microeconomic Foundations of the Competitiveness of Nations, Regions, and Firms, Journal of International Business Studies 37: 163–175. Soete, L. (1987), The Impact of Technological Innovation on International Trade Patterns: The Evidence Reconsidered, Research Policy 16: 101–130. Soete, L. and Wyatt, S. (1983), The Use of Foreign Patenting as an Internationally Comparable Science and Technology Output Indicator, Scientometrics 5: 31–54. Solar Impulse (2010), www.solarimpulse.com. Solow, R.M. (1956), “A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth,” Quarterly Journal of Economics 70 (1): 65–94. S ö lvell, Ö . (2002), The Multi-Home Based Multinational – Combining Global Competitiveness and Local Innovativeness , Paper presented at the Symposium in honor of John Stopford, London. S ö lvell, Ö . (2008), Clusters: Balancing Evolutionary and Constructive Forces, Stockholm: Ivory Tower Publishing. S ö lvell, Ö ., Lindqvist, G. and Ketels, C. (2003), The Cluster Initiative Greenbook , Stockholm: Bromma tryck AB. Spence, A.S. and Kirchhoff, B.A. (2006), “Schumpeter and New Technology Based Firms: Towards a Framework for How NTBFs Cause Creative Destruction,” International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal 2 (2): 145–156. Spiezia, V. and Vivarelli, M. (2002), “Innovation and Employment: A Critical Survey,” in N. Greenan, Y. L’Horty and J. Mairesses (eds), Productivity, Inequality, and the Digital Economy, Cambridge , MA: The MIT Press: 101–131. SPRU (1972), Success and Failure in Industrial Innovation: Report on the Project SAPPHO , by the Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex, London: The Centre for the Study of Industrial Innovation. Sterckx, S. and Cockbain, J. (2012), Exclusion from Patentability: How Far Has the European Patent Office Eroded Boundaries , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 284 References

Sternitzke, C., Bartkowski, A. and Schramm, R. (2008), Visualizing Patent Statistics by Means of Social Network Analysis Tools, World Patent Information 30 (2): 115–131. Stevens, R. (1941), A Report on Industrial Research as a National Resource: Introduction, Research: A National Resource (II): Industrial Research, NRC. Washington D.C.: USGPO. Stiglitz, J.E. (2007), Making Globalization Work, New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.. Stokes, D.E. (1997), Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation , Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press. Stolpe, M. (2002), Determinants of Knowledge Diffusion as Evidenced in Patent Data: the Case of Liquid Crystal Display Technology, Research Policy 31 (7): 1181–1198. Stoper, M. (1992), The Limits of Globalization: Technology Districts and International Trade, Journal of Economic Geography 68: 60–93. Stoper, M. (1997), “Territories, Flows, and Hierarchies in the Global Economy,” in K.R. Cox (eds), Spaces of Globalization: Reasserting the Power of the Local , New York: Guilford Press. Stoper, M. and Salais, R. (1997), The Regional World: Territorial Development in the Global Economy , New York: Guilford Press. Swan, T.W. (1956), Economic Growth and Capital Accumulation, Economic Record 32: 334–361. Swedenborg, B. (1979), The Multinational Operations of Swedish Firms: An Analysis of Determinants and Effects , Stockholm: Almquist et Wiksell. Swiss-American Chamber of Commerce and The Boston Consulting Group (2008), Creative Switzerland? Fostering an Innovation Powerhouse! , Zurich, December. Swiss Biotech (2011), Swiss Biotech Report 2011 , Zurich: Swiss Biotech Association. Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property (2013a), Patent – First Steps, available at: https://www.ige.ch/en/patents.html. Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property (2013b), Parallel Imports, available at: https://www.ige.ch/en/legal-info/legal-areas/patents/parallel-imports.html. Swissinfo.ch (2011), La vie dans un “paradis fiscal” Suisse, by C. Britt, June 20, available at: http://www.swissinfo.ch/fre/economie/La_vie_dans_un_paradis_fiscal_ suisse.html?cid=32936656. Tan, J. (2006), Growth of Industry Clusters and Innovation: Lessons from Beijing Zhongguancun Science Park, Journal of Business Venturing 21: 827–850. Tanner, A.N. (2011), Spatial Dynamics of Technological Evolution: Technological Relatedness as Driver for Radical Emerging Technologies , Paper presented at the 2011 DIME_DRUID ACADEMY Winter Conference, Aalborg, Denmark, January 20–22. Tavares, A. T. and Teixeira, A. (2006), “Introduction,” in A.T. Tavares and A. Teixeira (eds), Multinationals, Clusters and Innovation: Does Public Policy Matter, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Teece, D.J. (1981), The Multinational Enterprise: Market Failure and Market Power Consideration, Sloan Management Review 22: 3–17. Teece, D.J. (1985), Multinational Enterprises, International Governance and Industrial Organization, American Economic Review 75: 233–238. Temple, J. (1999), The New Growth Evidence, Journal of Economic Literature 37: 112–56. Tether, B.S., Smith, I.J. and Thwaites, A.T. (1997), Smaller Enterprises and Innovation in the UK: The SPRU Innovations Database Revisited, Research Policy 26: 19–32. The Economist (2008), A Bigger World – A Special Report on Globalization , September 2008. References 285

