The main idea behind this paper is that social capital (SC) is to be interpreted as a component of an investment which implies entangled private and public benefits. Within a theoretical framework that considers social capital as the public component of the impure public good R&D we show that the ‘civic culture’ of the district area in which a firm works is not a sufficient incentive to increase its investment in SC. Social capital/networking dynamics might positively and complementary evolve only if the opportunity cost of investing in innovation is sufficiently low. We consequently focus our attention on a specialized biomedical industrial district characterised by a strong pattern of innovative activity. We observe that R&D and networking/social capital arise as complementary driving forces for innovation outputs. When empirical evidence confirms that this complementarity plays key role, the policy effort should be targeted toward both market and non-market characteristics, rather than solely to the production of local public goods or innovation inputs as independent elements of firm performances. The difference is important as far as policy effectiveness is concerned. In fact, we argue that SC/networking dynamics might positively evolve only if the private opportunity cost of investing in R&D innovation is sufficiently low. Nevertheless, this exogenous economic incentive works as long as complementarity, as here defined, holds.
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND INNOVATION DYNAMICS IN DISTRICT BASED LOCAL SYSTEMS
MANCINELLI, Susanna;MAZZANTI, Massimiliano
2007
Abstract
The main idea behind this paper is that social capital (SC) is to be interpreted as a component of an investment which implies entangled private and public benefits. Within a theoretical framework that considers social capital as the public component of the impure public good R&D we show that the ‘civic culture’ of the district area in which a firm works is not a sufficient incentive to increase its investment in SC. Social capital/networking dynamics might positively and complementary evolve only if the opportunity cost of investing in innovation is sufficiently low. We consequently focus our attention on a specialized biomedical industrial district characterised by a strong pattern of innovative activity. We observe that R&D and networking/social capital arise as complementary driving forces for innovation outputs. When empirical evidence confirms that this complementarity plays key role, the policy effort should be targeted toward both market and non-market characteristics, rather than solely to the production of local public goods or innovation inputs as independent elements of firm performances. The difference is important as far as policy effectiveness is concerned. In fact, we argue that SC/networking dynamics might positively evolve only if the private opportunity cost of investing in R&D innovation is sufficiently low. Nevertheless, this exogenous economic incentive works as long as complementarity, as here defined, holds.I documenti in SFERA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
