Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
The Annals of Regional Science
Erschienen in: The Annals of Regional Science 2/2013

01.04.2013 | Special Issue Paper

Bridging knowledge to commercialization: the good, the bad, and the challenging

verfasst von: Tüzin Baycan, Roger R. Stough

Erschienen in: The Annals of Regional Science | Ausgabe 2/2013

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This paper investigates a new emerging phenomenon in the debate of knowledge-based economic growth called “bridging knowledge to commercialization”. The paper considers commercialization of knowledge as a complex and a multi-faceted phenomenon and aims to highlight “the good”, “the bad” and “the challenging” in commercialization of knowledge from a taxonomic perspective. The paper has four objectives: (1) to examine the emerging concepts in bridging knowledge to commercialization while addressing related issues in the literature and to offer a conceptual framework on the basis of a typology of metaphores for knowledge; (2) to highlight the societal benefits of commercialization of knowledge in a regional development context; (3) to underline the value conflicts and differences in culture and perspectives in the valuation of knowledge in order to better understand the commercialization process; and (4) to highlight the challenges for academia, industry and government while describing the critical framework conditions that are needed to effectively foster commercialization of knowledge. While addressing the academic, societal, spatial, cultural and ethical implications of knowledge commercialization, the paper highlights retrospects and prospects from regional development perspective.
Vorheriger Artikel Introduction: commercialization of knowledge in a regional context: new perspectives
Nächster Artikel Technology commercialization on campus: twentieth century frameworks and twenty-first century blind spots

