North Atlantic Innovative Relations of Swiss Pharmaceuticals and the Proximities with Regional Biotech Arenas

References

• Amin, A., and Thrift, N. 1992. Neo-Marshallian nodes in global networks. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 16:571–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andreff, W. 1996. Les multinationales globales. Paris: Éditions La Découverte.
   Google Scholar
• Archibugi, D.; Howells, J.; and Michie, J. 1999. Innovation systems and policy in a global economy. In Innovation policy in a global economy, ed. D. Archibugi, J. Howells, and J. Michie, 1–16. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Archibugi, D., and Michie, J. 1995. The globalisation of technology: A new taxanomy. Cambridge Journal of Economics 19:121–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Archibugi, D., and Michie, J. 1997. Technological globalisation and national systems of innovation: An introduction. In Technology, globalisation and economic performance, ed. D. Archibugi and J. Michie, 1–23. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Audretsch, D. B. 2001. The role of small firms in U.S. biotechnology clusters. Small Business Economics 17:3–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benedyk, M. O. 2001. New institute within TSRI focuses on molecular genetics of disease. Researchers target illnesses of children and afflictions of people in developing nations. Scripps News & Views 1(2). Available online: http://www.scripps.edu/newsandviews/e_20010205/icnd.html.
   Google Scholar
• Blakely, E. J., and Nishikawa, N. 1992. Incubating high-technology firms: State economic development strategies for biotechnology. Economic Development Quarterly 6:241–54.
   Google Scholar
• Blanc, H., and Sierra, C. 1999. The internationalisation of R & D by multinationals: A tradeoff between external and internal proximity. Cambridge Journal of Economics 23:187–206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brenner, R. 2002. The boom and the bubble: The U.S. in the world economy. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Burrill & Co. 1998. 1998 quarterly press releases: First quarter. Available online: http://www.burrillandco.com/content_pr.html.
   Google Scholar
• Burrill & Co. 1999. 1999 quarterly press releases.
   Google Scholar
• Fourth quarter 1999. 1999 ends on a positive note for biotechnology. Available online: http://www.burrillandco.com/content_pr_99q.html.
   Google Scholar
• Fourth quarter 2000. Second quarter 2000: Another busy quarter for biotech as the second quarter 2000 ends on a high note. Available online: http://www.burrillandco.com/content_pr_00q2.html.
   Google Scholar
• Fourth quarter 2001. 2001 quarterly press releases.
   Google Scholar
• First quarter 2001: Biotech financing window closes amid a market downturn. Sequencing the human genome not enough. Available online: http://www.burrillandco.com/content_pr_01q1.html.
   Google Scholar
• First quarter 2002. 2002 quarterly press releases. Second quarter 2002: Biotech continues its downward spiral during Q2 02. Wall Street’s enthusiasm wanes as investors wait for a turn around. Available online: http://www.burrillandco.com/content_pr_02q2.html.
   Google Scholar
• California Healthcare Institute. 2002. Biomedicine: The next wave for southern California’s economy. 2002 report on southern California’s biomedical R & D industry. La Jolla, Calif.: California Healthcare Institute, PriceWaterhouseCoopers.
   Google Scholar
• Cantwell, J. 1995. The globalization of technology: What remains of the product cycle model Cambridge Journal of Economics 19:155–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cavalla, D. 1997. Should biotechnology companies be based on research projects or niche technologies Drug News & Perspectives 10:197–202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chesnais, F. 1995. World oligopoly, rivalry between “global” firms and global corporate competitiveness. In Technological innovation, multinational corporations and new international competitiveness, ed. J. Molero, 75–107. Reading, U.K.: Harwood Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Chesnais, F. 1997. La mondialisation du capital (nouvelle édition augmentée). Paris: Syros.
   Google Scholar
• Chesnais, F. 2001. La nouvelle économie: Une conjoncture propre à la puissance hégémonique américaine [The new economy: An economic cycle specific to the hegemonic power of the U.S.]. In Une nouvelle phase du capitalisme? ed. F. Chesnais, G. Duménil, D. Lévy, and I. Wallerstein, 41–70. Paris: Éditions Syllepse.
   Google Scholar
• Chiron. 1997a. 1996 annual report. Emeryville, Calif.: Chiron Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Chiron. 1997b. Chiron announces it will expand senior management by recruiting new chief executive officer. Media release, 29 January. Emeryville, Calif.: Chiron Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Chugai. 2002. Corporate, quick facts: Chugai pharma USA. Available online: http://www.chugaibio.com/corpinfo/corpinfo5.html.