The Economist (2010), Steve Jobs and the iPad of hope, January 2010, available at: http://www.economist.com/node/15391134. The Wall Street Journal (2010), Novartis Purchases the Rest of Alcon for $12.9 Billion , by G. Mijuk, J. Whalen and D. Cimilluca, December 16. The Wall Street Journal (2011), Tax Haven’s Tax Haven Pays a Price for Success, by D. Ball, August 29, available at: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240531119048 75404576528123989551738.html Tidd, J. and Bessant, J. (2009), Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change , Fourth Edition, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Tinguely, X. (2006), Du projet de création d’un cluster de la mécanique au groupement injec- tion de la région fribourgeoise , Bachelor thesis, University of Fribourg, Switzerland. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics (2008), The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics , Second Edition, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Thompson, W.R. (1962), “Locational Differences in Inventive Effort and their Determinants,” in R.R. Nelson (eds), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Thompson, J.L. (2004), Innovation through People, Management Decision 42 (9): 1082–1094. Tong, X. and Davidson Frame, J. (1994), Measuring National Technological Performance with Patent Claims Data, Research Policy 23 (2): 133–141. Total (2012), Factbook 2011 , Paris: Total. Tracey, P. and Clark, G.L. (2003), Alliances, Networks and Competitive Strategy: Rethinking Clusters of Innovation, Growth and Change 34 (1):1–16. Trajtenberg, M. (1990a), A Penny for your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations, RAND Journal of Economics 21 (1): 172–187. Trajtenberg, M. (1990b), Economic Analysis of Product Innovation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R. and Jaffe, A.B. (1997), University versus Corporate Patents: A Window on the Basicness of Invention, Economics of Innovation and New Technology 5: 19–50. Tushman, M.L. and Anderson, P. (1986), Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments, Administrative Science Quarterly 31 (3): 439–465. U.S. Cluster Mapping (2013), http://clustermapping.us. Ulku, H. (2007), R&D, Innovation, and Growth: Evidence from Four Manufacturing Sectors in OECD Countries, Oxford Economic Papers 59: 513–535. Ullman, E.L. (1958), Regional Development and the Geography of Concentration, Papers and Proceedings of the Regional Science Asociation IV: 179–198. UN (2003), Foreign Investment in Latin American and the Caribbean , New York: United Nations Publications. UNCTAD (1995), World Investment Report 1995: Transnational Corporations and Competitiveness , United Nations: New York and Geneva. UNCTAD (2005), World Investment Report 2005: Transnational Corporations and the Internationalization of R&D , United Nations: New York and Geneva. UNCTAD (2008), World Investment Report 2008: Transnational Corporations and the Infrastructure Challenge , United Nations: New York and Geneva. UNCTAD (2012a), World Investment Report 2012: A New Generation of Investment Policies , United Nations: New York and Geneva. UNCTAD (2012b), UNCTAD stat: Inward and Outward Foreign Direct Investment Flows, Annual, 1970–2011 , available at: http://unctadstat.unctad.org. 286 References

UNCTAD (2012c), UNCTAD stat: Inward and Outward Foreign Direct Investment Stock, Annual, 1970–2011 , available at: http://unctadstat.unctad.org. USA Today (2011), State of the Union: Fact-checking Obama’s speech, http://www. usatoday.com/news/washington/2011–01–25-state-of-the-union-fact-check_N.htm, February 5th, 2012. Usher, A.P. (1954), A History of Mechanical Inventions, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Utterback, J. (1974), Innovation in Industry and the Diffusion of Technology, Science 183 (4125): 620–626. Utterback, J. and Abernathy, W. (1975), “A Dynamic Model of Process and Product Innovation,” Omega 3 (6): 639–656. Van de Ven, A., Polley, D.E., Garud, R., and Venkataraman, S. (1999), The Innovation Journey , New York: Oxford University Press. Van der Panne, G., Van Beers, C. and Kleinknecht, A. (2003), Success and Failure of Innovation: A Literature Review, International Journal of Innovation Management 7 (3): 1–30. Van Pottelsberghe, B. (2008), Europe’s R&D: Missing the Wrong Targets?, Intereconomics , July/August: 220–225. Van Reenen, J. (1997), Employment and Technological Innovation: Evidence from UK Manufacturing Firms, Journal of Labor Economics 15: 255–284. Veblen, T. (1915), Imperial Germany and the Industrial Revolution , New York: Macmillan. Venables, A. (1995), Economic Integration and the Location of Firms, American Economic Review 85: 296–300. Verbeke, A. (2009), International Business Strategy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Verloop, J. (2004), Insight in Innovation: Managing Innovation by Understanding the Laws of Innovation , Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. Vernon, R. (1966), International Investment and International Trade in the Product Life Cycle, Quarterly Journal of Economics 80 (5): 190–207. Vernon, R. (1974), Competition Policy Toward Multinational Corporations, The American Economic Review 64 (2): 276–282. Vernon, R. (1977), Strom over Multinationals: The Real Issues , London: Macmillan. Verspagen, B. (2005), “Innovation and Economic Growth,” in J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery and R. R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 487–513. Vietor, R.H.K. (2006), How Countries Compete: Strategy, Structure, and Government in the Global Economy , Boston: Harvard Business Review Press. Vivarelli, M. (1995), The Economics of Technology and Employment: Theory and Empirical Evidence , Aldershot: Edward Elgar. Vivarelli, M., Evangelista, R. and Pianta, M. (1996), Innovation and Employment: Evidence from Italian Manufacturing, Research Policy 25: 1013–1026. Von Hippel, E. (1988), The Sources of Innovation . New York: Oxford University Press. Von Th ü nen, J.H. (1826), Der isolierte Staat in Beziehung auf nationale Ökonomie und Landwirtschaft , Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer. Voss, H. (2011), The Determinants of Chinese Outward Direct Investment , New Horizons in International Business, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Wade, R. (1990), Governing the Market: Economic Theory and the Role of Government in East Asian Industrialization , Princeton: Princeton University Press. References 287

