Engajamento do Parque Científico e Tecnológico de Cornélio Procópio, PR, Brasil no modelo da hélice tripla

Autores

  • Marcio Jacometti Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná - Campus Curitiba
  • Luiz César de Oliveira Faculdade de Economia da Universidade de Coimbra
  • Jair de Oliveira Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná - Campus Cornélio Procópio
  • Juliano César de Oliveira Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná - Campus Cornélio Procópio
  • Felipe Haddad Manfio Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná - Campus Cornélio Procópio

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29327/237867.8.2-6

Palavras-chave:

Tríplice Hélice

Resumo

The objective of this article is to compare recommendations of the literature on management of technology parks with the implementation actions of Science and Technology Park (STP) of the Federal Technological University of Paraná, Cornélio Procópio Campus (UTFPR-CP), Brazil. Thus, a lifting was carried out in the literature on the origins of technological parks and their respective trajectories. The main points identified in this study were compared with the event records that are guiding the execution actions for the STP implementation project. The results show that implementation process follows the recommendations of literature, including with establishment of regional strategic partnerships, according to Triple Helix model. In addition, the importance of political support at the municipal, state and federal levels was evident, as well as the private initiative and the Academy,  essential in enabling the donation of the land and the beginning of STP physical construction, following the pattern of fourth generation of technology parks.

Referências

Allen, J. (2007). Third generation science parks, Manchester Science Parks. Retrieved August 5, 2020, from file:///C:/Users/UTFPR/AppData/Local/Temp/MSP_Third_Generation_ Brochure_0.pdf

Amirahmadi, H., & Saff, G. (1993). Science parks: a critical assessment. Journal of Planning Literature, 8(2), 107-123.

Anprotec. National Association of Entities Promoting Innovative Enterprises. (2020). Retrieved August 2, 2020, from http://anprotec.org.br/site/pt/a-anprotec/

BACEN. Banco Central do Brasil. (2015). Dólar comercial oficial: índice diário. Retrieved September, 12, 2020, from http://www.yahii.com.br/dolardiario15.html

Bigliardi, B., Dormio, A. I., Nosella, A., & Petroni, G. (2006). Assessing science parks’performances: Directions from selected Italian case studies. Technovation, 26(4), 489-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2005.01.002

Chun, D., Chung, Y., & Bang, S. (2015). Impact of firm size and industry type on R&D efficiency throughout innovation and commercialisation stages: evidence from Korean manufacturing firms. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27(8), 895-909. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2015.1024645

Colombo, M., & Delmastro, M. (2002). How effective are technology incubators? Evidence from Italy. Research Policy, 31, 1103-1122.

Cooke, P. (2002). Biotechnology clusters as regional, sectoral innovation systems. International Regional Science Review, 25(1), 8-37.

Dabrowska, J. (2017). Measuring the success of science parks by using performance measurement systems. Thesis of doctorate. University of Manchester, UK.

Etzkowitz, H. (2008). The triple helix: university-industry-government innovation in action. New York: Routledge.

Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1999). The future location of research and technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 24(2), 111-123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1007807302841

Formica, P. (2009). Science and technology parks (STP): the evolution. International Organisation for Knowledge Economy and Enterprise Development, 1-3. Retrieved August 10, 2020, from http://www.iked.org/pdf/4TH%20Generation%20STPs.pdf

Gyurkovics, J.; Lukovics, M. (2014). Generations of science parks in the light of responsible innovation. In: N. Buzás, & M. Lukovics (Eds.), Responsible innovation. SZTE GTK, Szeged, pp. 193-208.

]Hall, B. H., Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2003). Universities as research partners. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(2), 485-491.

Hansson, F. (2007). Science parks as knowledge organizations - the “ ba ” in action? European Journal of Innovation Management, 10, 348-366.

IASP. International Association of Science Parks and Areas of Innovation. (2020). Retrieved August 10, 2020, from http://www.iasp.ws

Kawulich, B. B. Participant observation as a data collection method. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(2), art. 43, 2005.

Liu, N., & Guan, J. (2016). Policy and innovation: nanoenergy technology in the USA and China. Energy Policy, 91, 220-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.01.020

Löfsten, H., & Lindelöf, P. (2002). Science parks and the growth of new technology-based firms-academic-industry links, innovation and markets. Research Policy, 31(6), 859-876. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00153-6

Lu, S., & Bunchapattanasaakda, C. (2020). Influence of entrepreneurial social network on the competitiveness and the growth of MSMEs based on the theory of structural hole, International Journal of Development Research, 10(7), 37887-37895.

Luger, M. I., & Goldstein, H. A. (1991). Technology in the garden. Chapel Hill, NC: UNC.

Marshall, Catherine & Rossman, Gretchen B. (1995). Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Minguillo, D., & Thelwall, M. (2015). Which are the best innovation support infrastructures for universities? Evidence from R&D output and commercial activities. Scientometrics, 102(1), 1057-1081. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1458-5

Moré, R. P. O, Andrade, C. R. D., Moré, A. O., & Hoffmann, R. T. (2019). Creation of companies incubator in the light of Cerne: incubator novus case, International Journal of Development Research, 9(1), 25174-25182.

Nosratabadi, H., Pourdarab, S., & Abbasian, M. (2011). Evaluation of science and technology parks by using fuzzy expert system. Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science, 2(4), 594-606.

