Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-13T16:07:54.863Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Entrepreneurial State in Action: The Danish Robotics Cluster and the Role of the Public Sector

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2020

JULIAN LAMBERTY  and
JEPPE NEVERS
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The question of the role of the state in the creation of competitive clusters and innovation systems has drawn increased attention in recent years. Drawing on Mariana Mazzucato’s concept of “the entrepreneurial state,” this article investigates the role of the public sector in the development of the Danish robotics cluster, a world-leading cluster for production of industrial robots that has developed after the closing of Maersk’s shipyard in the city of Odense. In what ways did public programs and actors contribute to the development of this cluster? In what ways did public programs facilitate entrepreneurs, and when did they function as agents or perhaps even risk-takers? To answer these questions, this article tracks three layers of public agency: the local, the national, and the European. This article concludes that there were crucial initiatives at all three levels and that these initiatives were not coordinated, but nevertheless connected by a certain zeitgeist—the idea of public institutions taking responsibility for the competitiveness of private companies, an idea that blossomed in the period of high globalization from the late 1980s to the 2000s. In other words, what united the efforts of the public sector was not any master plan but an underlying thought collective that made the workings of “the entrepreneurial state” flexible and fit for the unpredictable nature of innovation. Thus, this article argues that industrial policy did not wither away in the age of neoliberalism but changed its form in an increasing complexity of state-market relations.

Keywords

The entrepreneurial stateIndustrial clustersRobotics IndustryDenmark
Type
Article
Information
Enterprise & Society , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , March 2022 , pp. 68 - 98
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Business History Conference. All rights reserved