   Google Scholar
• Cooke, P. 1998. Introduction: Origins of a concept. In Regional innovation systems: The role of governance in a globalized world, ed. H.-J. Bracyk, P. Cooke, and M. Heidenreich, 2–27. London: UCL Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cortright, J., and Mayer, H. 2002. Signs of life: The growth of biotechnology in the U.S. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Crabtree, P. 2000. Gene therapy thrives in San Diego County. San Diego Union-Tribune, 19 November, H7.
   Google Scholar
• Crabtree, P. 2002. The new drug war: No quick cure as biotechs battle for premium space. San Diego Union-Tribune, 7 February, C1.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, J. 1998. NAS in 1997: A good year for new launches. Scrip Magazine 1 (January), 60.
   Google Scholar
• Dibner, M. D., and Bulluck, A. J. 1992. U.S./European strategic alliances in biotechnology. Biotech Forum Europe 9:628–35.
   Google Scholar
• Dicken, P.; Forsgren, M.; and Malmberg, A. 1994. The local embeddedness of transnational corporations. In Globalization, institutions, and regional development in Europe. ed. A. Amin and N. Thrift, 23–45. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dicken, P., and Malmberg, A. 2001. Firms in territories: A relational perspective. Economic Geography 77:345–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiMasi, J. 2001. New drug development in the United States from 1963 to 1999. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics 69:286–96.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiMasi, J. A. 1995. Trends in drug development costs, times, and risks. Drug Information Journal 29:375–84.
   Google Scholar
• DiMasi, J. A.; Hansen, R. W.; Grabowski, H. G.; and Lasagna, L. 1991. Cost of innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. Journal of Health Economics 10:107–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Discovery Partners. 2000. Form S-1 registration statement. Washington, D.C.: Discovery Partners International, Securities and Exchange Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Discovery Partners. 2001. Discovery Partners International establishes European headquarters in Basel, Switzerland. Media release, 28 November. San Diego, Calif.: Discovery Partners International.
   Google Scholar
• Dolata, U. 1996. Politische Ökonomie der Gentechnik: Konzernstrategien, Forschungs-programme, Technologiewettläufe [Political economy of biotechnology: Firm strategies, research programs, technological competition]. Berlin: Edition Sigma.
   Google Scholar
• Drews, J. 1998. Die verspielte Zukunft: Wohin geht die Arzneimittelforschung? [U.S. publication: Drews, J. 1999. In Quest of Tomorrow’s Medicines. New York: Springer.] Basel: Birkhäuser.
   Google Scholar
• Drews, J., and Ryser, S. 1996. Innovation. Deficit in the pharmaceutical industry. Drug Information Journal 30:97–108.
   Google Scholar
• Drug companies must improve R & D efficiency to remain competitive. 2001. News release, 30 November. Boston: Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development.
   Google Scholar
• Dunning, J. H. 1993. Multinational enterprises and the global economy. Wokingham, U.K.: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Dyer, M. R.; Cohen, D.; and Herrling, P. L. 1999. Functional genomics: From genes to new therapies. Drug Discovery Today 4:109–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elan. 2002. 2001 Annual report & form 20-F. Dublin: Elan Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Ernst & Young, ed. 2002. Beyond borders. The global biotechnology report 2002. U.K.: Ernst & Young.
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, M. P. 1994. Geography of innovation. Boston: Kluwer Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Florida, R. 1997. The globalization of R & D: Results of a survey of foreign-affiliated R & D laboratories in the U.S.A. Research Policy 26:85–103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Florida, R. 2001. The economic geography of talent. Working paper. Pittsburgh, Penn.: Heinz School of Public Policy and Management, Carnegie Mellon University. Presented at the annual meeting of the Association of American Geographers, New York City, 1 March.
   Google Scholar
• Gambardella, A. 1995. Science and innovation: The U.S. pharmaceutical industry during the 1980s. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gassmann, O., and von Zedwitz, M. 1999. New concepts and trends in international R & D organization. Research Policy 28:231–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Genomics Institute of the Novartis Research Foundation. 2001. Discovery in the making. Available online: http://www.gnf.org/index.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Genomics Institute of the Novartis Research Foundation. 2002a. Genomics Institute of the Novartis Research Foundation. Available online: http://www.web.gnf.org/facilities.html.
