Title: Nanodistrict 2: Understanding the emergence and deployment of nano S
1Nanodistrict 2 Understanding the emergence and
deployment of nano ST
- Philippe Larédo
- ENPC and University of Manchester
- and Vincent Mangematin
- GAEL (INRA) and Grenoble Ecole Management
2Underlying conceptual framework
- Based on work on breakthrough / radical
innovations - Bridging and growing small worlds
- Building new worlds
- Combining existing technologies to create new
innovations - Building on existing trends or designing new
trends? - design as a central feature
- Focus how do fluid phases deploy and stabilize
3Underlying conceptual framework
- Based on work on breakthrough / radical
innovations - design as a central feature
- Crosses economics, management and sociology
- Dominant design (Abernathy, Metcalfe)
- design spaces (Stankievicz)
- Business models (Amit and Zott)
- New industrial organisation (Network Cf. Powell
or J. Baum) ex ante coordination or ex post
competition - To what extent what happened previously (biotech,
NTIC, internet) will be duplicated? - Focus how do fluid phases deploy and stabilize
4Underlying conceptual framework
- Based on work on breakthrough / radical
innovations - design as a central feature
- Focus how do fluid phases deploy and stabilize
OR how existing trajectories do change after the
introduction of nano? - Afuah and Utterback fluid phase, when
trajectories are opened - Radical change or inflexion in Nano, are we in a
fluid phase?
5How do nano ST differ Five major hypotheses
- Science dynamics new search regime? (cf.
Bonaccorsi hypothesis) - Science / engineering linkage individual vs
distributed IP and the central role of
demonstrators (Thoma, Bonaccorsi P. Stephan) - Platform agglomerations and regional
concentration (Robinson, Rip et al.) - Emergence from scratch or convergence of
trajectories (Avenel et al.) - Toward new organisational / institutional forms?
Bonaccorsi, 2005 (www.prime-noe.org) and 2006
(RP)
6Nano ST new search regime
- 1- Rate of growth
- Need for tapping the realm of nano ST. New
scientometric developments for the delimitation
of emerging science fields (Zitt et al., Mogoutov
et al.) - Preliminary results very rapid growth 14/year
(human genome is 8, average is under 2) - Implications High rate of growth requires
flexible institutional setting to accommodate it
--gt redistribution of capabilities and new
entrants
7Nano ST new search regime
- 2- Complementarities
- New forms of inter-disciplinarity (e.g. chemistry
for nano electronics) --gt more than simply
project based networks - Facilities ultra clean rooms technology
platforms, from 20 to 300 m --gt concentration
witnessed but not a big science model - High involvement of incumbents as nano ST are
tool/instrumentation oriented - Growing actor heterogeneity see Thoma al. On
patenting activity (3 equal groups of patents
between authors only, inventors only and
authors-inventors)
8Nano ST new search regime
- Early developments Taking science out of the lab
or how to get out of exploration? - Central hypothesis the shape of knowledge
matters- Individual IP (the bio model) vs.
distributed IP (the microelectronics model) - Assumption even if there are different types of
nanos, the coupling between demonstrators work
at the nano scale drive to lengthening the
innovation process - For evolution of microelectronic model
(Delemarle, Kahane et Laredo, Delemarle et
Laredo) - Evolution in the biotech industry and
decomposition of the process
9- Individual IP
- Molecules/individual process/kits
- transfer licences
- - key role of start-up firms
- blurred borders between research teams
- BIOTECH MODEL
- Distributed IP
- - IP Blocks/Patent pools
- - Demonstrations /standards
- - Knowledge circulation through industry -
University collaborations - - integration centres
- - key role of existing large players
- - start-up as specialised suppliers
- MICRO/NANO
- ELECTRONICS MODEL
10From Micro to nanoelectronics
Enlargement Of Classical IT/CS scientific Base
Rapidly Widening Product range
Cmos core
Sector/application Oriented integration
centres Media / telecom energy / biochips
Feasibility of Architectural Design demonstrators
Electronic roadmap
11Platform agglomerations and regional concentration
- Nano at the crossroad of different disciplines
- Biotech science based fields proximity of
leading scientists importance of small
technological platforms - Microelectronics technology based fields large
technological platforms, trained engineers to run
the platforms and leading scientists - Nano Potential use of different platforms,
exploration of competing hypotheses tests
required and thus platforms
12Platform agglomerations and regional concentration
- Not a single platform is needed but an
agglomeration of platform which offers a large
variety of capacity - Regional concentration from three sources
- Platforms
- Colocation of engineers and researchers
- Local offers from SMEs
13Emergence from scratch of convergence?
