Innovation, culture and firm size: microentreprises in an outermost región
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2012.753n1008Keywords:
Sociology of innovation, microenterprises, triple helix, innovative culture, Canary IslandsAbstract
The analysis of innovation activities, attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of micro companies has few precedents in innovation studies, although this group represents over 95% of all businesses in Spain and the European Union. This paper presents the empirical results of a study on innovation in micro firms, which aims to identify and explain the factors that most affect their ability to innovate, based on the approach of the Triple Helix. Among these factors, next stand out: human, social and relational capital, the ability to absorb foreign knowledge and the existence of an innovative culture that facilitates the attitudes, beliefs and opportunities necessary to innovate in collaborative environments with multiple relationships and interactions. The analysis is completed with a characterization of micro companies, attending to the weight of these factors and some of the innovation barriers that were identified.
Downloads
References
Acs, Z. J. y Audretsch, D. B. (1990): Innovation and Small Firms, Cambridge, MIT Press.
Agrawal, A. (2001): “Research on University- to-Industry Knowledge Transfer: Framework of Existing Literature and Unanswered Questions”, International Journal of Management Reviews, n.º 3 (4), pp. 285-302.
Arrow, Kennet J. (1962): “Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Innovation”, en Nelson (ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press, pp. 609-626.
Aydalot, P. (1986): Milieux innovateurs en Europe, Paris, GREMI.
Bell, D. (1976): El advenimiento de la sociedad postindustrial, Madrid, Alianza Editorial.
Beugelsdijk, S. y van Schaik, T. (2005): “Social capital and growth in European regions: An empirical test”, European Journal of Political Economy, n.º 21, pp. 301-324.
Bessant, J. (1999): “La innovación y la pequeña empresa”, Madri+d, Revista de Investigación e Información Tecnológica, n.º 2, pp. 13-15.
Braczyk, H.; Cooke, P. y Heidenreich, R. (eds.) (1996): Regional Innovation Systems. The Role of Governances in a Globalized World, Londres, University College London Press.
Camagni, R. (ed.) (1991): Innovation Networks: Spatial Perspectives, Londres, Belhaven Press.
Capello, R. y Faggian, A. (2005): “Collective Learning and Relational Capital in Local Innovation Processes”, Regional Studies, n.º 39, pp. 75-87.
Clemons, E. (1986): “Information Systems for Sustainable Competitive Advantage”, Information & Management, n.º 11, pp. 131-136.
Cooke, P. y Morgan, K. (1998): The Associational Economy: Firms, Regions, and Innovation, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
De la Fe, T. G. (2009): “El modelo de la Triple Hélice de relaciones Universidad, Industria y Gobierno: Un análisis crítico”, en Manuel Fernández Esquinas (coord.), “Perspectivas teóricas sobre ciencia, tecnología e innovación”, Arbor, n.º 738, Madrid, pp. 739-755.
De la Fe, T. G. y Hernández, N. (2011): “Canarias: las peculiaridades de la insularidad”, en Ramos Vielba, I. (coord.), Una revisión de los sistemas regionales de I+D. Andalucía, Canarias, Madrid y País Vasco, Madrid, Fundación Ideas para el progreso. Disponible en http://www.fundacionideas.es/sites/default/files/pdf/L-Una_revision_de_los_sistemas_regionales_de_ID-Pol.pdf.
Edquist, C. (1997): Systems of Innovation. Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, Londres, Pinter.
Etzkowitz, H. (2003): “Innovation in innovation: the Triple Helix of universityindustry- government relations”, Social Science Information, vol, 42, n.º 3, pp. 193-337.
Etzkowitz, H. y Leydesdorff, L. (2000): “The dynamics of innovation: form National Systems and ‘Mode 2’ to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relation”, Research Policy, n.º 26, pp. 109-123.
Fagerberg, J. y Verspagen, B. (2002): “Technology- gaps, innovation-diffusion and transformation: an evolutionary interpretation”, Research Policy, n.º 31, pp. 1291-1304.
European Comission (2003): Competence development in SMEs, n.º 1, Observatory of European SMEs. Fernández Sánchez, E.; Montes Peón, J. y Vázquez Ordás, C. (2000): “Typology and strategic analysis of intangible resources: A resource-based approach”, Technovation, n.º 20, pp. 81-92.
