Science Parks and the Performance of New Technology-Based Firms: A Review of Recent U.K. Evidence and an Agenda for Future Research

By Donald S. Siegel, Paul Westhead, Mike Wright. 2003

296 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fa641ac9b427571327b0fc0e0d89fd5cb286fdb5

How researchers see this paper

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

In Economics and Econometrics

Citations in the corpus

Universities and Fundamental Research: Reflections on the Growth of University–Industry Partnerships (2002, background): “Siegel, Westhead, and Wright (2002) report that the number of U.K. university science 9 parks has increased from two in 1972 to 46 in 1999.”
University support and the creation of technology and non-technology academic spin-offs (2016, background): “Existing studies on the institutional determinants of academic entrepreneurship focused on the role played by technology transfer offices (TTOs) and universities (Link and Scott 2005; Siegel et al. 2003), as well as local context support mechanisms and regional conditions (Audretsch et al.”
Specialization as strategy for business incubators: An assessment of the Central German Multimedia Center (2008, background): “Within this area, business incubators (BIs) and science parks are instruments that have attracted a great deal of attention in the past (see Siegel et al., 2003; Hackett and Dilts, 2004; Phan et al., 2005 for recent reviews).”
Entrepreneurial practices in research-intensive and teaching-led universities (2016, background): “…of firms (Audretsch and Lehman 2006), a few studies indicate clear ‘‘leaks’’ in the pipeline between university research and economic success of local industries and firms (Bania et al. 1993; Beeson and Montgomery 1993; Lofsten and Lindelof 2005; Siegel et al. 2003; Guerrero et al. 2014).”
Assessing the impact of university science parks on research productivity: exploratory firm-level evidence from the United Kingdom (2003, background): “However, the 3 See Siegel, Westhead, and Wright (2003b) for a more comprehensive review of this evidence.”
Financing technology-based small firms in Europe: what do we know? (2012, background): “32 The crucial issues of competencies and proximity appear also through the role of science parks and incubators, which in many countries have become popular policy instruments to foster entrepreneurship (Siegel et al. 2003, Phan et al., 2005, Zhang 2005).”
Founders’ human capital and the performance of UK new technology based firms (2012, background): “4 The latest study examining the performance of firms located in science parks in the UK was performed by Siegel et al. (2003) and is a review of the results of previous studies.”
Technology Parks versus Science Parks: does the university make the difference? (2013, background): “Some authors question the STP model (Macdonald, 1987; Massey et al., 1992; Hansson et al., 2005) while others claim that STPs provide a supportive environment for firms (Siegel et al., 2003a; Hommen et al., 2006) – a debate that has been stoked by empirical work.”
Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations (2009, background): “…increasing numbers of university researchers engaging in academic entrepreneurship (Shane, 2005), a growing share of industry funding in university income (Hall, 2004), and the diffusion of technology transfer offices, industry collaboration support offices and science parks (Siegel et al., 2003).”
The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: Managerial and policy implications (2005, background): “There has also been a significant rise in the number of science parks, incubators, and other property-based institutions designed to launch and nurture new-technology based firms (NTBFs) (Siegel et al., 2003c; Phan et al., 2005).”
University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature (2007, methodology): “As a result, these significant developments have attracted, not unexpectedly, the increasing attention of researchers both in the United States and in Europe.”
Do graduated university incubator firms benefit from their relationship with university incubators? (2016, methodology): “The methodology for the matching builds upon previous studies performed by Siegel et al. (2003), Westhead (1997), and Westhead et al. (1994) that matched a cohort of firms that received a treatment to those that did not receive any treatment.”