High Technology, Institutions, and Development in Oxford: A Study of Entrepreneurial Landscapes

1. High technology, institutions and development in Oxford Helen Lawton Smith Department of Management, Birkbeck & Oxfordshire Economic Observatory, Oxford University

2. Research agenda: how entrepreneurial landscapes change over time • What combination of factors at different stages in Oxford’s and Oxfordshire’s economic development have contributed to their dynamism? • How has the institutional architecture changed over time? • Timescale – 1960s to the present day

3. Regional internal and external factors Internal: • local entrepreneurial capacity and the strategic decision making capacity of the region • the significance of networks and relationships between the key players in the public and private sectors External • broader trends in entrepreneurship, • national public policy and its relationship with local ‘institutional architecture’.

4. Feldman and Francis 2006: three stage process for successful regions • region inert – few start-up companies, latent assets such as universities, government labs and large companies; • regional response to exogenous shock – formation of a cluster • “fully functioning entrepreneurial environment within an innovative and adaptable industrial cluster.”

5. Where is Oxford and Oxfordshire? • Rural part of Western Crescent around London stretching from Cambridgeshire to South coast. • One corner of the “golden triangle” Oxford, Cambridge and London • One end of the Oxford to Cambridge Arc • On European map the Berkshire, Buckingham and Oxfordshire NUTS II region had the highest proportion of employment in knowledge intensive business services (2004)

6. Demographics Oxford – small city in a rural county • 143,000 people • a university town and an industrial town Oxfordshire • 600,000 people • Most rural county in the SE of England • Dense concentration of research and business/science parks in the south of the county

8. Oxfordshire research and skill base • County dominated by public expenditure (46% of employment) • education, health, expenditure on research and development (R&D) • 3 universities, 7 major research laboratories • numerous smaller research laboratories funded directly or co-funded by charities, especially medical charities. • Very highly skilled workforce 40% per cent of Oxfordshire residents qualified to degree level • ranked as the 3rd most qualified county. • High proportion of residents employed in professional occupations • Ranks 3rd of all county council areas

9. Growth of high tech economy

10. The Oxfordshire high-tech economy

11. Institutional architecture • Incubators and science parks • Networks and networking • Research base • Public policy

12. 1980s

13. 1990s

14. 2000s

16. spin-offs from Oxford University

17. Post ‘entrepreneurial university’ status spin-offs • Since 1997, Isis Innovation has managed the creation of a new spin-off company on average every two months; • responsible for creating 59 spin-out companies based on university IP. • raised an additional £280 million in follow-on venture funding rounds.

18. Said Business School Entrepreneurship Awareness Attendances 2000/1 – 2006/6

19. Entrepreneurship Awareness Attendances 2006/7 – 2009/10

20. Public policy

21. Conclusions • 1960s Oxfordshire was relatively inert • 1970s nascent cluster of around 50 firms employing some 8000 people. • 1980s The Oxford Trust, networking and entrepreneurship events • 1990s cluster grew rapidly in size and importance • an increasing number of entrepreneurs, • by the stability provided by a small number of long-established firms. • Oxfordshire organisations and firms in the van of capitalising on advances in technology: cluster shapers (Feldman and Francis 2006) • 2000s Centre of gravity of high-tech entrepreneurship shifted towards Oxford University • Nascent local/regional policy focus on high-tech economy

22. …….. cont • The nature of the cluster has evolved, it has renewed itself and entered new growth phases (Trippl and Todtling 2008). • much more orientated towards high-tech services and biotech, while still maintaining a strong manufacturing tradition. • key to the county’s adaptability is the strength, depth and mobility of its highly skilled labour market, both in technical and professional skills.

23. Networks, incubators and science parks, the research base and public policy • County is heavily networked • Has numerous incubators and three major science/business parks • Increasing importance of science base in entrepreneurial processes in both of above • Local public policy impact mainly on planning, national public policy more significant • Now confusion in multi-level governance system