Chapter 8 The regional dimension of ST&I activities in São Paulo State 1. Introduction 8-5 2. Regionalized quantitative indicators of ST&I activities 8-6 2.1 Profile and geographical distribution of skilled labor 8-6 2.2 Innovative firms 8-14 2.3 Patenting 8-15 2.4 Scientific articles 8-23 2.5 University-business interaction 8-26 3. Institutional structure supporting technological and innovation activities in firms 8-35 3.1 Business support institutions (education and research) 8-35 3.2 Vocational and technical-scientific education institutions 8-38 3.3 Technology centers, test laboratories and R&D institutions 8-42 4. The configuration of local innovation systems in São Paulo State 8-44 4.1 Metropolitan São Paulo 8-45 4.2 Campinas region 8-46 4.3 São José dos Campos region 8-47 4.4 São Carlos region 8-48 4.5 Ribeirão Preto region 8-49 8 – 2 SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & INNOVATION INDICATORS IN THE STATE OF SÃO Paulo/brazil – 2010 5. Conclusions 8-50 References 8-50 Chart Chart 8.1 Steps in the process of selecting occupations in ST&I – São Paulo State 8-7 List of Maps Map 8.1 Density of employment in technological occupations by microregion – São Paulo State, 2006 8-11 Map 8.2 Density of employment in technical occupations by microregion – São Paulo State, 2006 8-12 Map 8.3 Density of employment in operational occupations by microregion – São Paulo State, 2006 8-13 Map 8.4 Microregional technological specialization indices by technological domain – São Paulo State, 2002-2005 8-18 Map 8.5 Microregional technological specialization indices in the IT subdomain – São Paulo State, 2002-2005 8-22 Map 8.6 Microregional technological specialization indices in the pharmaceuticals-cosmetics subdomain – São Paulo State, 2002-2005 8-23 Map 8.7 Microregional technological specialization indices in the machine-tools subdomain – São Paulo State, 2002-2005 8-24 Map 8.8 Density of scientific production by microregion – São Paulo State, 1998-2006 8-25 Map 8.9 Scientific specialization by microregion – São Paulo State, 2002-2005 8-26 Map 8.10 Technical- and technological-level vocational education institutions by microregion – São Paulo State, 2006 8-41 Map 8.11 Higher education institutions offering undergraduate, post-graduate and extension courses by microregion - São Paulo State, 2006 8-42 Chapter 8 – THE REGIONAL DIMENSION OF ST&I ACTIVITIES IN SÃO PAULO STATE 8 – 3 List of Figures Figure 8.1 Employment in ST&I occupations by occupational category – São Paulo State, 2006 8-8 Figure 8.2 Employment in ST&I occupations by occupational category and educational attainment – São Paulo State, 2006 8-9 Figure 8.3 Employment by type of occupation & educational attainment – Brazil & São Paulo State, Paulo – 2006 8-9 Figure 8.4 Employment in ST&I occupations by economic activity and occupational category – São Paulo State, 2006 8-10 Figure 8.5 Firms introducing innovations by mesoregion of São Paulo State – 2003-2005 8-15 Figure 8.6 Research groups declaring interaction with firms and other non-academic institutions by microregion – São Paulo State, 2006 8-28 Figure 8.7 Firms interacting with research groups by microregion – São Paulo State, 2006 8-28 Figure 8.8 Number of relationships between research groups and firms by microregion – São Paulo State, 2006 8-29 List of Tables Table 8.1 Patent filings for selected microregions by technological domain – São Paulo State, 2002-2005 8-19 Table 8.2 Technological specialization indices for selected microregions by technological domain – São Paulo State, 2002-2005 8-20 Table 8.3 Relationships between research groups and firms by selected microregion and type of relationship – São Paulo State, 2006 8-30 Table 8.4 Relationships between research groups and firms by selected microregion and knowledge area – São Paulo State, 2006 8-31 8 – 4 SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & INNOVATION INDICATORS IN THE STATE OF SÃO Paulo/brazil – 2010 Table 8.5 Relationships between research groups and firms by economic activity and knowledge area – São Paulo microregion, 2006 8-32 Table 8.6 Relationships between research groups and firms by economic activity and knowledge area – Campinas microregion, 2006 8-33 Table 8.7 Relationships between research groups and firms by economic activity and knowledge area – São Carlos microregion, 2006 8-34 Table 8.8 R&D institutions, employees and average size of establishments in physical and natural sciences (CNAE Group 72.1) and in social and human sciences (CNAE Group 72.2) by microregion – São Paulo State, 2006 8-36 Table 8.9 Technical, technological and industrial apprenticeship courses, enrollment and graduates by microregion – São Paulo State, 2006 8-39 Table 8.10 Tertiary-level technological courses, enrollment and graduates by microregion – São Paulo State, 2006 8-40 Table 8.11 Inmetro-certified calibration and testing labs by microregion – São Paulo State, 2008 8-43 Table 8.12 Test labs and R&D labs by microregion – São Paulo State, 2008 8-44 Detailed Tables The Detailed Tables for this chapter are available on the