2nd BRICS workshop, Rio de Janeiro, April 2007 The Geography of Innovation in South Africa: A First Cut Jo Lorentzen HSRC, Cape Town

Outline Background A bit of theory  How close for comfort? Data you got and data you ain’t  What about a knowledge production function? What goes on in the provinces? Linkages between productive and knowledge activities What’s next?

A bit of theory, all over the place National domain most appropriate unit of analysis for understanding differential growth rates (Freeman 1987, Lundvall 1992, Nelson 1993) Regional growth differentials far more challenging (Cooke 2001, Howell 2005, Krugman 1991, Marshall 1890, Piore and Sabel 1984, Porter 2003, Romer 1990, Storper 1997) Specialisation (Marshall) or diversity (Jacobs) externalities? Empirical evidence on role of proximity and specialisation vs diversity inconclusive (mostly based on evidence from US and Europe)

Conclusion: we know precious little Once we account for innovation and knowledge creation processes, it becomes very difficult to apply simple stylised cluster constructs, because there is neither a representative Marshallian firm nor an illustrative “innovative” cluster. Co-location therefore may or may not offer structures, organisation and institutions which improve the likelihood of local innovation. Iammarino and McCann in Research Policy (2006)

Data you got and data you ain’t Systematic?Public?Electronic?Online? Patents (CIPRO) Yes No Value added (Quantec) YesNoYesNo R&D (HSRC) YesNoYesNo Publications (DoE,NRF) NoYesSort ofNo

Conclusions, open questions, future work Regional or local innovation systems possibly exist in GP and esp. in WC, but nowhere else. Is this because or urban economies or of agglomeration advantages? Are there cross-provincial knowledge spillovers or technology transfer? Estimate a knowledge production function. GP: case study of specialisation vs diversity externalities. WC: case study of regional knowledge production, sourcing, and use. MP, LP, NW: sectoral (mining) innovation system?