[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijtlid/v8y2016i1p4-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The obstacles for science technology parks in a developing country

Author

Listed:
  • Wawan Dhewanto
  • Donald Crestofel Lantu
  • Sri Herliana
  • Anggraeni Permatasari
Abstract
Science technology park (STP) is fundamentally posited to create links between business, academic and government to trigger the development of new technologies, including their commercialisation. In particular, STP in Indonesia has begun to establish in the past five years by implementing the concept of triple-helix model. Still, there were obstacles that hamper their objective to success. This research aims to observe existing STPs in Indonesia, including investigation and evaluation on any obstacle occurred in their implementation. This research is conducted by using qualitative method. The measurements of this research stand on the successful indicators of STP in either developing or developed countries. Data gathering is taken through in-depth interviews based on a purposive sampling. The interview is taken in four most developing STPs in Indonesia. The results discover that STPs which have implemented the triple-helix concept are highly possible to success compared to others. In addition, the results reveal that triple-helix-based STPs managed by private sector and local government have a strong potential to success. Then, this study successfully discovers the obstacles met by successful STPs in Indonesia, i.e., bureaucracy, networking and entrepreneurial culture.

Suggested Citation

  • Wawan Dhewanto & Donald Crestofel Lantu & Sri Herliana & Anggraeni Permatasari, 2016. "The obstacles for science technology parks in a developing country," International Journal of Technological Learning, Innovation and Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1), pages 4-19.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijtlid:v:8:y:2016:i:1:p:4-19
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=75180
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Indriany Ameka, 2013. "Technology Push vs. Market Pull in Technology University Innovation Commercialization Case Study: ITB," Information Management and Business Review, AMH International, vol. 5(7), pages 337-341.
    2. Maruf Sanni & A.A. Egbetokun & W.O. Siyanbola, 2010. "A model for the design and development of a Science and Technology Park in developing countries," International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1), pages 62-81.
    3. Leydesdorff, Loet & Meyer, Martin, 2006. "Triple Helix indicators of knowledge-based innovation systems: Introduction to the special issue," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1441-1449, December.
    4. Lam, Alice & Lundvall, Bengt-Aake, 2007. "The Learning Organisation and National Systems of Competence Building and Innovation," MPRA Paper 12320, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Geetha Vaidyanathan, 2008. "Technology parks in a developing country: the case of India," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 285-299, June.
    6. Liu, Xielin & White, Steven, 2001. "Comparing innovation systems: a framework and application to China's transitional context," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1091-1114, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mike Burbridge & Gregory M. Morrison, 2021. "A Systematic Literature Review of Partnership Development at the University–Industry–Government Nexus," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Hutajulu, Sahat & Dhewanto, Wawan & Prasetio, Eko Agus, 2020. "Two scenarios for 5G deployment in Indonesia," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhang, Yi & Chen, Kaihua & Fu, Xiaolan, 2019. "Scientific effects of Triple Helix interactions among research institutes, industries and universities," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 86, pages 33-47.
    2. Andrea Coveri & Antonello Zanfei, 2023. "Who wins the race for knowledge-based competitiveness? Comparing European and North American FDI patterns," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 292-330, February.
    3. Chen, Ping-Chuan & Hung, Shiu-Wan, 2016. "An actor-network perspective on evaluating the R&D linking efficiency of innovation ecosystems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 303-312.
    4. Ponomariov, Branco & Toivanen, Hannes, 2014. "Knowledge flows and bases in emerging economy innovation systems: Brazilian research 2005–2009," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 588-596.
    5. Michele O’Dwyer & Raffaele Filieri & Lisa O’Malley, 2023. "Establishing successful university–industry collaborations: barriers and enablers deconstructed," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 900-931, June.
    6. Zifeng Chen & Jiancheng Guan, 2011. "Mapping of biotechnology patents of China from 1995–2008," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 73-89, July.
    7. Jarunee Wonglimpiyarat, 2010. "Commercialization strategies of technology: lessons from Silicon Valley," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 225-236, April.
    8. Dziallas, Marisa & Blind, Knut, 2019. "Innovation indicators throughout the innovation process: An extensive literature analysis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 80, pages 3-29.
    9. Laura Lecluyse & Mirjam Knockaert & André Spithoven, 2019. "The contribution of science parks: a literature review and future research agenda," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 559-595, April.
    10. Xia, Tianjiao & Liu, Xiaohui, 2022. "The innovation paradox of TMT political capital in transition economy firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 775-790.
    11. Rodríguez-Navarro, Alonso & Brito, Ricardo, 2018. "Technological research in the EU is less efficient than the world average. EU research policy risks Europeans’ future," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 718-731.
    12. Li, Yin & Arora, Sanjay & Youtie, Jan & Shapira, Philip, 2018. "Using web mining to explore Triple Helix influences on growth in small and mid-size firms," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 76, pages 3-14.
    13. Chen, Guanghua & Yang, Guoliang & He, Feng & Chen, Kaihua, 2019. "Exploring the effect of political borders on university-industry collaborative research performance: Evidence from China’s Guangdong province," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 58-69.
    14. Markard, Jochen & Truffer, Bernhard, 2008. "Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 596-615, May.
    15. Qiu, Shumin & Liu, Xielin & Gao, Taishan, 2017. "Do emerging countries prefer local knowledge or distant knowledge? Spillover effect of university collaborations on local firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1299-1311.
    16. Reza Naghizadeh & Shaban Elahi & Manoochehr Manteghi & Sepehr Ghazinoory & Marina Ranga, 2015. "Through the magnifying glass: an analysis of regional innovation models based on co-word and meta-synthesis methods," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 2481-2505, November.
    17. Yi Zhang & Kaihua Chen & Guilong Zhu & Richard C. M. Yam & Jiancheng Guan, 2016. "Inter-organizational scientific collaborations and policy effects: an ego-network evolutionary perspective of the Chinese Academy of Sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1383-1415, September.
    18. Swati Mehta, 2018. "National Innovation System of India: An Empirical Analysis," Millennial Asia, , vol. 9(2), pages 203-224, August.
    19. Yutao Sun & Seamus Grimes, 2016. "The emerging dynamic structure of national innovation studies: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 17-40, January.
    20. Fagerberg, Jan, 2018. "Mobilizing innovation for sustainability transitions: A comment on transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1568-1576.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijtlid:v:8:y:2016:i:1:p:4-19. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=240 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.