   Google Scholar
• Genomics Institute of the Novartis Research Foundation. 2002b. Scientific Departments: Genomics Institute of the Novartis Research Foundation. Available online: http://www.web.gnf.org/scientific.html.
   Google Scholar
• Gertler, M. 1995. “Being there”: Proximity, organization, and culture in the development and adoption of advanced manufacturing technologies. Economic Geography 71:1–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gertler, M. 1997. Between the global and the local. The spatial limits to productive capital. In Spaces of globalization, ed. K. R. Cox, 45–63. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gerybadze, A., and Reger, G. 1999. Globalization of R & D: Recent changes in the management of innovation in transnational corporations. Research Policy 28:251–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grabher, G. 2001. Ecologies of creativity: The village, the group, and the heterarchic organisation of the British advertising industry. Environment & Planning A 33:351–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grabowski, H., and Vernon, J. 1994. Innovation and structural change in pharmaceuticals and biotechnology. Industrial and Corporate Change 3:435–49.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, M., and Parker, E. 1998. Industrial change and regional development: The case of the U.S. biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. Environment and Planning A 30:1757–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrling, P. L. 2000. Leading in the post-genome era. Paper presented at the media presentation on R & D Day, Basel, 6 December.
   Google Scholar
• Holzmann, D. C. 1993. Healy rips Scripps’ pact with Sandoz. Bio World Today, 12 March.
   Google Scholar
• Howells, J. 1997. The globalization of research and technological innovation: A new agenda? In Technology, innovation and competitiveness, ed. J. Howells and J. Michie, 11–36. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Howells, J. 1998. Innovation and technology transfer within multinational firms. In Globalization, growth, and governance, ed. J. Michie and J. Grieve Smith, 50–70. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Howells, J. 1999. Regional systems of innovation. In Innovation policy in a global economy, ed. D. Archibugi, J. Howells, and J. Michie, 67–93. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Howells, J., and Wood, M. 1993. The globalisation of production and technology. London: Belhaven Press.
   Google Scholar
• Howells, J. R. 1995. Going global: The use of ICT networks in research and development. Research Policy 24:169–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hullmann, A. 2000. Generation, transfer and exploitation of new knowledge. In Changing innovation in the pharmaceutical industry, ed. A. Jungmittag, G. Reger, and T. Reiss, 71–96. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• IDEC Pharmaceuticals. 1997. Rituxan receives marketing clearance in first European country. Media release, 2 December, San Diego, Calif.: IDEC Pharmaceuticals.
   Google Scholar
• IMS. 2000. Mergers—The drive to dominate: IMS health. Available online: http://www.imsglobal.com/insight/news_story/0005/news_story_000517a.htm;/news_story_000517b.htm;/news_story_000517c.htm.
   Google Scholar
• IMS. 2002. World pharma sales 2001: U.S. still driving growth: IMS health. Available online: http://www.ims-global.com/insight/news_story/0204/news_story_020430.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson & Johnson. 2002. Pharmaceutical research & development locations. La Jolla, Calif.: Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development. Available online: http://www.jnjpharmarnd.com/locations/ca.html.
   Google Scholar
• King, R. T. J., and Moore, S. D. 1995. Swiss stakes: Basel’s drug giants are placing huge bet on U.S. biotech firms. Roche, Sandoz, Ciba pay up, seeking breakthrough, a strategy some deride. Wall Street Journal Europe, 29 November 1.
   Google Scholar
• Krasner, J. 2002. Drug research giant heads to Cambridge. Boston Globe, 7 May, A1.
   Google Scholar
• Krugman, P. 1991. Geography and trade. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kupper, T. 1998. A bitter pill. Without products to sell, San Diego biotechs rely heavily on funding from big companies for survival. But are they selling their future San Diego Union-Tribune, 9 March, A1.
   Google Scholar
• Kupper, T. 1999a. Discovery adds third firm to group. San Diego Union-Tribune, 15 June, C1.
   Google Scholar
• Kupper, T. 1999b. N.J. health-care giant to buy Agouron. S.D. biotech reveals $2.1 billion deal. San Diego Union-Tribune, 27 January, A1.
   Google Scholar
• Lundvall, B.-Å. 1988. Innovation as an interactive process: From user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation. In Technical change and economic theory, ed. G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, and L. Soete, 349–69. London: Pinter.
