Regional science policy and the growth of knowledge megacentres in bioscience clusters



deficiency. It is arguable, judged by Nobel Prizes awarded that Cambridge with
eleven is superior in biosciences to any of the stronger candidates in the USA. But it
is unquestionable that the latter have been more entrepreneurial, even though large
numbers of DBFs everywhere have neither products nor profits.

What does this signify? In an earlier paper, an extensive analysis of the response by
the large number of non-megacentre, even non-bioscience regions in the USA,
Canada and the UK was undertaken (Cooke, 2002b). This showed that fifteen US
States had undertaken science base analyses and developed science strategies with
targets and mechanisms for augmenting their capture of basic science funding in
biosciences. Some piecemeal evidence of the outcomes of these are the statistics that
show universities like Harvard, Johns Hopkins, UCSF, Stanford and Duke as
occupying highest places in the NIH R&D allocations compared to hitherto. But the
US has also an interesting mechanism for supporting ambitious if underdeveloped
universities in lagging States to access national competitive funding. The EPSCOR
scheme under the NSF competitive bidding procedure for accessing, first programme,
now project funding allows designated States, e.g. Oklahoma and Mississippi to bid
competitively for such bioscience research funding by lowering the grant aid
qualifying bar below that expected of the rest of the USA. This, in EU terms, is a
‘structural funds’ mechanism within the Framework Funds and it has produced
generally positive rather than futile results in the USA.

In Europe, some regional bodies have begun to develop regional science strategies,
most notably Scotland that identifies its £800 million R&D spend annually and seeks
to augment it through intra-regional collaboration and the furtherance of existing
science-funding mechanisms. Medical and Biosciences are two if the three funding
areas to be targeted. In Finland a central government policy of seeding regional
Centres of Expertise, and later, Centres of Excellence has produced up to six regional
bioscientific Centres of Excellence that follow the US system of linking
exploration
to exploitation but through largely public rather than private knowledge exploitation
mechanisms. Regional governance institutions are now somewhat more aware now
than they were until only very recently, that health is a large part of their economy,
that it links directly to some of the most exciting science being done in the world
today, and that as well as making a direct economic contribution through purchasing

28



More intriguing information

1. An alternative way to model merit good arguments
2. Une Classe de Concepts
3. The resources and strategies that 10-11 year old boys use to construct masculinities in the school setting
4. The name is absent
5. The name is absent
6. The name is absent
7. Emissions Trading, Electricity Industry Restructuring and Investment in Pollution Abatement
8. The name is absent
9. The Dictator and the Parties A Study on Policy Co-operation in Mineral Economies
10. The name is absent
11. Income Mobility of Owners of Small Businesses when Boundaries between Occupations are Vague
12. The name is absent
13. The name is absent
14. The name is absent
15. THE INTERNATIONAL OUTLOOK FOR U.S. TOBACCO
16. Structural Influences on Participation Rates: A Canada-U.S. Comparison
17. INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS AND GROUP PROCESSES
18. The name is absent
19. The name is absent
20. The name is absent