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Literatur
Adelman DE, DeAngelis KL (2006) Patent metrics: the mismeasure of innovation in the biotech patent debate. Texas Law Rev 85:1679–1741
Agrawal A (2001) University-to-industry knowledge transfer: literature review and unanswered questions. Int J Manag Rev 3(4):285–302CrossRef
Agrawal A, Henderson R (2002) Putting patents in context: exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Manag Sci 48:44–60CrossRef
Andriessen D (2006) On the metaphorical nature of intellectual capital: a textual analysis. J Intellect Cap 7(1):93–110CrossRef
Audretsch DB, Aldridge TT (2009) Scientist commercialization as conduit of knowledge spillovers. Ann Reg Sci 43(4):897–905CrossRef
Audretsch D, Feldman MP (1996) R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. Am Econ Rev 86:630–640
Baldini N, Grimaldi R, Sobrero M (2007) To patent or not to patent? A survey of Italian inventors on motivations, incentives, and obstacles to university patenting. Scientometrics 70:333–354CrossRef
Bathelt H, Malmberg A, Maskell P (2004) Clusters and knowledge: local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Progr Hum Geogr 28:31–56CrossRef
Bayton JA, Chapman RL (1972) Transformation of scientists and engineers into managers. Scientific and Technical Information Office, NASA, Washington, DC
Behrens TR, Gray DO (2001) Unintended consequences of co-operative research: impact of industry sponsorship on climate for academic freedom and other graduate student outcome. Res Policy 30:179–199CrossRef
Bengtsson L, Nilsson AS, Rickne A (2009) Why and how do researchers engage themselves in commercialization of research? In: Paper presented at the International Conference on Organizational Learning, Knowledge and Capabilities (OLKC). 26–28 April 2009, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Bercovitz J, Feldmann M (2008) Academic entrepreneurs: organizational change at the individual level. Organ Sci 19(1):69–89CrossRef
Bird BJ (1988) Implementing entrepreneurial ideas: the case for intention. Acad Manag Rev 13:442–453
Bird BJ, Allen DN (1989) Faculty entrepreneurship in research university environments. J High Educ 60(5):583–596CrossRef
Bird BJ, Hayward DJ, Allen DN (1993) Conflicts in the commercialization of knowledge: perspectives from science and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory Pract 17(4):57–77
Blair D, Hitchens D (1998) Campus companies—UK and Ireland. Ashgate, Aldershot
Bok D (2003) Universities in the market place: the commercialization of higher education. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Boucher G, Conway C, Meer ELS (2003) Tiers of engagement by universities in their region’s development. Reg Stud 37(9):887–897CrossRef
Bramwell A, Wolfe D (2008) Universities and regional economic development: the entrepreneurial University of Waterloo. Res Policy 37:1175–1187CrossRef
Buchbinder H (1993) The market-oriented university and the changing role of knowledge. High Educ 26:331–347CrossRef
Charles D, Conway C (2001) High Educ Bus Interact Surv. Centre for Urban and Regional Development Studies, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne
Charles D, Howells J (1992) Technology transfer in Europe: public and private networks. Belhaven Press, London
Cohen W (2000) Taking care of business. ASEE Prism Online, pp 1–5
Colyvas J, Crow M, Annetine G, Mazzoleni R, Nelson RR, Rosenberg N, Sampat BN (2002) How do university inventions get into practice. Manag Sci 48(1):61–72CrossRef
Cooke P, Heidenreich M, Braczyk HJ (eds) (2004) Regional innovation systems: the role of governances in a globalized world. Routledge, London
Cooke P, Uranga M, Etxebarria G (1997) Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organisational dimensions. Research Policy 26:475–491CrossRef
Davenport TH, Prusak L (2000) Working Knowledge. Harvard Business School Press, Boston
Deem R (2001) Globalization, new managerialism, academic capitalism and entrepreneurialism in universities: is the local dimension still important? Comp Educ 37:7–20CrossRef
Drazen JM (2002) Institutions, contracts and academic freedom. New Engl J Med 347:1362–1363CrossRef
Duch N, García-Estévez J (2011) Do universities affect firms’ location decisions? Evidence from Spain, Document de treball de l’IEB 2011/7, Institut d’Economia de Barcelona
Duch N, García-Estévez J, Parellada M (2011) Universities and regional economic growth in Spanish regions, Document de treball de l’IEB 2011/6, Institut d’Economia de Barcelona
Eisenberg RS (1996) Public research and private development: patents and technology transfer in government-sponsored research. Va Law Rev 82:1663–1727CrossRef
Etzkowitz H (1990) The capitalization of knowledge: the decentralization of United States industrial and science policy from Washington to the States. Theory Soc 19(1):107–121CrossRef
Etzkowitz H, Leydesdorff L (1996) Emergence of a triple-helix of university-industry-government relations. Sci Public Policy 23:279–286
Etzkowitz H, Leydesdorff L (2000) The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and “mode 2” to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Res Policy 29:109–123CrossRef
Etzkowitz H, Webster A, Gebhardt C, Cantisano BR (2000) The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Res Policy 29:313–330CrossRef
Frenken K, van Oort FG (2004) The geography of research collaboration: theoretical considerations and stylized facts in biotechnology in Europe and the United States. In: Cooke P, Piccaluga A (eds) Regional Economics as Knowledge Laboratories. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 38–57
