• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.43-58
• /
• 2019

This paper examine the changing ecosystems in Malaysia, starting with the government policy driven greenfield cluster of Cyberjaya, which is part of the Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) mega project. In this context of an emerging economy, predominantly production oriented, the role of the government was crucial with respect to implementing policies and building infrastructure for the ecosystems. First, the roles played by the cluster development agency, universities, and industry are explained. As the cluster developed, this paper, taking an entrepreneurial ecosystem approach, explores how some actors evolved and changed their roles to become catalyst organisations established for the cluster now serving nationwide. This was followed by the emergence of new actors in the ecosystems, for example, knowledge intermediaries, and new roles for universities. In addition to actors such as universities and industry, this paper recognizes the emergence of media organisations as new actors in the entrepreneurial ecosystems in Malaysia.

• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.2 no.2
• /
• pp.81-95
• /
• 2013

This paper seeks to build on previous work conducted by Porter, Devol, Florida, Bahrami and Evans, Wennberg and Lindqvist, and others contained in the literature, to construct a new way of looking at innovation cluster development. It seeks to describe the key elements contained in the research that serve as building blocks for innovation clustering, adding analysis dimensions that aim to further illuminate understanding of this process. It compares those building block characteristics to the innovation topography of U.S. urban centers, to shed light on a new framework through which urban innovation cluster formation can be considered. It identifies three building block analysis categories: 1) Technological Capability and Capacity (TCC); 2) Intellectual Propulsion Capacity (IPC); and 3) Structural Creative Inspiration (SCI). These three pillars form the architecture for creation of a Strategic Innovation Network (SIN), upon which clustering can be systematically analysed and built. The purpose of the SIN is to optimally organize and connect all available resources that include physical, financial, and human, such that innovation clustering is inspired, encouraged, nurtured, and ultimately constructed as fully functioning socio-economic organisms that provide both local and regional benefits. It is designed to aid both private enterprise and public policy leaders in their strategic planning considerations, and to enhance urban economic development opportunities.

• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.2 no.2
• /
• pp.96-108
• /
• 2013

Egypt has been known as the light house of science and innovation not only in the Middle East but to the world across ages. Recently, there have been many ups and downs that positioned Egypt in a lower rank that it actually deserves according to its long history. This review entitles the current condition of science, technology and innovation in Egypt and the consequent setting up of best practices of science and technology parks (STPs) experiences. Egypt's science, technology and innovation (STI) system is highly centralized and dominated by the public sector, with R&D happening mostly in state-run universities and research centers supervised by the Ministry of Higher Education and Ministry of Scientific Research. R&D indicators state that Egypt ranking is 40th worldwide for the published articles (around 10,000 papers in 2011), while the numbers of issued patents (350 local and 50 international in 2011) is still far beyond expected. STPs in Egypt are addressed in this review by three examples; smart village in Cairo, Investment zone in Borg El-Arab City and Technology Valley in Ismailia. The three models are discussed in details and a suggested road map for developing more STPs is estimated.

• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.1 no.3
• /
• pp.177-185
• /
• 2012

In recent years, some experts have shown that urban competitiveness is more important than national competitiveness. They have also argued that innovation will make cities more competitive. The purpose of this paper is to create Korean urban competitiveness index, and to also highlight strategic aspects for enhancement of urban competitiveness of metropolitan cities based on innovation in Korea. First, we will present various factors and indicators of urban competitiveness based on three components for innovation: formation of cluster, human capital, creative economy. Available literature and statistical analyses will be used. Second, scores of urban competitiveness will be developed based on Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Evaluation of scores with weights will be used for this purpose. The resulting weights are 0.3672 for the formation of cluster, 0.3318 for human capital, and 0.3010 for creative economy, respectively. Finally, we present urban competitiveness using the standardized T-score. The most competitive city based on innovation is Daejeon(1st), followed by Gwangju(2nd) and Daegu(3rd). Three least competitive cities are Incheon (6th), Busan(5th) and Ulsan(4th).

• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.47-60
• /
• 2016

In today's digital non-linear global business environment, innovation initiatives are influenced by inter-organizational, political, economic, environmental, technological systems, as well as by decisions made individually by key actors in these systems. Network-based structures emerge from social linkages and collaborations among various actors, creating innovation ecosystems, complex adaptive systems in which entities co-create value. A shared vision of value co-creation allows people operating individually to arrive together at the same future. Yet, relationships are difficult to see, continually changing and challenging to manage. The Innovation Ecosystem Transformation Framework construct includes three core components to make innovation relationships visible and articulate networks of relational capital for the wellbeing, sustainability and business success of innovation ecosystems: data-driven visualizations, storytelling and shared vision. Access to data facilitates building evidence-based visualizations using relational data. This has dramatically altered the way leaders can use data-driven analysis to develop insights and provide ongoing feedback needed to orchestrate relational capital and build shared vision for high quality decisions about innovation. Enabled by a shared vision, relational capital can guide decisions that catalyze, support and sustain an ecosystemic milieu conducive to innovation for business growth.

• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.30-46
• /
• 2016

This paper is intended as an opening of a dialog on how to apply platform thinking in the development of innovation environments. It will briefly describe a new STP (Science and Technology Park) concept called 3GSP (Third Generation Science Park), which is gaining momentum in Finland. The paper explains the fundamental changes that are currently taking place in the global innovation environment and explains why platform thinking is becoming an essential element in ecosystem development. The theoretical background and classifications of platforms are described and the benefits to be gained from STP perspective are highlighted. The paper emphasizes especially the role of so called 'competence platforms' and explains the main characteristics of a fully working competence platform. The role of competence platforms in understanding serendipity and as a fundamental factor in building the team is also highlighted. The paper analyses from STP perspective several practical examples, where platform thinking supports the emergence of new innovation environments, including Urban Mill (Finland) and Meetberlage (Netherlands). The requirements for comprehensive competence platform services are presented and their potential to support community building and therefore ecosystem development is illustrated. This analysis will provide STP practitioners with new models for applying platform thinking and will help to establish co-creation, open innovation and serendipity management practices. The case studies presented will help STP management teams to evaluate the benefits of competence platforms in different contexts.

• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.102-112
• /
• 2017

In this increasingly globalised and rapidly-changing world, the various challenges that can arise are also increasingly globalised and complex. These may range from economic, environmental, societal or even demographic challenges. Solutions should therefore be applicable world-wide, but they need to be properly adapted to the specifications and needs at the regional and country level. This implies that past models of centralised innovation can be progressively substituted by new approaches based on openness and strategic collaboration between the various players involved. There are various models of openness and collaboration in research, development and innovation creating scientific networks at different levels. This paper is designed in a way to present the concept of smart specialisation and clusters and how they are linked and contribute to the support of Smart Specialisation Strategy in the Asian countries. The following paragraphs describe how smart specialisation is applied and the importance of clusters in developing a S3 strategy. In addition, the status of cluster policies in Asia as well as the steps towards S3 are also presented. The status of cluster policies and their steps towards S3 policies in Asia are described. The approach of China to adopt S3 in their R&I policy is also presented. The scope of this paper, is to demonstrate the policy framework of cluster and S3 policies in the region of Asia and how they are applied. China has been further analysed as a case, since they are more active in applying such policies.

• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.87-103
• /
• 2015

This paper aims to explore how firms develop and grow in regional clusters based in a developing country. The argument is that start-ups / small and large firms are able to grow by developing linkages or networks for resources within clusters - and this tenet is based on studies of firms that are based from such clusters as Silicon Valley in the US, Cambridge in UK and other clusters from which have evolved over long periods of time. Most of the time we hear narratives from the developed world where there are brownfield cluster development efforts. In developing countries governments are making efforts to develop clusters from scratch - which in this paper we term as greenfield cluster versus a brownfield development, which is where the cluster is developed based on existing and new organisations in a region. In this paper, we believe the context of clusters can be important in determining the way firms develop linkages for their growth - and we look at two contexts in Malaysia ie. A greenfield cluster and a brownfield cluster. The paper presents findings from case studies of firms in a greenfield cluster (Cyberjaya) and a brown field cluster (Penang) in Malaysia. The cases reveal fairly different approaches to development of linkages or networks, which we hope will provides insights to cluster development officials and policy makers and implications to researchers for developing studies of clusters and innovation systems.

• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.79-86
• /
• 2015

Over the last two decades, interest increased with regard to how some research universities made direct impacts on surrounding regional economic activities and growth. Although the role of basic research for most research universities has remained strong, pressure has intensified to broaden its missions to include helping local and regional economic development efforts. Consequently, many research universities have evolved their basic scientific research mission from the production of scientific knowledge to the sharing and exchange of knowledge with local industries by actively engaging in local economic development (Uyarra 2010). Previous examination has shown that most research universities contribute to local and regional economic development by various functions they provide. They are as follows: Creation of Knowledge, Human-capital creation, Transfer of existing know-how, Technological innovation, Capital investment, Regional leadership, Knowledge infrastructure production and Influence in regional milieu (Drucker and Goldstein 2007). This paper will review the existing literature on the role of universities and its impacts on local regional economic growth and development. In addition, this paper will show how two major research universities (The University of Arizona and Arizona State University) have contributed to the growth of Arizona during last two decades. It is believed that the existence of these two research universities have been instrumental in making industries more diverse and highly attractive, particularly in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area.

• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.6-15
• /
• 2012

Science and technology parks have been popular among policy-makers at several spatial levels to promote innovation and economic growth of certain localities. However, this mainly property-led policy tool has been criticised for two reasons. First, it often failed to successfully support regional networking and technology transfer to regional firms. Only unplanned science and technology parks, such as Silicon Valley, seem to have been successfully fostering regional networking and technology transfer which has led, in turn, to the development of competitive innovative clusters. Secondly, it has too often bet on the same horses and become too specialised in the same fields, such as in micro-electronics or in biotechnology. This specialisation has been theoretically supported by the cluster concept. It has led to both a zero sum game of competition between locations as well as potentially negative path dependence and lock-ins. This paper suggests increasingly supporting diversification in science and technology parks by bringing together hitherto unconnected technologies. Several recently discussed concepts could be used to support diversification, such as related variety (Frenken et al. 2007), regional branching (Boschma and Frenken 2011), regional innovation platforms (Harmaakorpi et al. 2011) and transversality (Cooke 2011).