Phan, P. H., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2005). Science parks and incubators: observations, synthesis and future research. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 165-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2003.12.001

Rau, C., Salviati R. M., & Nascimento, D. E. (2019). Performance of Brazilian higher education institutions in the innovation criteria in university rankings. International Journal of Development Research, 9(7), 29067-29075.

Rowe, D. (2003), Evolution applies to science parks too. In: P. Formica, & L. Sanz (Eds.), Frontiers of entrepreneurship and innovation. Readings in Science Park Policies and Practice, IASP, Malaga.

Rycroft, R. W. (2007). Does cooperation absorb complexity? Innovation networks and the speed and spread of complex technological innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 74(5), 565-578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2006.10.005

Santos, S. A., & Parejo, M. (2005). Technology parks: a comparative analysis of the consolidated experiences in developed countries with Latin American countries. In S. A. Santos (Org.). Technological-based entrepreneurship - evolution and trajectory. 2. ed. Maringá, PR: Unicorpore.

Savitz, A. W., & Weber, K. (2007). The sustainable company: the real success is profit with social and environmental responsibility. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier.

Spolidoro, R. A. (1997). Knowledge society and its impacts on the urban environment. In G. Paladino, & L. A. Medeiros (Orgs.). Technology parks and urban environment. Brasília, DF: Anprotec/Sebrae.

Spolidoro, R., & Audy, J. L. N. (2008). PUCRS science and technology park: Tecnopuc. Porto Alegre, RS: EDIPUCRS.

Stake, R. E. (2009). A arte da investigação com estudos de caso. 2. ed. Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.

UBI Global. (2019, November). Global World Rankings of Business Incubators and Accelerators 2019-2020. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16066.53441. Retrieved August 10, 2020, from file:///C:/Users/UTFPR/Downloads/UBIGlobal-WorldRankingsReport2019-2020.pdf

UTFPR-CP. (2015a, May 21). Incubadora de Inovações da UTFPR Campus Cornélio Procópio [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx3q0a2bC1o

UTFPR-CP. (2015b, May 27). Projeto do Parque Científico e Tecnológico da UTFPR-CP [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xxm44fs7X8I&t=

UTFPR-CP. (2022). Incubadora de Inovações da Universidade Tecnológica. Retrieved September 12, 2022, from http://incubadora.cp.utfpr.edu.br

Vasquez-Urriago, A. R., Barge-Gil, A., & Rico, A. M. (2016). Science and technology parks and cooperationfor innovation: empirical evidence from Spain. Research Policy, 45(1), 137-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.07.006

Vedovello, C. A., Judice, V. M. M., & Maculan, A. M. D. (2006). Critical review of technology park approaches: interpretative alternatives to recent Brazilian experiences. Revista de Administração e Inovação, 3(2), 103-118.

Vila, P. C., & Pages, J. L. (2008, May). Science and technology parks: creating new environments favorable to innovation. Paradigms: Productive Economy and Knowledge, 0, 141-149. Retrieved August 11, 2020, from file:///C:/Users/UTFPR/AppData/Local/Temp/226082-Text%20de%20l'article-307805-1-10-20110217.pdf

WIPO. World Intellectual Property Organization. (2020). Global Innovation Index 2020: who will finance the innovation? Retrieved February 5, 2021, from https://www.wipo.int/global_innovation_index/en/2020/

Wright, M., Liu, X., Buck, T., & Filatotchev, I. (2008). Returnee entrepreneurs, science park location choice and performance: an analysis of high‐technology SMEs in China. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 131-155. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00219.x

Yang, J. B., Wong, B. Y. H., Xu, D. L., & Stewart, T. J. (2009). Integrating DEA-oriented performance assessment and target setting using interactive MOLP methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 195(1), 205-222.

Yang, C. H., Motohashi, K., & Chen, J. R. (2009). Are new technology-based firms located on science parks really more innovative? Evidence from Taiwan. Research Policy, 38(1), 77-85.

Yami, M., Chagchun, G., & Han, G. (2018). The science and technology parks (STPs) evaluation model approach to eco-innovation key indicator. International Business Research, 11(11), 187-200.

Zouain, D. M. (2003). Technology parks - proposing a conceptual model for urban regions: the Technology Park of São Paulo. Thesis (Doctorate) - Institute of Energy and Nuclear Research, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Downloads

Publicado

2023-07-11 — Atualizado em 2023-09-13

Versões

Como Citar

Jacometti, M., Oliveira, L. C. de, Oliveira, J. de, Oliveira, J. C. de, & Manfio, F. H. (2023). Engajamento do Parque Científico e Tecnológico de Cornélio Procópio, PR, Brasil no modelo da hélice tripla. Revista De Empreendedorismo E Gestão De Micro E Pequenas Empresas, 8(02), 01–17. https://doi.org/10.29327/237867.8.2-6 (Original work published 11º de julho de 2023)

Edição

v. 8 n. 02 (2023): Revista de Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Micro e Pequenas Empresas

Seção

ESTUDO DE CASO

Licença

Copyright (c) 2023 Revista de Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Micro e Pequenas Empresas

Creative Commons License

Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Divulgação e compartilhamento:

A revista permite a divulgação dos artigos publicados (p´os print) em webpage pessoais e institucionais dos autores, repositórios institucionais e temáticos, bem como em redes sociais.


Os artigos são licenciados sob a versão Atribuição-NãoComercial-Compartilhamento pela mesma Licença 4.0 Internacional