Geiger RL (2006) The quest for ‘economic relevance’ by US research universities. High Educ Policy 19:411–431CrossRef
Gibson LJ (1988) Economic development: the university and commercialization of research. Econ Dev Rev 6(2):7–11
Göktepe-Hulten D, Mahagaonkar P (2010) Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: in the expectation of money or reputation? J Technol Transf 35:401–423CrossRef
Goldfarb B, Henrekson M (2003) Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property. Res Policy 32(4):639–658CrossRef
Goldman M (1984) Building a mecca for high technology. Technol Rev 86:6–8
Goldstein HA, Renault CS (2004) Contributions of universities to regional economic development: a quasi-experimental approach. Reg Stud 38(7):733–746CrossRef
Gouldner A (1979) The future of intellectuals and the rise of the new class. Seabury Press, New York
Guena A, Nesta LJJ (2006) University patenting and its effects on academic research: the emerging European evidence. Res Policy 35:790–807CrossRef
Gulbrandsen M (2005) But Peter’s in it for the money—the liminality of entrepreneurial scientists. VEST J Sci Technol Stud 18(1–2):49–75
Gulbranson CA, Audretsch DB (2008) Proof of concept centers: accelerating the commercialization of university innovation. J Technol Transf 33:249–258CrossRef
Hansen S, Brewster A, Asher J, Kisiewlewski M (2006) The effects of patenting in the AAAS scientific community. American Academy for Advancement of Science, Washington, DC
Heaton GR Jr, Hill CT, Windham P, Cheney DW (2011) The entrepreneurial university in a global context: a report to NEDO. Technology Policy International
Henderson R, Jaffe AB, Trajitenberg M (1998) Universities as a source of commercial technology: a detailed analysis of university patenting 1965–88. Rev Econ Stat 80:119–132CrossRef
Henrekson M, Rosenberg N (2001) Designing efficient institutions for science-based entrepreneurship: lessons from the US and Sweden. J Technol Transf 26(2):207–231CrossRef
Horstmann E, McCabe MS, Grochow L, Yamamoto S, Rubinstein L, Budd T et al (2005) Risks and benefits of phase 1 oncology trials, 1991 through 2002. N Engl J Med 352:895–904
Howell J, McKinlay C (1999) Commercialization of university research in Europe. Report to the Advisory Council on Science and Technology, Ontario, Canada
Hudson CH (2006) Regional development partnership in Sweden: a way for higher education institutions to develop their role in the processes of regional governance? High Educ 51:387–410CrossRef
Huggins R (2008) Universities and knowledge-based venturing: finance, management and networks in London. Entrepreneurship Reg Dev 20(2):185–206CrossRef
Jacob M, Lundqvist M, Hellsmark H (2003) Entrepreneurial transformations in the Swedish university system: the case of Chalmers university of technology. Res Policy 32(9):1555–1568CrossRef
Jensen K, Murray F (2005) The intellectual property landscape of the human genome. Science 310(10):239–240CrossRef
Johannessson C (2008) University strategies for knowledge transfer and commercialisation—an overview based on peer reviews at 24 Swedish universities 2006, VINNOVA Report VR 2008:17. VINNOVA-Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems
Johnston J, Wasunna A (2007) Patents, biomedical research and treatments: examining concerns, canvassing solutions, special report. Hastings Center Rep 37(1):1–36
Kenney M (1987) The ethical dilemmas of university-industry collaborations. J Bus Ethics 6:127–135CrossRef
Kenney M, Patton D (2009) Reconsidering the Bayh-Dole Act and the current university invention ownership model. Res Policy 38:1407–1422CrossRef
Kitagawa F, Wigren C (2010) From basic research to innovation: entrepreneurial intermediaries for research commercialization at Swedish ‘strong research environments’, Center for Innovation, Research and Competence in the Learning Economy (CIRCLE), Paper No. 2010/02, Lund University, Sweden
Kobus J (1992) Universities and the creation of spin-off companies. Ind High Educ 6(3):136–42
Kortum S, Lerner J (1999) What is behind the recent surge in patenting? Res Policy 28:1–22CrossRef
Kumar MN (2010) Ethical conflicts in commercialization of university research in the post-Bayh-Dole era. Ethics Behav 20(5):324–351CrossRef
Lazzaretti L, Tavoletti E (2005) Higher education excellence and local economic development: the case of the entrepreneurial University of Twente. Eur Plan Stud 13(3):475–493CrossRef
Lebovitz RM (2007) The duty to disclose patent rights. Northwest J Technol Intellect Prop 6(1):36–45
Lee YS (1996) Technology transfer and the research university: a search for the boundaries of university-industry collaboration. Res Policy 25:843–863CrossRef
Lee JJ, Rhoads RA (2004) Faculty entrepreneurialism and the challenge to undergraduate education at research universities. Res High Educ 45:739CrossRef
Levin SG, Stephan PE (1991) Research productivity over the life cycle: evidence for academic scientists. Am Econ Rev 81(4):114–132
Leydesdorff L (2000) The triple helix: an evolutionary model of innovations. Res Policy 29:243–255CrossRef
Litan RE, Mitchell L, Reedy EJ (2007a) The university as innovator: bumps in the road. Issues Sci Technol XXIII:57–66
Litan RE, Mitchell L, Reedy EJ (2007b) Commercializing university innovations: alternative approaches. Innov Policy Econ 8:31–57