Wallsten, S. (2001), An Empirical Test of Geographic Knowledge Spillovers Using Geographic Information Systems and Firm-Level Data, Regional Science and Urban Economics 31 (5): 571–599. Wang, M.Y. (2002), The Motivations behind China’s Government-Initiated Industrial Investments, Pacific Affairs 75 (2): 187–206. Waxell, A. and Malmberg, A. (2007), What is Global and what is Local in Knowledge- Generating Interaction? The Case of the Biotech Cluster in Uppsala, Sweden, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development 19: 137–159. Weber, A. (1909/1929), Theory of the Location of Industries, trans. by C.J. Friedrich, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Wengraf, T. (2001), Qualitative Resarch Interviewing , London: Sage Publications Ltd. Weterings, A. and Boschma, R. (2006), “The Impact of Geography on the Innovative Productivity of Software Firms in the Netherlands,” in P. Cooke and A. Piccaluga (eds), Regional Development in the Knowledge Economy , London: Routledge, 63–83. WEF (2008), The Global Competitiveness Report 2008–2009, Geneva: The World Economic Forum. WEF (2009), The Global Competitiveness Report 2009–2010, Geneva: The World Economic Forum. WEF (2011), The Global Competitiveness Report 2011–2012, Geneva: The World Economic Forum. WEF (2012), The Global Competitiveness Report 2012–2013, Geneva: The World Economic Forum. Williams, T.I. (2000), A History of Invention: From Stone Axes to Silicon Chips , Revised Edition, New York: Checkmark Books. Williamson, O.E. (1971), The Vertical Integration of Production: Market Failures Considerations, American Economic Review 61: 112–123. Winter, S.G. (1987), “Knowledge and Competence as Strategic Assets,” in D. Teece (eds), The Competitive Challenge – Strategies for Industrial Innovation and Renewal , Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Company. WIPO (2013), International Exhaustion and Parallel Importation, available at: http:// www.wipo.int/sme/en/ip_business/export/international_Exhaustion.htm. World Bank (1993), The East Asian Miracle: Economic Growth and Public Policy, New York: Oxford University Press. Yang, Q., Mudambi, R. and Meyer, K.E. (2008), Conventional and Reverse Knowledge Flows in Multinational Corporations, Journal of Management 34 (5): 882–902. Young, A. (1993a), Invention and Bounded Learning by Doing, Journal of Political Economy 101 (3): 443–470. Young, A. (1993b), Substitution and Complementarity in Endogenous Innovation, Quarterly Journal of Economics 108: 775–807. Zander, I. (1999), How Do You Mean “Global”? An Empirical Investigation of Innovation Networks in the Multinational Corporation, Research Policy 28 (2–3): 195–213. Zander, U. and Kogut, B. (1995), Knowledge and the Speed of the Transfer and Imitation of Organizational Capabilities: An Empirical Test, Organization Science 6 (1): 76–92. Zeller, C. (2001), Clustering Biotech: A Recipe for Success? Spatial Patterns of Growth of Biotechnology in Munich, Rhineland and Hamburg, Small Business, 17 (1–2): 123–141. Zeller, C. (2002), “Regional and North Atlantic Knowledge Production in the Pharmaceutical Industry,” in V. Lo and E. Schamp (eds), Knowledge – The Spatial Dimension , Münster: Lit-Verlag. 288 References

Zeller, C. (2004), North Atlantic Innovative Relations of Swiss Pharmaceuticals and the Proximities with Regional Biotech Arenas, Economic Geography 80 (1): 83–111. Zhan, J.X. (1995), Transnationalization and Outward Investment: The Case of Chinese Firms, Transnational Corporations 4: 67–100. Ziedonis, R.H. (2004), Don’t Fence Me In: Fragmented Markets for Technology and the Patent Acquisition Strategies of Firms, Management Science 50 (6): 804–820. Zucker, L. G. and Darby, M.R. (1996), Star Scientists and Institutional Transformation: Patterns of Invention and Innovation in the Formation of the Biotechnology Industry, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 93 (12): 709–716. Zucker, L. G., Darby, M.R. and Brewer, M.B. (1998), Intellectual Human Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises, American Economic Review 88 (1): 290–306. Appendices

Appendix 1 : Glossary of the Principal Notions Surrounding the Concept of Innovation

