A typology approach to understanding the diversity of Science Parks

Science Parks play a crucial role in fostering entrepreneurship and innovation, acting as hubs for knowledge transfer, technology commercialization, and business development. Despite their growing importance, existing classifications fail to adequately capture their diversity. This study addresses this gap by proposing a novel typology based on two key dimensions: ownership and strategic orientation. We categorize them into four types— Research Parks , Technology Parks , Industrial Parks , and Traditional Parks —providing a framework that enhances understanding, strategic planning, and policymaking. To empirically validate this typology, we analyse 180 Science Parks worldwide, all full members of the International Association of Science Parks and Areas of Innovation (IASP). The classification relies on data from multiple institutional sources, including IASP directories, reports from national Science Park associations, and individual park websites. Our approach introduces a three-tier classification: i) typology, which establishes the overarching structure; ii) types, representing specific categories within the typology; and iii) clusters, further categorize the types into subsets, adding depth to the classification system. Clusters are the results of the practical application of the model to IASP's full members. By categorizing Science Parks into four types and nine clusters, this study provides insights into their distinct needs and challenges, informing more effective policy and management strategies. Ultimately, this research contributes to the broader discourse on Science Parks by offering a refined classification system that improves understanding of their diversity and strategic roles. • Science Parks foster new ventures and ecosystems, crucial in global economies. •Identifying Science Parks' heterogeneity is essential. •Understanding ownership and strategic orientation of Science Parks is crucial. •Further research is needed to understand differences between Science Parks. •Typologies for Science Parks enhance understanding and support policy development.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Technovation
Published
2025-05-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2025.103267
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Museums and Cultural Heritage
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
31.57

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A typology approach to understanding the diversity of Science Parks

Magnus Klofsten, Hans Löfsten, Alberto Albahari
2 citations
Technovation
Museums and Cultural Heritage
31.57
article

A typology approach to understanding the diversity of Science Parks

Magnus Klofsten, Hans Löfsten, Alberto Albahari
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Science Parks play a crucial role in fostering entrepreneurship and innovation, acting as hubs for knowledge transfer, technology commercialization, and business development. Despite their growing importance, existing classifications fail to adequately capture their diversity. This study addresses this gap by proposing a novel typology based on two key dimensions: ownership and strategic orientation. We categorize them into four types— Research Parks , Technology Parks , Industrial Parks , and Traditional Parks —providing a framework that enhances understanding, strategic planning, and policymaking. To empirically validate this typology, we analyse 180 Science Parks worldwide, all full members of the International Association of Science Parks and Areas of Innovation (IASP). The classification relies on data from multiple institutional sources, including IASP directories, reports from national Science Park associations, and individual park websites. Our approach introduces a three-tier classification: i) typology, which establishes the overarching structure; ii) types, representing specific categories within the typology; and iii) clusters, further categorize the types into subsets, adding depth to the classification system. Clusters are the results of the practical application of the model to IASP's full members. By categorizing Science Parks into four types and nine clusters, this study provides insights into their distinct needs and challenges, informing more effective policy and management strategies. Ultimately, this research contributes to the broader discourse on Science Parks by offering a refined classification system that improves understanding of their diversity and strategic roles. • Science Parks foster new ventures and ecosystems, crucial in global economies. •Identifying Science Parks' heterogeneity is essential. •Understanding ownership and strategic orientation of Science Parks is crucial. •Further research is needed to understand differences between Science Parks. •Typologies for Science Parks enhance understanding and support policy development.

TechnovationVol. 145
Linköping University (SE), Chalmers University of Technology (SE), Universidad de Málaga (ES)
King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, University of Tehran, King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology, Háskóli Íslands, Universidade do Porto, University of Tehran Science and Technology Park, Hsinchu Science Park Bureau, Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Museums and Cultural Heritage
31.57
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.