Freeman, C. (1987): Technology, policy, and economic performance: Lessons from Japan, Londres, Pinter. George, D. y Mallery, P. (1995): SPSS/PC+ step by step: A simple guide and reference, Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, EE.UU.
Giner, S.; Lamo de Espinosa, E. y Torres, C. (eds.) (2002): Diccionario de Sociología, Madrid, Alianza Editorial.
Grant, R. M. (1996): “Toward a Knowledge- Based Theory of the Firm”, Strategic Management Journal, n.º 17, Winter Special Issue, pp. 109-122.
Khan, A. M. y Manopichetwattana, V. (1989): “Innovative and noninnovative small firms: Types and characteristics”, Management Science, n.º 35 (5), pp. 597-606.
Koschatzky, K. y Sternberg, R. (2000): “R&D cooperation in innovation systems some lessons from the European Regional Innovation Survey (ERIS)”, European Planning Studies, vol. 8, n.º 4, pp. 487-501.
Lamo de Espinosa, E. (2002): “La sociedad del conocimiento. El orden del cambio” en Varios Autores, La Sociedad: teoría e investigación empírica, Madrid, CIS, pp. 429-450.
Leydesdorff, L. y Etzkowitz, H. (1996): “Emergence of a Triple Helix of University-Industry- Government Relations”, Science and Public Policy, n.º 23, pp. 279-286.
Lucas, R. (1988): “On the mechanics of economic development”, Journal of Monetary Economics, n.º 22, pp. 3-42.
Lundvall, B.-A. (ed.) (1992): National Systems of Innovation - Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, Londres, Pinter Publisher.
Malerba, F. (2002): “Sectoral Systems of Innovation and Production”, Research Policy, 31 (2), pp. 247-264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00139-1
March-Chordà, I.; Gunasekaran, A. y Lloria- Aramburo, B. (2002): “Product development process in Spanish SMEs: an empirical research”, Technovation, 22 (5), pp. 301-312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(01)00021-9
Meyer-Krahmer, F. (1985): “Innovation behaviour and regional indigenous potential”, Reg. Studies, n.º 19, pp. 523-534.
Merton, R. K. (1987): “Three Fragments from a Sociologist’s Notebooks: Establishing the Phenomenon, Specified Ignorance, and Strategic Research Materials”, Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 13, pp. 1-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.13.080187.000245
Nelson, R. (1993): National Innovation Systems. A Comparative Analysis, New York, Oxford University Press.
Nooteboom, B. (1994): “Innovation and diffusion in small firms: Theory and evidence”, Small Business Economics, n.º 6 (5), pp. 327-347.
OCDE (1993): Small and medium-size entreprises: Technology and competitiveness, Paris, OCDE.
Romer, P. M. (1986): “Increasing returns and long-run growth”, The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 94 (5), pp. 1002-1037. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/261420
Romer, P. M. (1990): “Endogenous technological change”, The Journal of Political Economy, vol. 98 (5), pp. 71-102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/261725
Saxenian, A. (1994): Regional Advantage- Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128, Cambridge MA, Harvard University Press.
Saxenian, A. (2002): “Brain Circulation: How High-Skills Immigration Makes Everyone Better Off”, The Brookings Review, n.º 20, pp. 28-31.
Saxenian, A. (2005): “From brain drain to brain circulation: Transnational communities and regional upgrading in India and China”, Studies in Comparative International Development, n.º 40 (2), pp. 35-61.
Solla Price, D. (1973): Hacia una ciencia de la ciencia, Barcelona, Ariel.
Solow, R. (1957): “Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function”, Review of Economics and Statistics, n.º 39, pp. 312-320.
Verspagen, B. (2001): “Economic Growth and Technological Change: An Evolutionary Interpretation”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 1, OECD Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry.
Viale, R. y Ghiglione, B. (1998): The Triple Helix Model: A Tool of the Study of European Regional Socio Economic Systems, in the IPTS Report 29.
World Bank (2003): Sustainable development in a dynamic world. Transforming institutions, growth and quality of life, World development report, World Bank and Oxford University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2012 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the printed and online versions of this Journal are the property of Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a “Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International” (CC BY 4.0) License. You may read here the basic information and the legal text of the license. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 License must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the published by the Editor, is not allowed.