Intellectual property: “Intangible property resulting from inventive activity, e.g. patents, trademarks and copyrights.” (Rutherford, 1992, p. 230). Invention: “A discovery of a new product or process of production which is often crudely measured by patent statistics. Economists have analyzed the rate of invention as a function of the business cycle, the type of market or the organization of scientific research.” (Rutherford, 1992, pp. 237–238). Patent: “A legally registered and protected invention which is the property of its inventor for a period of a year. Patents create a formidable technological barrier to entry, establishing and maintaining monopoly power. Since patents allow monopoly profits to accrue to their inventors, they are a major private incentive to research and development. Non-patentholders can only use patented technical knowledge by licence. Although the patent system may encourage inventors, it has been criticized on the grounds that all scientific knowledge should be a free good and that the considerable legal costs of registering and protecting a patent exclude the poor inventor from using the system.” (Rutherford, 1992, p. 343). Research and development (R&D): “The activity of inventing new processes and products and applying them in industry, especially those which are science based and dependent for their survival and long-term growth on innovation. The study of this is often termed ‘the economics of science’.” (Rutherford, 1992, p. 392). Science: “The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observa- tion and experiment.” (Oxford Dictionaries, 2013, Internet source). Technical progress: “The use of new techniques and/or the introduction of new products. Historically, technical progress has taken the form of the saving of labor and raw materials, mechanization and the use of inventions; in most cases, changes in the capital stock are necessary to achieve it. Technical progress can be measured by considering changes in the proportion of output using a particular technique, e.g. of steelmaking, by increases in speed or by improvements in product quality. Technical progress is a major determinant of economic growth.” (Rutherford, 1992, p. 457). Technology: “The application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry.” (Oxford Dictionaries, 2013, Internet source).

Note: In-depth definitions of some of these concepts can be found in The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics (2008). Source: Rutherford (1992) and Oxford Dictionaries (2013, Internet source).

289 290 Appendices

Appendix 2: Extract of the First Page of a Patent Application at the EPO

28 range >1000 bp RFU

24 range 500 - 1000 bp range < 200 bp 22 range 500 - 1000 bp

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Minutes

Source: European Patent Office (2013b, Internet source). Appendices 291

Appendix 3: Map of the Geographical Regions Analyzed

A. Cantons

Canton Canton AG Aargau NW Nidwalden AI Appenzell Innerrhoden OW Obwalden AR Appenzell Ausserrhoden SG St. Gallen BE Bern SH Schaffhausen BL Basel-Country SO Solothurn BS Basel-City SZ Schwyz FR Fribourg / Freiburg TG Thurgau GE Geneva TI Ticino GL Glarus UR Uri GR Graubünden / Grison VD Vaud JU Jura VS Valais / Wallis LU Luzern ZG Zug NE Neuchâtel ZH Zurich

Source: Personal elaboration. 292 Appendices

B. Districts (1/4)

No District Canton No District Canton 1 Canton Geneva GE 19 District de Sierre VS 2 District de Nyon VD 20 Bezirk Leuk VS 3 District de Morges VD 21 Bezirk Visp VS 4 District du Jura-Nord vaudois VD 22 Bezirk Raron VS 5 District du Gros-de-Vaud VD 23 Bezirk Brig VS 6 District de l'Ouest lausannois VD 24 Bezirk Goms VS 7 District de Lausanne VD 25 District de la Veveyse FR 8 District de Lavaux-Oron VD 26 District de la Gruyère FR 9 District de la Broye-Vully VD 27 District de la Glâne FR 10 District de la Riviera-Pays- VD 28 District de la Broye FR d'Enhaut 11 District d'Aigle VD 29 Bezirk See / District du Lac FR 12 District de Monthey VS 30 District de la Sarine FR 13 District de Saint-Maurice VS 31 Bezirk Sense FR 14 District de Martigny VS 32 District de Neuchâtel NE 15 District d'Entremont VS 33 District du Val-de-Ruz NE 16 District de Conthey VS 34 District de Boudry NE 17 District de Sion VS 35 District du Val-de-Travers NE 18 District d'Hérens VS 36 District du Locle NE Source: Personal elaboration. Appendices 293

B. Districts (3/4)

No District Canton No District Canton 77 Wahlkreis Werdenberg SG 92 Bezirk Münchwilen TG 78 Wahlkreis Rheintal SG 93 Bezirk Frauenfeld TG 79 Wahlkreis Rorschach SG 94 Bezirk Steckborn TG 80 Wahlkreis St. Gallen SG 95 Bezirk Diessenhofen TG 81 Wahlkreis Wil SG 96 Bezirk Stein SH 82 Wahlkreis Toggenburg SG 97 Bezirk Reiat SH 83 Wahlkreis See-Gaster SG 98 Bezirk Schaffhausen SH 84 Kanton Appenzell Innerrhoden AI 99 Bezirk Schleitheim SH 85 Bezirk Hinterland AR 100 Bezirk Oberklettgau SH 86 Bezirk Mittelland AR 101 Bezirk Unterklettgau SH 87 Bezirk Vorderland AR 102 Bezirk Andelfingen ZH 88 Bezirk Arbon TG 103 Bezirk Winterthur ZH 89 Bezirk Bischofszell TG 104 Bezirk Pfäffikon ZH 90 Bezirk Kreuzlingen TG 105 Bezirk Hinwil ZH 91 Bezirk Weinfelden TG 106 Bezirk Meilen ZH

Source: Personal elaboration. 294 Appendices

C. Main regions

D. Employmentbasins

Source: Personal elaboration. Appendices 295

Appendix 4 : Interview Protocol

Important note: as a semi-structured form of interview was chosen, not every question presented below was asked.

