Regional knowledge capabilities, embeddedness of firms and industry organisation: Bioscience megacentres and economic geography
Regional knowledge capabilities, embeddedness of firms and industry organisation: Bioscience megacentres and economic geography
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/0965431042000219987
复制
发表时间：
2004-07-01
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Cooke, P
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cooke, P
生物科学认识论的变化正在产生重要的空间效应。其中最值得注意的是出现了一些“生物科学大中心”，用于基础和应用生物科学医学和临床研究（分子，后基因组学，蛋白质组学等），生物技术研究、这些领域和相关领域的培训、学术创业精神以及“药物发现”初创公司和分拆公司集群的商业开发，沿着的还有专业风险资本和其他创新系统支助服务。曾经领导这种知识产生和利用过程的大型制药公司越来越依赖于在这种集群中产生的创新药物解决方案，而超大中心现在是这种商业知识的主要来源。“大型制药公司”很少处于超大型中心的核心位置，例如本文将在美国和欧洲的四个地方发现的那些中心，但对于一些风险资本（“里程碑付款”），营销和发现的药物分销仍然很重要。这些过程的嵌入也造成了新的重大地区差异，一些地区政府已经认识到这一点，使他们制定区域科学政策和资金的责任，以抵消传统的国家（和欧盟，超国家）研究资助制度固有的空间偏见。反应遵循各种模式，从市场：以下两个区域化（由中心分散）和“区域主义”（地面）;在每一种情况下，大中心的作用是合理的健康方面。但它们在协助实现区域经济增长愿景方面的作用也在政策方面得到了明确的认识和强调。
Changes in epistemology in biosciences are generating important spatial effects. The most notable of these is the emergence of a few 'Bioscience Megacentres' for basic and applied bioscience medical and clinical research (molecular, post-genomic, proteomics, etc.), biotechnology research, training in these and related fields, academic entrepreneurship and commercial exploitation by clusters of 'drug discovery' start-up and spin-off companies, along with specialist venture capital and other innovation system support services. Large pharmaceutical firms that used to lead such knowledge generation and exploitation processes are becoming increasingly dependent upon innovative drug solutions produced in such clusters, and megacentres are now the predominant source of such commercial knowledge. 'Big pharma' is seldom at the heart of megacentres such as those the paper will argue are found in about four locations each in the USA and Europe, but remains important for some risk capital ('milestone payments), marketing, and distribution of drugs discovered. The embedding of these processes also creates major new regional disparities, which some regional governances have recognised, causing them to develop responsibilities for regional science policy and funding to offset spatial biases intrinsic in traditional national (and in the EU, supranational) research funding regimes. Responses follow a variety of models ranging from market:following to both regionalised (decentralising by the centre) and 'regionalist' (ground-up); in each case, the role of megacentres is justified in health terms. But their role in assisting fulfilment of regional economic growth visions is also clearly perceived and pronounced in policy terms.