- How technology does match markets? How markets
are shaped? - Product or process?
- Empirically three models observed
- Research as a first market (researchers as
first users, internet, instrumentation, biotech)
put on the market intermediary products,
servicB2B services - Equipment and Business (equipment goods,
micro-electronics, biotech). Integration of new
designs, new processes in instruments. Where is
the innovation located? - Consumer (Mobiles, Pharma). Which are the
linkages with the markets? - Which are the firms involved? Newly created
start-ups, large incumbents, start-ups from the
previous waves?
14Emergence from scratch of convergence?
- Considerations on the present situation
- Source a DB on nearly 6000 firms in 2005 (3000
in 2004) with nano involvement (Avenel,
Mangematin et al.) - Mostly initiated by existing firms 2 channels-
progressive move of IT/bio (miniaturisation
process)- large consumer firms LOreal, Golf
balls, chemistry and materials- Start-up mostly
with research markets - Strong societal anticipations of risks- Asbestos
(cf. Proposals by Swiss insurance companies)-
Crichton effect (cf. Also Prince Charles)-
Preliminary results on risk linked to carbon
nanotubes
15Emergence from scratch of convergence?
- Our hypothesis
- First markets embedded nanos (i.e. in
existing products for solving given problems, cf.
Abernathy revolutionary products). Similarly
than in informatics and biotech at the early
stage - Regulation as critical factor to development(cf.
Joly on GMO controversies with EPA approach on
functions and EU approach on research and
production process). Chances of a movement toward
a generalised Pharma model? - Critical aspects existence of protected areas
(Defence), role of unregulated / non democratic
countries (China?)
16From component dynamics to overall process
dynamics new organisational forms?
- Background
- Rothaermel and Hill Position of incumbents in a
shaken environment - The convergence of science dynamics and changing
science/engineering links drives to strong
agglomeration dynamics - Role of public authorities Strong transformation
in the shaping of public capabilities cf.
Minatec - Mesa comparison (Delemarle, Robinson
et al.) - New geographic poles or scientific districts
(anchor tenant hypothesis revised?)
Agrawal and Cockburn, 2003
17From component dynamics to overall process
dynamics new organisational forms?
- Emergence of new business models as in biotech
with venture capital? - Which actor will have a critical role?
- Which role for IP?
- Alliance, MA, critical size?
Agrawal and Cockburn, 2003
18Which patterns for the clusters?
- Minatec is one example closely located around a
large research/technology center large firms - Mesa is another example with a division of work
specialised islands closely related. Philips - Cambridge or Oxford are other examples based on
biotech, with start-ups from the previous waves
and large pharmaceutical firms around
19Toward new public arrangements Minatec
idealised
- Shared facilities
- Joint support teams TT (contract, IP),
incubator, seed capital.. - Vision shaping (markets society)OMNT, Ideas
Lab - Scientific forum
- Incentives for internal external research
collaboration - Attractivity team
UniversityEngineeringSchools
NationalLab
Industry RD space
20Toward scientific districts? a hint from the
Grenoble area
- Minatec 3500 researchers, engineers and post
grads - Critical world size (publications, patents)
- 3 layers of facilities exploration,
demonstration, prototyping (around 1 billion
euros) - Large RD facilities from 3 world key players in
electronics (ST, Philips and Flextronics) - Numerous start-up (one of largest European pool),
Successful start-up with world niches (SOITEC), - Incoming industry players most major electronic
equipment producers, Pharma and materials firms
implanting RD facilities, - Broad academic environment (55000 students, 13000
academics and public researchers - Large trained capabilities (40 of total manpower
with bachelor degree)
21What remains to be done?
- WP1 Characterising nanoST
- Characterising convergence if any
- Describing the linkages ST and commercialisation
- WP2 Characterising economic dynamics
- Incumbents Vs start-ups?
- Effects of specialisation for a cluster
- Respective role of start-ups and incumbents
- WP3 Characterising nanoclusters
- Role of platforms
- Patterns of clusters
22Deliverables