General As a starting point, could you explain your position and give a description of your daily duties/challenges? Could you briefl y outline your background (education and previous work experience)? In-house Regarding the sums spent in R&D and the nature of the pharma- innovation ceutical industry, innovation is crucial to develop competitive management advantages and sustain high level of productivity and growth. • Can you tell me a little bit more about the prevalence of innovation for your company? • The pharmaceutical industry is known for being particularly competitive. How would you evaluate the competitiveness of the pharmaceutical industry and the role of innovation to that extent? • Could you point out any signifi cant change in the nature of competition and innovation in your industry? • In terms of sums spent in R&D (past, present, future)? • In terms of the outcome of the innovation process? Is it harder to come up with successful innovations? As innovation is the result of the combination of different types of knowledge, capabilities, skills and resources, the innovation process is not only highly uncertain and unpredictable but also among the most complex processes both technically and socially. • How do you try to reduce the inherent uncertainty of the innovation process and thus increase the probability of success of the innovation process? • Feedbacks, interactions and collaborations between people involved in the innovation process are crucial to the success of the innovation process. How do you insure knowledge transfer between people involved in the innovation process within your company? • Roche: According to your annual report, interdivisional collaboration between your two divisions (pharmaceuticals and diagnostics) is particularly encouraged to foster innovation in both divisions. Similarly, scientifi c freedom and diversity of approaches (in terms of diversity of views, cultures and approaches) are advocated to stimulate creativity and innovation. As a consequence, your company pays particular attention to gender diversity and your innovation strategy has been articulated around the attraction of talents, dialogue and performance feedbacks, supporting employees’ development and ultimately rewarding innovation. • Could you tell me a little bit how this strategy has been developed and how is it concretely implemented? 296 Appendices

• This strategy has been designed to encourage scientifi c breakthroughs. What are, according to your experience, the main factors increasing the probability of success of the innovation process? • As this strategy puts a special emphasis on diversity of approaches, how do you bring together different knowledge held within your enterprise and take the most out of it to bolster your innovation process? Cluster, Your company is the archetype of a multinational enterprise. nearby • How operating in different environments affects your innovation environment process? and • What is the importance of location in your innovation innovation strategy? • How do you take advantage of the specifi cities of each environment where you operate? • The US seem to play an important role in your innovation strategy. What does a presence in the US signify both in terms of innovation and market opportunities? According to my patents analysis, pharmaceutical clusters (regions where the pharmaceutical industry is particularly concentrated) seem to play an important role in your innovation strategy. • Could you comment these results? • US pharmaceutical clusters seem to be an important source of knowledge and innovation for your company. What do these regions specialized in the pharmaceutical industry bring to your company? • Concretely, does your location here in […] provide you specifi c advantages that, for example, the Basel region in Switzerland does not offer you? • Is […] specialized in any particular fi eld of research? If yes, which one(s)? In contrast, in which fi eld of research is the Basel region specialized? • Do you intendedly target clusters when you decide to establish new subsidiaries? • As some of your subsidiaries are located in regions identifi ed as pharmaceutical cluster regions and some others are not, does location tend to matter more for some activities than others? R&D? Manufacture? What activities do you tend to locate in clusters? • What are the advantages of being part of a pharmaceutical cluster in terms of innovation? • How do you concretely take advantage of the dynamic environment of clusters? How do you benefi t from the presence of rival fi rms, suppliers, companies in related industries, a pool of specialized employees, academic and research institutions and business associations? Appendices 297

• Openness (to new ideas, new processes…) and absorptive capacities are crucial to take advantage of external knowledge. How do you tap into knowledge held within clusters? • Although clusters may provide an environment conducive to innovation and productivity growth, do they also represent a threat in terms of knowledge outfl ow to nearby competitors? To what extent the benefi ts of being part of a cluster (agglomeration, knowledge spillovers) outweigh the potential costs of knowledge outfl ow to rival fi rms? Could the potential knowledge outfl ow to nearby competitors incite you to move away from clusters in order to protect cutting-edge technologies? Roche: By referring to your annual report, the importance of setting up a rich innovation network by interacting and developing collaborations with outside partners such as universities, research institutes or biotech companies is at the core of your innovation strategy (more than 150 outside partners so far). • How being part of clusters does contribute to enrich your innovation network and how does proximity with outside partners affect your innovation capacities? • How do you develop your absorptive capacities in order to take advantage of knowledge created by your external partners? Cross- According to my patent analysis, having a presence in multiple cluster pharmaceutical clusters seems to play an important role in your relationships global innovation strategy. and the • How do these cross-cluster relationships contribute to improve management your innovation performances? of the • Does the presence in multiple clusters allow you to tap into innovation different types of knowledge and capabilities? If yes, could you network give me some examples of specifi c knowledge or capabilities that you target in different clusters? • Through the years your company has built an impressive global innovation network by establishing research activities in many different locations around the world. How do you deal with the complexity of your global innovation network and what are the main challenges to insure the effi ciency of your innovation process? • Regarding the internal management of your global innovation process, how do you make sure that knowledge developed in one of your subsidiary benefi ts your whole company? In other words, how internal knowledge transfers are supported? • Market opportunities and new sources of economic growth are an important driver of location choices. How do economic considerations determine the location of your research activity? Are market opportunities a prerequisite to the establishment of research activities in a particular location? Source: Personal elaboration Index