Louis KS, Blumenthal D, Gluck ME, Stoto MA (1989) Entrepreneurs in academe: an exploration of behaviors among life scientists. Adm Sci Q 34:110–131CrossRef
Markman G, Gianiodis P, Phan P (2004) Entrepreneurship from the ivory tower: do incentive systems matter? J Technol Transf 29:353–364CrossRef
Markman G, Gianiodis P, Phan P (2008) An agency theoretic study of the relationship between knowledge agents and university technology transfer offices. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 55:29–36CrossRef
Mazzoleni R, Nelson R (2005) The roles of research at universities and public labs in economic catch-up. Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM) Working Paper Series, Pisa
McMullan WE, Melnyk R (1988) University innovation centers and academic venture formation. R&D Manag 18(1):5–12CrossRef
Merton RK (1973) The normative structure of science. In: The sociology of science: theoretical and empirical investigations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. (original work published 1942)
Meyer M (2003) Academic entrepreneurs or entrepreneurial academics? Research-based ventures and public support mechanisms. R&D Manag 33(2):107–115CrossRef
Mitchell L (2010) From lab to bench to market: house subcommittee holds hearing on improving commercialization. Testimony by Lesa Mitchell, June 10, 2010. (http://​www.​kauffmann.​org)
Mowery DC, Nelson RR, Sampat BN, Ziedonis AA (2001) The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. Res Policy 30:99CrossRef
Mowery DC, Shane S (2002) Introduction to the special issue on university entrepreneurship and technology transfer. Manag Sci 48(1):V–IX
Munson JM, Posner BZ (1979) The values of engineers and managing engineers. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 26(4):94–100
Murray F, Stern S (2005) Do formal intellectual property rights hinder the free flow of scientific knowledge? An empirical test of the anti-commons hypothesis, Working Paper 11465. National Bureau of Economic Research
Murray F (2003) Innovation as co-evolution of scientific and technological networks: exploring tissue engineering. Res Policy 31:1389–1403CrossRef
Muscio A, Geuna A (2008) Governance of university knowledge transfer in Europe. In: Paper presented at the DRUID 25th Celebration Conference, 17–20 June 2008, Copenhagen, Denmark
Mustar P (1997) Spin-off enterprises. How French academics create high-tech companies: conditions for success or failure. Sci Public Policy 24(1):37–43
National Research Council (2005) Reaping the benefits of genomic and proteomic research: intellectual property rights in innovation and public health. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
Nelson RR (2004) The market economy and the scientific commons. Res Policy 33:455–467CrossRef
Niller E (2001) ‘Biotech and health’: report fails to address the downside of academic-industry collaborations. Wall Street J (Eur) 17. http://​online.​wsj.​com
Nonaka I, Takeuchi H (1995) The knowledge-creating company. Oxford University Press, Oxford
OECD (2003) Turning science into business: patenting and licensing at public research organizations. OECD Publications, Paris
Owen-Smith J, Powell W (2001) Careers and contradictions: faculty responses to the transformation of knowledge and its uses in the life sciences research. Sociol Work 10:109–140CrossRef
Owen-Smith J, Powell W (2003) The expanding role of university patenting in the life sciences: assessing the importance of experience and connectivity. Res Policy 32:1695–1711CrossRef
Palfreyman D (1989) The Warwick way: a case study of entrepreneurship within a university context. Entrepreneurship Reg Dev 1:207–219CrossRef
Pattyn B (2006) The ethical implications of patenting academic research. Ethical Perspect 13:165–170CrossRef
Pierre de Maret P (2007) Universities of the world: what for? In: Sadlak J, Liu NC (eds) The world class university and ranking: aiming beyond status. UNESCO-CEPES/Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Bucharest, p 38
Powers JB (2004) R&D funding sources and university technology transfer: what is stimulating universities to be more entrepreneurial? Res High Educ 45(1):1–23CrossRef
Pressman L (ed) (2002) AUTM licensing survey: FY 2001. Association of University Technology Managers, Northbrook
Pressman L, Burgess R, Cook-Deegan RM, McCormack SJ, Nami-Wolk I, Soucy M (2006) The licensing of DNA patents by U.S. academic institutions: an empirical survey. Nat Biotechnol 24:31–39CrossRef
PriceWaterhouseCooper (2007) Staying in control while unlocking the knowledge (in cooperation with TechnoPartner)
Rai AK (2005) Open and collaborative research: a new model for biomedicine. In: Hahn RW (ed) Intellectual property rights in frontier industries. Brookings-AEI Press, Washington, DC, p 158
Rasmussen E, Moen Ø, Gulbrandsen M (2006) Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge. Technovation 26(4):518–533CrossRef
Rosenbloom JL (2007) The geography of innovation commercialization in the United States during the 1990s. Econ Dev Q 21(1):3–16CrossRef
Rubins I (2007) Risks and rewards of academic capitalism and the effects of presidential leadership in the entrepreneurial university. Perspect Public Aff 4:3–18
Sampat BN (2006) Patenting and U.S. academic research in the 20th century: the world before and after Bayh-Dole. Res Policy 35:722–789CrossRef
Sampat BN, Mowery DC, Ziedonis AA (2003) Changes in university patent quality after the Bayh-Dole Act: a re-examination. Int J Ind Organ 21:1371–1390CrossRef
