Regional Innovation Support Systems and Technopoles - Technopolis: Best Practices for Science and Technology Cities - page 43

1997 ), large attraction-led technopoles aiming at attracting inward investment of
high-tech companies and R&D departments of multinationals can be found in
France and Spain. In countries such as the UK, Germany, the Netherlands and
Belgium, on the other hand, ''technopoles'' are nothing more than small incubator-
led parks aiming at boosting spin-offs from higher education institutes and public
research establishments and other small high-tech firms.
Although there are large variations among science and technology parks in
different countries (Anttiroiko 2004 ), broadly speaking, technopoles aim at
achieving three goals. First, the most obvious goal is to foster economic devel-
opment. High-tech and innovation-led growth is regarded as absolutely necessary
for maintaining and increasing competitiveness of firms, regions and nations.
Second, in some countries, particularly those with over-populated and congested
urban areas, building an out-of-the-way technopole in the countryside is often seen
as a way to reduce regional economic inequalities. This line of reasoning was
behind the creation of Tsukuba in Japan, Daedeok in South Korea and technopoles
in France, where economic planners hoped to draw research and development out
of the over-burdened capital cities by relocating their national research facilities
and universities to new sites in the country and by luring firms with incentives to
follow them there. This kind of 'dirigiste' or mission-oriented regional policy is
based on the growth pole concept and can only be found in countries with powerful
central governments (Cooke and Morgan 1998 ). Third, technopoles aim at creating
synergy between higher education institutes, public research establishments and
firms in order to foster technology transfer, innovation and hence competitiveness.
In the end, this should lead to creating an environment geared toward innovation.
Capital and resources are naturally drawn to such a ''milieu of innovation'', rather
than having to be relocated through central planning (Castells and Hall 1994 ).
Synergy is crucial in the long-run. Even technopoles based on branch plants,
controlled from distant locations, should have synergy, as source of innovation, as
their long-term objective.
Although creating synergy and fostering technology transfer and networking
both between firms and between firms and higher education institutes and public
research establishments in the region is an important goal of technopoles, the
failure to achieve this goal is at the same time one of their largest weaknesses. The
main reasons for this lack of technology transfer and networking are the following.
First, because technopoles are a property-based initiative, a great deal of their
management is property-related and puts much emphasis on marketing and image
instead of promoting networking on the spot. According to Lagendijk and Charles
( 1998 :19) ''The most important question… is whether other instruments not based
on property or on attracting investments to particular places might be more
effective to facilitate technology transfer''. Second, since the technology-push
philosophy (linear model of innovation) prevails at many technopoles, they often
lack explicit technology transfer instruments. Third, in some larger technopoles in
peripheral areas, externally controlled branch plants dominate, which have few
links with local suppliers and lack the R&D base necessary for collaboration with
local higher education institutes and public research establishments. According to