Abernathy, W., 78 availability of, 91, 96 Abramovitz, M., 45 human, 16, 37, 39, 40 academic institutions, 92 physical, 37 agents, 43 public, 37 agglomeration economies, 106 Carty, J.J., 77 Aghion, P., 33 Casson, M.C., 22 aircraft industry, 76 catch-up development, 44–6, 69 Alcon, 115 catch-up innovation cycle, 9 alliance capitalism, 119–20 chain-linked model of Apple, 9–10, 85 innovation, 80–4 applied research, 54, 77, 78 Chandler, A.D., 15 architectural innovation, 15 change Aristophanes, 10 organizational, 29 Arrow, K.J., 36 pace of, 1 Asheim, B.T., 97 China, 45, 216, 241n6 Asian economies, catching-up circular model of innovation, 101–2 by, 45–6 classical economics, 25–6 Audretsch, D.B., 105 clusters, 31, 42, 71, 86–108 automobile industry, 106 advantages of, 95–7, 107–8 collaboration in, 94–5 barriers to entry, 96 competition in, 94–6 Basel pharmaceutical cluster, 3, 95, concept of, 92–3, 238n6 133–4, 208–32, 235 defined, 2, 94 basic research, 54, 77, 78 empirical evidence on, 104–7 Bichowsky, F.R., 77 global innovation strategy of MNEs BioValley, 222, 225 and, 123–30 Birkinshaw, J., 21 innovation and, 2–3, 28 Blanchard, O., 35 pharmaceutical, 217–30 Boston Life-Science Cluster, 221 relationships between actors in, 94 bottleneck issues, 84 Switzerland, 193–206 BRIC countries, 110, 241n3 unique environment of, 96–7 Brock, W., 35 Cobb-Douglas production Bush, V., 77 function, 33 business cycle, 8, 28 collaboration business enterprises in clusters, 94–5 innovation and, 21–3 in innovation process, 119–20 R&D expenditures by, 17–18 collective consumption goods, 37 value chains, 20–2 co-location, 95, 96 business environment, 91–2, 96–7, commercialization, 78 234, 235 communication technology, 87, 98 Community Innovation Cantwell, J., 48 Survey (CIS), 66–7 capital company sophistication, 90 accumulation, 25, 32, 36, 36, 237n1 compensation mechanisms, 47, 239n18