internet at: <http://www.fapesp.br/enindicadores2010>. Chapter 8 – THE REGIONAL DIMENSION OF ST&I ACTIVITIES IN SÃO PAULO STATE 8 – 5 1. Introduction place, including key innovation inputs such as skilled labor, the presence of specialized suppliers, and local knowledge spillovers due to geographical concentra- he regional dimension of science, technology tion of key economic agents, especially service provid- and innovation (ST&I) is extremely important ers, research institutions and universities. Tbecause the knowledge flows that feed business Several studies have empirically proved the exis- innovation are mediated to a significant extent by the tence of a positive correlation between local knowledge proximity of firms, universities, other educational es- flows and innovation processes in firms. Examples tablishments, research institutions and service provid- include Feldman (1999) and Audretsch & Feldman ers. This spatial proximity acts as a strong stimulus (2003), who used various databases (such as scientific to the creation and diffusion of new knowledge and publications, patents and citations) to measure the links capacity building among economic agents. between innovation inputs and innovation outcomes The importance of the regional dimension is jus- grounded in the concept of the knowledge production tified by the existence of a number of positive exter- function. Others, including Dahl & Pedersen (2004), nalities or local benefits and scope advantages for the have set out to measure local knowledge spillovers maintenance of interactions between economic agents through informal contact among workers. In the case of located in regions where firms and ST&I institutions Brazil, chapter 9 of the 2004 edition of Science, Technol- are geographically concentrated. Regionalized ST&I ogy & Innovation Indicators for São Paulo State (FAPESP, indicators therefore need to be produced and analyzed 2005), which like the present chapter deals with the as part of an effort to understand in greater depth and regional dimension of ST&I activities in the state, also quantify the relations between geography and innova- identified a convergence between the regional produc- tion. tion structure and the presence of ST&I institutions. The main hypothesis to explain these relations is This has important implications for local policy that important knowledge flows are mediated by the in support of producers. Public policy, as well as local geographical space in which the agents in question policy bodies, can enhance the capacity for interactive operate. These knowledge flows may foster innova- learning of a local nature among agents. This effect can tion processes in firms by supplying innovation inputs be obtained by means of local policy measures designed such as academic research, education, skilled labor, re- to stimulate the accumulation of technical, technologi- search centers, and laboratories that provide technical cal, financial and market competencies, especially by and technological services, all of which factor into the intensifying interaction among local agents. firms’ own efforts to develop technology in house. Within this context, the purpose of the present The debate about the influence of location on chapter is to analyze the regional dimension of ST&I innovation in manufacturing began with the ground- indicators in São Paulo State and, as was done for the breaking work of Marshall (1984), who showed the previous edition (FAPESP, 2005, chapter 9), establish importance of positive externalities for English firms the links between innovation inputs (skilled labor, the located in what he called “industrial districts” in the ST&I system, the education system and institutions late 19th century. In the 1980s the concept of local that provide services to firms), innovation activities in product systems or clusters gained exposure and vis- firms and innovation outputs. ibility because of some successful experiences such The methodological approach used to define the as the industrial districts in Italy and Silicon Valley regional dimension consists of using the concept of in the United States, where clustering provided sig- geographical microregion wherever possible, as de- nificant benefits to producers and their innovation ef- fined by the Brazilian Institute of Geography & Statis- forts. In the case of Silicon Valley, development of the tics (IBGE). In some cases where a breakdown to the firms located there was boosted by a vast ST&I infra- microregion level is impossible, other levels of aggre- structure, which was appropriated by producers and gation such as mesoregion are used instead. their routines with positive effects for local firms.1 A A number of methodological difficulties must be basic assumption in this literature is that clustering mentioned before beginning the analysis proper. First, facilitates access by producers to a number of benefits it is hard to aggregate some data at the microregional that enhance their competitiveness in the market- level, such as the number of indexed scientific articles 1.