Samson KJ, Gurdon MA (1990) Entrepreneurial scientists: organizational performance in scientist-started high technology firms. In: Paper presented at the Babson Entrepreneurship Research Conference, Wellesly, MA
Schachman HK (2006) From publish or perish to patent and prosper. J Biol Chem 281:6889–6903CrossRef
Shamoo A, Resnik D (2003) Responsible conduct of research. Oxford University Press, New York
Shane SA (2004) Academic entrepreneurship: university spinoffs and wealth creation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Siegel DS, Veugelers R, Wright M (2007) Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: performance and policy implications. Oxf Rev Econ Policy 23(4):640–660CrossRef
Siegel DS, Waldman DA, Atwater L, Link AN (2004) Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies. J Eng Technol Manag 21(1–2):115–42CrossRef
Sullivan P (2000) Value-driven intellectual capital. Wiley, New York
Slaughter S, Rhoades G (2004) Academic capitalism and the new economy: markets, states and higher education. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Smilor RW, Dietrich GB, Gibson DV (1993) The entrepreneurial university: the role of higher education in the United States in technology commercialization and economic development. Int Soc Sci J 135:1–11
Stern S (2004) Do scientists pay to be scientists? Manag Sci 50:835–853CrossRef
Tassey G (2001) R&D policy models and data needs. In: Feldman MP, Link AN (eds) Innovation policy in the knowledge-based economy. Kluwer, Boston, p 71
Thursby JG, Jensen R, Thursby M (2001) Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: a survey of major U.S. universities. J Technol Transf 26:59–72CrossRef
Thursby JG, Thursby MC (2002) Industry/university licensing: characteristics, concerns and issues from the perspective of the buyer. J Technol Transf 28:207–218CrossRef
Thursby JG, Thursby MC (2005) Gender patterns of research and licensing activity of science and engineering faculty. J Technol Transf 30:343–353CrossRef
Tighe TJ (2003) Who’s in charge of America’s universities? A blueprint for reform. State University of New York Press, Albany
Uranga MG, Kerexeta GE, Campàs-Velasco J (2007) The dynamics of commercialization of scientific knowledge in biotechnology and nanotechnology. Eur Plan Stud 15(9):1199–1214CrossRef
van Dierdonck R, Debackere K (1988) Academic entrepreneurship at Belgian universities. R&D Manag 18(4):341–353
van Geenhuizen M (2010) Patterns of knowledge commercialization at universities: project level results in The Netherlands. In: Paper presented at ERSA Conference, 19–23 August 2010, Jonkoping, Sweden
van Looy B, Ranga M, Callaert J, Debackere K, Zimmerman E (2004) Combining entrepreneurial and scientific performance in academia: towards a compounded and reciprocal Matthew-effect? Res Policy 33:425–441
van Looy B, Callaert J, Debackere K (2006) Publication and patent behavior of academic researchers: conflicting, reinforcing or merely co-existing? Res Policy 35:596–608
van Overwalle G (2006) Reconciling patent policies with the university mission. Ethical Perspect 13:231–247
Viale R, Etzkowitz H (eds) (2010) The capitalization of knowledge: a triple helix of university-industry-government. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Vogeli C, Yucel R, Bendavid E, Jones LM, Anderson MS, Louis KS et al (2006) Data withholding and the next generation of scientists: results of a national survey. Acad Med 81:128–136
Walsh JP, Cho C, Cohen WM (2005) View from the bench: patents and material transfers. Science 299:1021CrossRef
Warren A, Hanke R, Trotzer D (2008) Models for university technology transfer: resolving conflicts between mission and methods and the dependency on geographic location. Camb J Reg Econ Soc 1:219–232CrossRef
Waugh WL Jr (1998) Conflicting values and cultures: the managerial threat to university governance. Policy Stud Rev 15:61–73CrossRef
Wright M, Clarysse B, Mustar P, Lockett A (2007) Academic entrepreneurship in Europe. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Wright M, Vohora A, Lockett A (2002) Annual UNICO-NUBS survey on university commercialisation activities: financial year 2001. Nottingham University Business School, Nottingham
Wubben EFM, Omta SWF, Van Lieshout R, Goorden JG (2005) Towards a classification of instruments for valorisation of academic& industrial knowledge. Stichting Kvie, The Hague
Ziman J (1996) Is science losing its objectivity? Nature 382:751–754CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Bridging knowledge to commercialization: the good, the bad, and the challenging
verfasst von
Tüzin Baycan
Roger R. Stough
Publikationsdatum
01.04.2013
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
The Annals of Regional Science / Ausgabe 2/2013
Print ISSN: 0570-1864
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-0592
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-012-0510-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2013

The Annals of Regional Science 2/2013 Zur Ausgabe

Original Paper

Attributes influencing self-employment propensity in urban and rural Sweden

Original Paper

Estimation of house prices in regions with small sample sizes

Original Paper

A note on convergence across Canadian provinces: new insights from the club clustering algorithm

Original Paper

Industrial location and interpretation of zero counts

Original Paper

Does immigration induce “native flight” from public schools?

Original Paper

Growth effects of regional policy in Germany: results from a spatially augmented multiplicative interaction model