   Google Scholar
• Lundvall, B.-Å. 1992. User-producer relationships, national systems of innovation and internationalisation. In National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning, ed. B.-Å. Lundvall, 45–67. London: Pinter.
   Google Scholar
• Lundvall, B.-Å. 1993. Explaining interfirm cooperation and innovation: Limits of the transaction-cost approach. In The embedded firm, ed. G. Grabher 52–62. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Malmberg, A., and Maskell, P. 1997. Towards an explanation of regional specialization and industry agglomeration. European Planning Studies 5:25–41.
   Google Scholar
• Markusen, A. 1996. Sticky places in slippery space: A typology of industrial districts. Economic Geography 72:293–313.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maskell, P., and Malmberg, A. 1999. Localised learning and industrial competitiveness. Cambridge Journal of Economics 23:167–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McBride, G. 2000. Institute insight: The Genomics Institute of the Novartis Research Foundation. Pathways: The Novartis Journal 1:36–41.
   Google Scholar
• Mehta and Isaly Healthcare Investments. 1995. Swiss company alliances. New York: Mehta and Isaly Healthcare Investments.
   Google Scholar
• Merck. 2001. Annual report 2000. Whitehouse Station, N.J.: Merck & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Merck. 2002. Annual report 2001. Whitehouse Station, N.J.: Merck & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Michalet, C.-A. 1985. Le capitalisme mondial [World capitalism]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
   Google Scholar
• Mossinghoff, G. J. 1995. Health care reforms and pharmaceutical innovation. Drug Information Journal 29:1077–190.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, R. R. 1988. Institutions supporting technical change in the United States. London: Pinter.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, R., and Winter, S. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Novartis. 1998a. Novartis announces formation of the Novartis Institute for Functional Genomics. Media release, 8 April, Basel: Novartis International.
   Google Scholar
• Novartis. 1998b. Novartis announces USD 600 million investment in agricultural genomics. Media release, 21 July, Basel: Novartis International.
   Google Scholar
• Novartis. 1999. Geschäftsbericht 1998 [Annual report]. Basel: Novartis International.
   Google Scholar
• Novartis opens drug research center in MIT’s Tech Square. 2002. Media Release. MIT News, 6 May.
   Google Scholar
• Novartis Pharma. 1999. Novartis jointly initiates consortium to create a public gene marker database. Media release, 15 April. Basel: Novartis Pharma.
   Google Scholar
• Novartis tax rebate approved. 1999. San Diego Union-Tribune, 29 September, C2.
   Google Scholar
• Novartis Venture Fund. 2002. Activity report 2001: Fostering entrepreneurial initiative in the life sciences. Basel: Novartis Venture Fund.
   Google Scholar
• Oβenbrügge, J., and Zeller, C. 2002. The biotech region Munich and the spatial organization of its innovation networks. In Technological change and regional development in Europe, ed. L. Schätzl and J. Revilla Diez, 233–49. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Office of Technology Assessment. 1993. Pharmaceutical R & D: Costs, risks and rewards. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
   Google Scholar
• Papanastassiou, M., and Pearce, R. 1994. La mondialisation de l’innovation et l’organisation de la R & D dans les multinationales [The globalization of R & D innovation and organization in the multinationals]. In Les défis de la mondialisation: Innovation et concurrence, ed. F. Sachwald, 69–106. Paris: Masson.
   Google Scholar
• Pavitt, K., and Patel, P. 1999. Global corporations and national systems of innovation: Who dominates whom? In Innovation policy in a global economy, ed. D. Archibugi, J. Howells, and J. Michie, 94–119. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pearce, R., and Papanastassiou, M. 1996. R & D networks and innovation: Decentralised product development in multinational enterprises. R & D Management 26:315–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearce, R. D. 1989. The internationalization of research and development by multinational enterprises. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pearce, R. D. 1999. Decentralized R & D and strategic competitiveness: Globalised approaches to generation and use of technology in multinational enterpises (MNEs). Research Policy 28:157–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearce, R. D., and Singh, S. 1992. Globalizing research and development. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pfizer. 2002a. Pfizer: Global research and development. Available online: http://www.pfizer.com/pfizerinc/about/focus/research.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Pfizer. 2002b. California governor Gray Davis, Pfizer CEO Hank McKinnell and vice chairman, John Niblack, Open Major Life Science Research Campus. Media release, 1 May.
