Science Park Location and New Technology-Based Firms in Sweden – Implications for Strategy and Performance

178 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature (2007, background): “Although the contradicting results are based on different methods (Lindelof and Lofsten (2003) and Lofsten and Lindelof (2005) employ F-tests to find differences between members and nonmembers, while Siegel et al. (2003c) uses regression models based on Griliches (1994)’s R&D production function),…”
The Economics of University Research Parks (2007, methodology): “Lindelöf and Löfsten (2003, 2004) conducted a matched-pairs analysis of 134 on-park and 139 off-park Swedish firms for 1999, using descriptive techniques similar to those employed by Westhead and Storey (1994). The authors report that there are insignificant differences between science-park and non-”
Science Parks in Japan and Their Value-Added Contributions to New Technology-Based Firms (2006, unknown): “Furthermore, regarding the innovation output of on-park NTBFs, most of the empirical literature does not support the view that science parks encourage on-park NTBFs to yield more R&D output (Westhead and Storey, 1994; Westhead, 1997; Colombo and Delmastro, 2002; Lindelof and Lofsten, 2003).”