2006 Volume 61 Issue 2 Pages 63-80
Innovation is considered to be a crucial factor for corporate activities. A growing interest in the geographical dimension of innovation has been apparent in economic geography theory. In discussions about agglomeration, geographical proximity between various actors is said to promote innovation because geographical proximity accelerates the transfer of knowledge, and that is important to innovation. But some articles in the literature point out that geographical proximity is not necessary to promote innovation. This paper assesses the research networks between companies and scientists in Tsukuba Science City (Tsukuba) and clarifies the examination of whether geographical proximity is important to promoting innovation. These analyses are based on an interview and on a questionnaire survey mailed to R&D laboratories and one mailed to members of the Pharmaceutical Society of Japan (Nihon Yakugakkai) in Tsukuba. The results can be summarized as follows. The reason that a private R&D center is located in Tsukuba is that they sought a relationship with a national R&D center. However, collaborative research was not promoted between the private and national R&D centers because the 'organizational proximity' was short. It is derived from the differences in the way the members of these R&D centers think. A private R&D center pursues the interests of economic performance whereas a national R&D center pursues the ideal of academic achievement. Members of a research support agency in Tsukuba fail to understand the R&D needs, so they do not play an important role in promoting research networks. When successful innovation is done, the intra-firm environment is more important than the interfirm environment because of the internal labor market and lifetime employment system that had developed in Japan. In particular, major firms have a high level of R&D expenditures, so they do not need a relationship with other firms to seek the seeds for innovation. Above all, research networks do not always grow in the local milieu. We therefore conclude that innovation does not necessarily need to be promoted based on geographical proximity.