   Google Scholar
• Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA). 2001. Pharmaceutical industry profile 2001. Washington, D.C.: PhRMA.
   Google Scholar
• Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA). 2002. Pharmaceutical industry profile 2002. Washington, D.C.: PhRMA.
   Google Scholar
• Pisano, G. P. 1991. The governance of innovation: Vertical integration and collaborative arrangements in the biotechnology industry. Research Policy 20: 237–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, M., and Council on Competitiveness and Monitor Group on the Frontier. 2001. San Diego—Clusters of innovation initiative. Washington, D.C.: Council on Competitiveness.
   Google Scholar
• Prevezer, M. 1998. Clustering in biotechnology in the USA. In The dynamics of industrial clustering. International comparisons in computing and biotechnology, ed. P. G. M. Swann, M. Prevezer, and D. Stout, 124–93. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Prevezer, M. 2001. Ingredients in the early development of the U.S. biotechnology industry. Small Business Economics 17:17–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinhardt, J. 2001. A broad innovative platform for sustained growth. Paper presented at media presentation on R & D Day, 30 October, New York.
   Google Scholar
• Roche. 1997. MabThera: Hope for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma patients thanks to biotechnology. Media release, 28 November. Basel: F. Hoffmann-La Roche.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, C. D. 1992. Alliance with drug firm assists Scripps research. San Diego Union-Tribune, 4 December, C1.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, C. D. 1994. Scripps deal with drug firm approved. Sandoz is partner in scaled-back alliance. The San Diego Union-Tribune, 17 May, C1.
   Google Scholar
• Rx R & D myths: The case against the drug industry’s R & D “scare card. 2001. Washington, D.C.: Public Citizen’s Congress Watch.
   Google Scholar
• Salk Institute. 2002. The Salk Institute for Biological Studies. Available online: http://www.salk.edu/about.html.
   Google Scholar
• Sandoz. 1993. Geschäftsbericht [Annual report] 1992. Basel: Sandoz AG.
   Google Scholar
• Sandoz. 1994. USA: Sandoz und Scripps schliessen Forschungsabkommen ab [Sandoz and Scripps enter research collaboration]. Sandoz Bulletin 30(106):36.
   Google Scholar
• Sankyo. 2002. Company information, research institute. Available online: http://www.sankyopharma.com/research.
   Google Scholar
• Schoenberger, E. 1997. The cultural crisis of the firm. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Schultz, P. 2000a. The Bell Labs of biology. Technology Review 103:94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schultz, P. 2000b. Genomics Institute of the Novartis Research Foundation. Paper presented at media presentation Novartis Pharma R & D Day, Basel, 6 December.
   Google Scholar
• Schweitzer, S. O. 1997. Pharmaceutical economies and policy. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, A. J. 1988. New industrial spaces. London: Pion.
   Google Scholar
• Sharp, M.; Thomas, S.; and Martin, P. 1994. Transferts de technologie et politique de l’innovation: Le cas des biotechnologies [Technology transfer and innovation policy: The case of biotechnologies]. In Les défis de la mondialisation, ed. F. Sachwald, 155–212. Paris: Masson.
   Google Scholar
• Shimmings, A. 1999. NAS in 1998: Quality not quantity counts. Scrip Magazine 1 (January):62–3.
   Google Scholar
• Shimmings, A. 2000. NAS in 1999: Fierce marketing but fewer new products. Scrip Magazine 1 (January):68–9.
   Google Scholar
• Sierra, C. 1997. Proximité(s), interactions technologiques et territoriales: Une revue [Proximities, technological and territorial interactions]. Revue d’Économie Industrielle 82(4th Quarter):7–38.
   Google Scholar
• Sölvell, Ö., and Zander, I. 1998. International diffusion of knowledge: Isolating mechanisms and the role of MNE. In The dynamic firm: The role of technology, strategy, organization, and regions, ed. A. D. J. Chandler, P. Hagström, and Ö. Sölvell, 402–17. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Southgate, J. 2001. NAS in 2000: A bumper year for launches bucks the downward trend. Scrip Magazine 2 (February):80–1.
   Google Scholar
• Stern, M., and Rose, C. 1993. NIH chief rips Scripps pact with Sandoz. San Diego Union-Tribune, 12 March, C1.
