The Triple Helix: International Cases and Critical Summary - Technopolis: Best Practices for Science and Technology Cities - page 70

3.4 Critical Mass
Critical mass appears to be an attractive element in these clusters. Larger popu-
lation of entities means higher availability of meaningful collaboration opportu-
nities. Critical mass, which often implies recognition and reputation, is significant
in many other ways too. A critical mass of talent attracts more talent. A critical
mass of healthy companies attracts more capital. Critical mass allows economy of
scale in time allocation, procurement of resources and build-out of specialized
infrastructure such as lab or manufacturing facilities. 3 It lowers market risk for
specialized services and vendors, therefore encouraging their supply. A critical
mass of companies gives managers and employees a sense of option, that even if
their own company fails there are other potential employers nearby.
Critical mass is not only desirable, it is a necessity (Song 2004 ). Smaller
locales, lacking critical mass, face a challenge in attracting external talent as well
as capital. When asked whether they would invest if an opportunity is promising in
itself but from a less established geographic area, most venture capitalists say that
they would consider investing, however, they would have the company locate to a
major cluster, because the odds of success are much lower in regions without the
support network.
3.5 The Nature of Life Science Clusters
With the onset of a mature life science industry, the industry tends to continue to
gravitate toward established clusters where there is critical mass, provided those
clusters can meet the growing needs at sustainable cost.
Even when the emergence of a new traditional cluster may not seem to be in
sight, however, a combination of compelling force conspires to create a new type
of cluster—i.e., specialized subclusters, or small clusters specialized in one or two
niche strengths of a region. An article in Genetic Engineering News, dated Sep-
tember 2004, reported future trends in life science cluster development. 4
''Tomorrow's company in Seattle can have manufacturing in Research Triangle
Park, marketing offices in New Jersey, and clinical trials in Kansas. It is much
more of a hub-and-node scenario now.''
Hence, as regions and companies realize the impracticality of developing full-
scale clusters today partly due to the huge cost investment, they are instead
adapting their strategy to develop in niches they have competitive advantage in.
Also reported in the Genetic Engineering News article mentioned earlier, ''In the
past, regions simply wanted to duplicate San Diego or Boston in their backyard.''
3 ''Texas Biotechnology and Life Science Cluster Report'', State of Texas, August 2005.
4 ''Novel Model for Biotech Cluster Development'', David G. Jensen, Volume 24, Number 16,
September 15, 2004.