299 300 Index competition economic development, innovation in clusters, 94–6 and, 7, 44–6 global, 110, 127, 133, 234 economic growth imperfect, 116 development and, 45 level of, 91 endogenous, 35–43 monopolistic, 39, 41, 116 exogenous, 31–5 competitive advantage, 20–3, 71, innovation and, 3, 29–43, 69, 84, 88, 110, 119, 133 73, 233 competitiveness neoclassical model of, 31–5 innovation and, 43–9, 233 patterns of, 30 location and, 86–97 economic performance macroeconomic, 90, 234 competitiveness and, 44–9 microeconomic, 90–2, innovation and, 24–51, 69 107, 233–4 economics, of innovation, 2, 5–6 sources of, 88–97 economies of scale, 44, 88, 107, 115 computers, 1, 12 Edison, T., 79 Concorde, 76 Edquist, C., 101 cost leadership strategy, 21 education, 16, 54 cost savings, 14 efficiency, 110 cotton spinning, 1 efficiency-seeking investment, 114–15 creative destruction, 27, 41, 42, 50 electricity, 1, 30 cross-border co-operation electric light bulb, 79 modes, 119 electronic industry, 9, 63 cross-border transactions, 110 embeddedness, 102–3 cross-cluster relationships, 217–30 employment, 14, 46–8, 69 customer feedback, 78, 84 endogenous growth theory, 36–43 customers, 98 endowments, 89–90 entrepreneurs, 8, 29, 96 DeBresson, C., 66 equilibrium, 26, 43 demand conditions, 91 European Cluster Observatory, 105, 218 design, 79 European Commission, 66–7 developing countries, European Patent Office (EPO), 3, 17, 18, catching-up by, 44–6 134, 138, 143–9, 150 development, 77 evolutionary dynamics, 27 Diamond, J., 11 exchange rate theories, 117 diamond model, 88–93, exogenous growth, 31–5 117–18 experimental development, 54 differentiation strategy, 21 explicit knowledge, 98–9 diffusion, 76, 78 diversity, 40 face-to-face relationships, 98–9, division of labor, 25, 40, 93 101, 124 Dixit, A., 41 factor (input) conditions, 91 Doha Declaration, 239n7 Fagerberg, J., 5, 10, 86 dominant design, 14 feedback, in innovation process, Dunning, J.H., 116, 117, 119 78–9, 83–4 Dvorak keyboard, 11 Feldman, M.P., 73, 104, 105, 106 firms eclectic paradigm, 117–18 continuous interactions between, 98 economic activity, spatial in related industries, 91, 98, 105 concentration of, 2, 86–108 strategy of, 91 Index 301 first mover advantage, 84 human capital, 16, 37, 39, 40 Fordism, 15 human resources, 91 foreign affiliates, 122–3 foreign direct investment (FDI), imitation, 63 109–118, 120, 121, 241n2 incremental innovation, 12, 42 Frankel-Romer model, 36 India, 216, 241n6 Frascati Manual, 53, 57 indoor plumbing, 1 Freeman, C., 100 industrial organization, 7, 41 Fribourg, Switzerland, 95 industrial revolutions, 1, 30 innovation General Agreement on Tariffs and clusters and, 2–3, 28, 31, 42, 71, Trade (GATT), 59 86–108 general equilibrium, 43 competitive advantage and, 21 generic drugs, 63 competitiveness and, 48–9, 233 geographical distribution, of Swiss concentration of, 104–7 inventive activities, 137–80 defined, 8–10, 15–16 geography of innovation, 71–2, demand for, 79 109–32 diffusion of, 27 see also clusters economic development and, 44–6 Germany, 44 economic growth and, 3, 29–43, 69, Gerschenkron, A., 44, 45 73, 233 Gertler, M.S., 97 economic performance and, global competition, 110, 127, 24–51, 69 133, 234 economics of, 2, 5–6 Global Competitiveness Report (GCR), employment and, 46–8 48, 134 geography of, 71–2, 109–32 global financial crisis, 6 history of, 9–10 globalization, 1–2, 11, 48, 71, 72, implementation of, 16–22 87, 88, 109, 125 incremental, 12, 42 of innovation process, 119–3 indicators, 52–3 MNEs and, 111–18 vs. invention, 10–12, 65 Godin, B., 77, 78, 83 location and, 86–97 Gordon, R.J., 1 management of, 21, 75 government, role of, 91–2, 234 marketing, 16 Gow, I., 57 measurement of, 52–70 Griliches, Z., 58 organizational, 15–16 Gross Domestic Product (GDP), in pharmaceutical sector, 209–13 30, 109 process, 13–16 Grossman, G., 41, 42 product, 13–16 Gross National Product (GNP), 30 radical, 12, 42, 236n7 growth hubs, 28 sources of, 98 growth theory, 25, 31–5, 50, 238n8 spatial concentration of, 2 spatial features of, 17 Hansen, M.T., 21 study of, 1, 5–6, 7, 25–9, Helpman, B., 41, 42 71, 99–100 home-base augmenting (HBA), 122 success rate by industry, 79 home-base exploiting (HBE), 121 surveys, 66–7 Hommen, L., 101 systems of, 97–104, 107–8 horizontal differentiation, 40, 42 types of, 12–16, 22–3, 27 Howitt, P., 33 innovation cycles, 1, 28 302 Index innovation process, 1–3, 8–9, 27, Koopmans, T.C., 35 28, 29, 43, 65–6 Krugman, P., 93–4 analysis of, 76–80 aspects of, 74 labor as “black box”, 74–6 costs, 115 chain-linked model of, 80–4 division of, 25, 40, 93 characteristics of, 97–9 labor markets, 46–8 circular model of, 101–4 learning by doing, 36, 80 cognitive nature of, 73–85 learning through interacting, 99 complexity of, 233–4 linear model of innovation, 76–80, 85 forces driving, 75–6 location, role of, 86–104, 107, globalization of, 119–3 133, 241n1 linear model of, 76–80, 85 location-specific advantages, 117–18, systemic view of, 83 119–20, 121 input costs, 88 Lundan, S.M., 116, 117 input measures, 53–6, 57 institutional change, 29 macroeconomic environment, 90, 234 intellectual property rights, 39, 92 macroeconomics, 7 see also patents Malmberg, A., 97–8 internal combustion engines, 1 Mankiw, N.G., 37, 38 internalization advantages, 117 marketing innovations, 12, 16 Internet, 1 market pull, 75 invention, 10–12, 61, 62, 65, 231 market-seeking investments, 114 inward FDI (IFDI), 111, 113 Marshall, A., 93 Marx, K., 26–7 Jaffe, A.B., 104, 105–6 Marx-Schumpeter model of Japan, 44, 45, 100 technological competition, 27 Jobs, S., 85 Massachusetts, 221 joint ventures, 2 Maxcy, G., 121 measurement of innovation, 52–70 Kaldor, N., 36 input measures, 53–6, 57 Kells, S., 57 object approach to, 66–7 Kelvin, Lord, 68 output measures, 56–67 Ketels, C.H.M., 109 subject approach to, 66–7 Kline, S.J., 8, 12, 24, 65–6, 74, 75, 76, Mees, C.E.K., 77 80–2, 83, 84, 86, 101 Mensch, G., 29 knowledge microeconomic environment, 90–2, characteristics of, 38 107, 234 cost of, 39 Mirman, L., 35 as cumulative, 39 modular innovation, 15 explicit, 98–9 monopolistic competition, 39, 41, 116 external sources of, 85, 86–7, 97–104 Mowery, D., 75 generation of, 16, 17, 38, 122–3 Mudambi, R., 21 outflow, 124 multinational enterprises (MNEs), 72, spatial attributes of, 106–7 109–11, 235 spillovers, 2, 104–6, 124 clusters and, 123–30 tacit, 98–9, 106–7, 119, 122, globalization and, 111–18 124, 125 internationalization of R&D knowledge economy, 25, 50, 68, by, 120–3 71, 115 motivations of, 114–15 Index 303 national system of innovation, 100–1 Pianta, M., 14, 47 natural resources, 89–90, 91, 114 political jurisdictions, 141 neoclassical economics, 26, 93, 239n19 population growth, 32, 33, 34 neoclassical growth theory, 31–5 Porter, M., 2, 20–3, 82, 88–95, 102–3, network effects, 107 117–18, 137, 221, 238n6 new growth theory, 35–43 primary activities, 21 Novartis, 115, 124, 126, 213, process innovation, 13–16 216, 221, 225 Procter and Gamble, 115 novelty, 8, 65 product innovation, 13–16 production, 2, 76, 78, 87 Obama, B., 50–1 production function, 41 offshoring, 2 production technology, 13 OLI paradigm, 117–20, 126–7 productivity, 48–9, 56, 88–91, 95, 104 openness, 84, 101–4 productivity growth, 25 organizational change, 29 product life cycles, 9, 29, 78, 120–1, organizational innovations, 15–16 237n10 organizational memory, 84 products, adaptation to local markets, 9 organizations, 17 product technology, 13 Oslo Manual, 66 profits, 27 output measures, 56–67 property rights, 38, 39 outward FDI (OFDI), 111, 112 prosperity, 48, 49, 89, 90 ownership-specific advantages, 117, public capital, 37 120, 121, 123 public goods, 37, 38, 39 quality improvement, 42 patent applications, 3, 17, 18, 59–60 in Basel pharmaceutical cluster, QWERTY keyboard, 11 208–32 evolution of number of, from radical innovation, 12, 42, 236n7 Switzerland, 143–9 railroads, 1 sectoral distribution of, in rationality, 43 Switzerland, 181–93 redundancy, 32 spatial distribution of, in regional innovation systems, 100–4 Switzerland, 149–79 regionalization, 2 patent citations, 105–6 related industries, 91, 98, 105 Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), 17 research and development (R&D), 16, patent flooding, 63 17, 78 patents, 10, 39, 134 expenditures on, 79 data on, 138–42 funding, 17, 18, 54 defined, 57 as input measure of innovation, 53–6 economic foundations of, 60 internationalization of, 110–11, exhaustion of rights, 239n7 120–3, 213–17, 230, 234 as measure of innovation, 57–65 outputs of, 19 strengths and weaknesses of, 61–4 returns on, 56 path dependency, 84 as source of innovation, 110–11 Pavitt, K., 80 types of activities in, 54 Perez, C., 29 research institutions, 92, 100 performance, 76 retail industry, 15 pharmaceutical sector, 63, 80, 133–4, Ricardo, D., 26 182, 208–32 Roche, 213, 216, 225 physical capital, 37 Rogers, M., 57, 78 304 Index