   Google Scholar
• Storper, M. 1997. The regional world: Territorial development in a global economy. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Storper, M., and Walker, R. 1989. The capitalist imperative. New York: Basil Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Swyngedouw, E. 1997. Neither global nor local: “Glocalisation” and the politics of scale. In Spaces of globalization: Reasserting the power of the local, ed. K. Cox, 137–66. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Swyngedouw, E. 2000. Elite power, global forces, and the political economy of “glocal” development. In The Oxford handbook of economic geography, ed. G. L. Clark, M. P. Feldman, and M. S. Gertler, 541–58. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taggart, J. 1993. The world pharmaceutical industry. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Taggart, J. H. 1991. Determinants of the foreign R & D locational decision in the pharmaceutical industry. R & D Management 21:229–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Scripps Research Institute (The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI). 2000. New genomic center funded to advance high throughput protein structure determination. Media release, 26 September. La Jolla, Calif: TSRI.
   Google Scholar
• The Scripps Research Institute (The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI). 2002a. About TSRI: Facts-at-a-glance. Available online: http://www.scripps.edu/intro/facts.html.
   Google Scholar
• The Scripps Research Institute (The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI). 2002b. The Schultz lab/Schultz lab personnel and facilities. Available online: http://www.schultzweb.scripps.edu/personnel.asp.
   Google Scholar
• Torre, A., and Gilly, J.-P. 2000. On the analytical dimension of proximity dynamics. Regional Studies 34:169–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valle, F. d., and Gambardella, A. 1993. “Biological” revolution and strategies for innovation in pharmaceutical companies. R & D Management 23:287–301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Brunt, J. 2002. Corporate VCs keep an eye on the future. Signals Magazine: Online Magazine of Biotechnology Industry Analysis, 3 May:14.
   Google Scholar
• Vasella, D. 1999. Novartis building on strong fundamentals. 1998 Novartis Financial Results Press Conference, 16 March. Basel: Novartis International.
   Google Scholar
• Veltz, P. 1996. Mondialisation, villes et territoires. l’Économies d’archipel [Globalisation, cities and territories. Economies of archipelago]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
   Google Scholar
• Verband Forschender Arzneimittelhersteller (VFA). 1998. Statistics 98: Die Arzneimittelindustrie Deutschlands [German Association of Research-Based Pharmaceutical Companies]. Bonn: VFA.
   Google Scholar
• Verband Forschender Arzneimittelhersteller (VFA). 1999. Statistics 99: Die Arzneimittelindustrie Deutschlands [German Association of Research-Based Pharmaceutical Companies]. Bonn: VFA.
   Google Scholar
• Verband Forschender Arzneimittelhersteller (VFA). 2000. Statistics 2000: Die Arzneimittelindustrie Deutschlands [German Association of Research-Based Pharmaceutical Companies]. Berlin: VFA.
   Google Scholar
• Verband Forschender Arzneimittelhersteller (VFA). 2001. Statistics 2001: Die Arzneimittelindustrie Deutschlands [German Association of Research-Based Pharmaceutical Companies]. Berlin: VFA.
   Google Scholar
• Willoughby, K. W., and Blakely, E. J. 1990. The economic geography of biotechnology in California: An exploration of regional form and advanced technology industries. Berkeley: Institute of Business and Economic Research, University of California-Berkeley.
   Google Scholar
• Woody, J. 2000. “Erfolg dank unseres langjährigen engagements” [Success owing to our commitment of many years]: Interview with James Woody, general manager of Roche Palo Alto. Roche Magazin 66(December):24–6.
   Google Scholar
• Zeller, C. 2000. Re-scaling power relations between trade unions and corporate management in a globalising pharmaceutical industry: The case of the acquisition of Boehringer Mannheim by Hoffmann-La Roche. Environment & Planning A 32:1545–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeller, C. 2001a. Clustering biotech: A recipe for success? Spatial patterns of growth of biotechnology in Munich, Rhineland and Hamburg. Small Business Economics 17:123–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeller, C. 2001b. Globalisierungsstrategien—der Weg von Novartis [Globalization strategy—The way of Novartis]. Berlin and New York: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Zeller, C. 2002a. Project teams as means for restructuring research and development in the pharmaceutical industry. Regional Studies 36:283–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeller, C. 2002b. Regional and North Atlantic knowledge production in the pharmaceutical industry. In Knowledge—The spatial dimension, ed. V. Lo and E. Schamp, 131–66. Münster: Lit-Verlag.
   Google Scholar