0.5 Results  (Page 20/20)

Dr. steve conlan (swansea university, co-director of cnh)

The key to successful growth of a Nanomedicine hub is forging industry and research partnerships. Build on the university’s strengths in engineering and physical sciences by searching for researchers and clinicians eager to cross-disciplinary boundaries.

The culture of researchers is very important to feel supported not only in a research group but in the School and in the wider University. Knowing you have support from both the Schools and Universities administration is empowering both personally and academically.

Bibliography

• Audretsch D., 1998, “Agglomeration and the location of innovative activity”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol. 14, pp. 18–29.
• Audretsch D. and Feldman M., 1994, “R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production”, The American Economic Review, Vol. 86, pp. 630–640.
• Belussi F., 1999, “Policies for the development of knowledge intensive local production systems”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 23, pp. 729–747.
• BIS, 2010, “Small firms given a major boost by Budget growth plans”, www.bis.gov.uk, Accessed 2010.
• Bradsher K., 2010, “China Drawing High-Tech Research From U.S.”, NY Times, Global Business.
• Burgi B, and Pradeep T., 2006, “Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology in Developing Countries” Current Science, Vol. 90, No. 5.
• Burt R., 1987,”Social contagion and innovation: cohesion versus structural equivalence”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 92, pp 1287–1335
• Davenport S., 2005, “Exploring the role of proximity in SME knowledge-acquisition”, Research Policy, Vol. 34, Iss. 5, 2005, pp. 683-701.
• Davies D. and Weinstein D., 1999, “Economic geography and regional production structure: an empirical investigation”, European Economic Review Vol. 43 , pp. 379–407.
• DIUS, 2009, “Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills Response to the House of Lords Science and Technology Select Committee Nanotechnologies and food inquiry”, www.parliament.uk, Accessed 2009.
• Feldman M., 1994,”The Geography of Innovation”, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
• Granovetter M., 1985, “Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 91, pp. 481–510.
• Gulati R., 1999, “Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 20, pp. 397–420.
• Harrison B., 1991, “Industrial districts: Old wine in new bottles?”, Regional Studies, Vol. 26, pp. 469–483.
• Hanson G., 2005, “Market potential, increasing returns and geographic concentration”, Journal of International Economics, Vol. 67, Iss. 1, pp. 1-24.
• Huang Z., Chen H. and Roco M., 2004, “International nanotechnology development in 2003: Country, institution, and technology field analysis based on USPTO patent database”, Journal of Nanoparticle Research Vol.6, pp. 325–354.
• Kay L. and Shapira P., 2009, “Developing Nanotechnology in Latin America” Journal of Nanoparticle Research, Vol. 11, Iss. 2, pp. 259-278.
• Keeble D. and Wilkinson F., 1999, “Collective learning and knowledge development in the evolution of regional clusters of high technology SMEs”, Regional Studies Vol. 33, pp. 295–303.
• Kostoff R., Koytcheff R. and Lau C., 2007, “Global nanotechnology research metrics”, Scientometrics, Vol. 70, No. 3, pp. 565–601.
• Krugman P., 1991, “Increasing returns and economic geography”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 99, pp. 483–499.
• Marshall A., 1986, “Principles of Economics”, 8 ^th Ed., Macmillan, Basingstoke.
• Moore G., 2005, “Dealing with Darwin: How Great Companies Innovate at Every Stage of Evolution”, Portfolio Hardcover, ISBN-10 -1591841070.
• National Materials Advisory Board (NMAB), 2006, “A Matter of Size: Triennial Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative” EmTech Report.
• OECD, 2005, “OECD SME and Entrepreneurship Outlook – 2005 Edition”, www.oecd.org, Accessed 2008.
• Osegowitsch T. and Sammartino A.,2008, “Reassessing (home-)regionalization”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 39, pp. 184–196.
• Parker R., 2008, “Leapfrogging Development through Nanotechnology Investment: Chinese and Indian Science and Technology Policy Strategies”, China-India-US Workshop on Science, Technology and Innovation Policy.
• Porter M., 1998. “Clusters and the new economics of competition”, Harvard Business Review Vol. 76, pp. 77–90.
• Quinstas P., Lefrere, P. and Jones G., 1997, “Knowledge management: a strategic agenda”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 30, pp. 385–391.
• Rabellotti R. and Schmitz H., 1999, “The internal heterogeneity of industrial districts in Italy, Brazil and Mexico”, Regional Studies, Vol. 33, pp. 97–108.
• Rudd E., 2008, “Discussion on investment in a technology based start-up” Swansea University.
• Shapira P., and Wang J., 2009, “From Lab to market: Strategies and issues in the commercialization of nanotechnology in China”, Asian Business&Management, Vol. 8, pp. 461-489.
• www.nanopaprika.eu, Accessed 2010.
• Yip G., Rugman A. and Kudina A., 2006, “International success of British companies”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 39, Iss. 3, pp. 241–264.
• Youtie J. and Shapira P., 2008, “Building an innovation hub: A case study of the transformation of university roles in regional technological and economic development”, Research Policy, Vol. 37, pp. 1188–1204.