Authors: NULL
In order for new knowledge to lead to growth it is necessary for this knowledge to be embedded into auser contect. Among policy organisations throughout the OECD world, optimistic voices describe thesocietal and economic benefits that can be created through the establishments of networks around newknowledge areas. Different kinds of networks, clusters and innovation systems, among others, are seen asimportant systems for transferring knowledge from the academic to the business world. Policy supportednetwork-like constructions have also increased dramatically. In the US alone there are about 50 policysupported biotech cluster projects. In the small country of Sweden, the business magazine Biotech Sweden(May 2003) reports a new record in Swedish biotech clusters, ?from zero to fourteen within a few years?.What all these constructions have in common is the mission of supporting the transfer of scientificknowledge to entrepreneurial business projects.However, the network phenomenon is also criticised. ?Networks combine the idea of connection with theidea of disconnection?, says the sociologist Zigmunt Bauman (Axess, 2003, nr 6, sid 13) who sketches aconsiderably darker picture of the emerging network society. Instead of a stable and reliable world,characterised by defined roles and engagements, Bauman (2002) stresses that network structures are looseand temporary constructions, characterised by a lack of long-range obligations. Sociologist ManuelCastells (1998) paints an equally dark picture of the emerging network society, but, in contrast toBauman, due to its enormous power rather than its fleeting character.At first glance it can be regarded as a paradox that the interpretation of networks made in the IMPtradition recognises both of these views of networks. Thus, networks in the IMP tradition are regarded asstructural Janus faces. On one hand all these networks that emerge as a consequence of interaction overtime have the appearance of a heavy colossus. Regardless of how great the awareness of their negativeeffects, they cannot change rapidly. On the other hand these networks are full of resources whose featuresare still waiting to be handled. Thus, it is a picture similar to the one sketched by Edith Penrose (1959) ?No matter how we consider the putting together of the ?jig-saw-puzzle?, we may still find that a numberof awkward corners persist in sticking out?. And, it is not in the construction of networks, but in theconstant confronting and recombining of these ?awkward corners?, that we can find the source of networkdynamics.
Journal: ( – )
Web Address:
Publish Year: 2004
Conference: Copenhagen, Denmark (2004)