Romer, P., 41 Basel pharmaceutical cluster, Ronstadt, R., 121 133–4, 208–32 Rosenberg, N., 8, 12, 24, 65–6, 74–6, geographical distribution of inventive 80–4, 86, 101 activities in, 137–80 Rothwell, R., 79 innovation in, 3 routines, 84 main inventive clusters in, 193–206 Samuelson, P.A., 37, 38 number of patent applications Sauvy, A., 14 from, 143–9 Schmookler, J., 9, 13 pharmaceutical industry Schumpeter, J.A., 1, 7, 8, 10, 12–13, 15, in, 209–13 16, 26–9, 42, 43, 50, 75, 237n3, sectoral distribution of inventive 238n5, 238n6 activity in, 181–93 Schumpeterian models of growth, 41 spatial distribution of patent science, 79, 82, 83 applications in, 149–79 science policies, 56–7 specialization patterns in, Science Policy Research Unit 193–206, 231 (SPRU), 66 sectoral distribution, of Swiss inventive tacit knowledge, 98–9, 106–7, activities, 181–93 119, 122, 124, 125 self-service stores, 15 Taiwan, 45 semiconductor industry, 63 tax breaks, 90 Sidrauski, M., 35 tax havens, 115 Silicon Valley, 2, 94, 95, 218 tax optimization, 115 Singapore, 45 Taylor, M.P., 38 skilled workers, 16, 47, 68 teamwork, 16–17, 75 small and medium enterprises (SMEs), technological congruence, 45 19, 55 technological innovation, 15 smart specialization, 102 technological progress, growth and, Smith, A., 25, 93, 237n1, 237n2 31–5, 35–43, 88 social capability, 45 technology life-cycle theory, 14 Solar Impulse, 10 technology push, 75–6 Solow, R.M., 31–5 technology spillovers, 17 Solow-Swan model, 31–2, 33–5, 36 teleportation, 12, 75 South Korea, 45 trade barriers, 133 spatial concentration, 2, 86–108 Trade-Related Intellectual Property specialization patterns, 193–206, Rights (TRIPS), 58–9 231, 234 trade theories, 88, 115–16 stationary state, 25 training, 54 steady state, 34, 35 transportation technology, 87 steam engines, 1 Stevens, R., 77 uncertainty, 97–8, 100 Stiglitz, J.E., 41, 87 United Kingdom, 44 strategic asset-seeking investments, United States, 44, 46 115, 120 universities, 100, 105, 106, 237n15 structural evolution, 44 Uruguay Round, 59 supplies, 98 users as innovators, 78 supporting activities, 21 US Small Business Administration, Swan, T.W., 31–5 66, 105 Switzerland, 90, 234–5 Utterback, J., 78 Index 305 value chain model, 20–3, 82, wages, 47, 49, 89, 106 102–4, 118, 120 The Wealth of Nations (Smith), 25 value creation, 110, 119 Western Europe, 46 value system, 103–4 Woolworths, 15 Van de Ven, A., 74 workforce skills, 47, 68 Veblen, T., 44, 45 World Bank, 45 Vernon, R., 29, 78, 116, 120–5, 237n10 World Investment Report (WIR), 110 Verspagen, B., 5 World Trade Organization (WTO), 59 vertical differentiation, 41 writing, 11