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bibliography of Works Cited

Aoki, Masahiko. Toward a Comparative Institutional Analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aoki, Masahiko, Kim, Hyung-Ki, and Okuno-Fujiwara, Masahiro, eds. The Role of Government in East Asian Economic Development: Comparative Institutional Analysis. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boje, Per. Vejen til velstand: Marked, stat og utopi. Vol. 1. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2014.Google Scholar
Foreman-Peck, James, and Federico, Giovanni, eds. European Industrial Policy: The Twentieth-Century Experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Gerschenkron, Alexander. Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1962.Google Scholar
Grabas, Christian, and Nützenadel, Alexander, eds. Industrial Policy in Europe after 1945: Wealth, Power and Economic Development in the Cold War. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.10.1057/9781137329905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guzzetti, Luca. A Brief History of European Union Research Policy. Brussels: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1995.Google Scholar
Johansen, Hans Christian, and Boje, Per. En dansk nicheproduktion: Historien om Lactosan-Sanovo Holding A/S. Odense: Odense University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
Mazzucato, Mariana. The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths. London: Penguin Books, 2018.Google Scholar
Mazzucato, Mariana. The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy. London: Allen Lane, 2018.Google Scholar
Mirowski, Philip, and Plehwe, Dieter, eds. The Road from Mont Pèlerin: The Making of the Neoliberal Thought Collective. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musacchio, Aldo, and Lazzarini, Sergio G.. Reinventing State Capitalism: Leviathan in Business, Brazil and Beyond. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014.10.4159/harvard.9780674419582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, Ove Kaj. Konkurrencestaten. Copenhagen: DJØF Forlag, 2011.Google Scholar
Scranton, Philip, and Fridenson, Patrick. Reimagining Business History. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013.Google Scholar
Steno, Carsten. A Cluster of Success: Universal Robots and the Danish Robotics Environment 1986 to 2016. Copenhagen: Underskoven, 2016.Google Scholar
Steno, Carsten. Hvor markedet tøver: Vækstfonden 1992–2017. Denmark: The Danish Growth Fund, 2017.Google Scholar
Steno, Carsten. En klynge, der virker: Universal Robots og det fynske robotmiljø – 1986 til 2016. Copenhagen: Underskoven, 2016.Google Scholar
Thurbon, Elizabeth. Developmental Mindset: The Revival of Financial Activism in South Korea. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2016.Google Scholar
Weiss, Linda. America Inc.? Innovation and Enterprise in the National Security State. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2014.Google Scholar
Wilson, John F., and Popp, Andrew, eds. Industrial Cluster and Regional Business Networks in England, 1750–1970. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2003.Google Scholar
Christensen, René Schrøder. “Skibsbygning og værftsanlæg – omstilling til containerskibe.” In Odense Staalskibsværft 1918–2012. Bind 2. 1959–2012: Lindøværftet og Munkebo, edited by Toftgaard, Jens, 695–745. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2016.Google Scholar
Christensen, René Schrøder. “Optakten til robotklyngen: Spredning af viden og teknologi fra Odense Staalskibsværft.” In Nye industrihistorier: Robotbyen Odense og andre industribyer i forandring, edited by Jeppe Nevers, Kristoffer Jensen, and Toftgaard, Jens. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 93–132.Google Scholar
Fear, Jeffrey. “German Capitalism.” In Creating Modern Capitalism: How Entrepreneurs, Companies, and Countries Triumphed in Three Industrial Revolutions, edited by McCraw, Thomas K., 135–182. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
Grabas, Christian, and Nützenadel, Alexander. “Industrial Policies in Europe in Historical Perspective.” Vienna: European Commission, working paper, 2013.Google Scholar
Lamberty, Julian. “Den odenseanske robotklynge: Udviklingshistorie og sammensætning.” In Nye industrihistorier: Robotbyen Odense og andre industribyer i forandring, edited by Nevers, Jeppe, Jensen, Kristoffer, and Toftgaard, Jens. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2020, 133–195.Google Scholar
Lamberty, Julian. “Universitetet og konkurrencestaten: Et studie af Syddansk Universitet 1990–2016.” PhD thesis, University of Southern Denmark, Department of History, Odense, 2017.Google Scholar
Larsen, Bitten. “Lindø er ikke fortid – det er fremtid – nye virksomheder i værftets kølvand.” In Odense Staalskibsværft 1918–2012. Bind 2. 1959–2012: Lindøværftet og Munkebo, edited by Toftgaard, Jens, 839–853. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2016.Google Scholar
Nevers, Jeppe. “Fra fabrikker til innovationsklynger: Industripolitikken i globaliseringens epoke.” In Nye industrihistorier: Robotbyen Odense og andre industribyer i forandring, edited by Nevers, Jeppe, Jensen, Kristoffer, and Toftgaard, Jens. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2020, 21–57.Google Scholar
Nevers, Jeppe. “Odense som universitetsby: De første 50 år.” In Odensebogen 2016, edited by Jørgen, Thomsen et al., 141–159. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2016.Google Scholar
Perram, John W. “Lindø Center for Anvendt Matematik, 1992–1999.” In Årsberetning 1998: Odense Universitet, edited by Jalking, Christa, 53–56. Odense: University of Southern Denmark, 1999.Google Scholar
Porter, Michael E. “Clusters and Competition: New Agendas for Companies, Government, and Institutions.” In On Competition, edited by Porter, Michael E., 213–304. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, 1998.Google ScholarPubMed
Berlingske Tidende Google Scholar
Fyens Stiftstidende Google Scholar
DEA. Rapport: Globaliseringspuljen 2007–2012. En kortlægning af fordelingen. Copenhagen: DEA, November 2012.Google Scholar
Erhvervsfremmestyrelsen. Kompetenceklynger i dansk erhvervsliv – en ny brik i erhvervspolitikken. Copenhagen: Erhvervsfremmestyrelsen, January 2001.Google Scholar
Erhvervsministeriet. Erhvervsredegørelse 1993. Copenhagen: Erhvervsministeriet, 1993.Google Scholar
Erhvervs- og boligstyrelsen. De danske kompetenceklynger – Kortlægning ved hjælp af kvantitative metoder. Copenhagen: Erhvervs- og boligstyrelsen, December 2002.Google Scholar
European Commission. “Research and Innovation Funding: Making a Real Difference.” European Commission, 2016.Google Scholar
Fonden for Entreprenørskab–Young Enterprise. Entreprenørskab fra ABC til ph.d. Kortlægning af entreprenørskabsundervisning i det danske uddannelsessystem. Copenhagen: Fonden for Entreprenørskab–Young Enterprise, 2010.Google Scholar
Fonden for Entreprenørskab–Young Enterprise. Entreprenørskab fra ABC til ph.d. Kortlægning af entreprenørskabsundervisning i det danske uddannelsessystem. Copenhagen: Fonden for Entreprenørskab–Young Enterprise, 2014.Google Scholar
Forsknings- og Uddannelsesministeriet, Styrelsen for Institutioner og Uddannelsesstøtte. Performanceregnskab for innovationsmiljøerne 2017. Copenhagen: Styrelsen for Institutioner og Uddannelsesstøtte, 2017.Google Scholar
Industriministeriet. Danmark i Det indre marked. Copenhagen: Industriministeriet, 1989.Google Scholar
Industriministeriet. Erhvervspolitisk redegørelse 1991: EFs erhvervspolitik. Copenhagen: Industriministeriet, 1991.Google Scholar
Ministeriet for Forskning, Innovation og Videregående Uddannelser. Strategi for samarbejde om Danmarks klynge- og netværksindsats. Copenhagen: Ministeriet for Forskning, Innovation og Videregående Uddannelser, April 2013.Google Scholar
Kommune, Odense. Erhvervs- og vækstpolitik. Odense: Odense Kommune, February 2007.Google Scholar
Robotics, Odense. Insight Report 2019: Realising Robotics Potential. Odense: Odense Robotics, February 2019.Google Scholar
Robotics, Odense. Insight Report 2020: Global Robotics Footprint Made in Odense. Odense: Odense Robotics, January 2020.Google Scholar
Robotics, Odense. Leading the Next Industrial Revolution: Growth in Odense’s Robotics Cluster—Today and in the Future. Insight Report, 2018. Odense: Odense Robotics, 2018.Google Scholar
PLS Rambøll Management A/S. ‘Odense som brobygger’: Vision for Erhvervsudviklingen i Odense. Odense: Odense Kommune, 2002.Google Scholar
Regeringen. Fremgang, fornyelse og tryghed: Strategi for Danmark i den globale økonomi. Denmark: Regeringen, April 2006.Google Scholar
Syddanmark, Region. Robotter og automatisering: Styrkepositioner, udfordringer og udviklingspotentiale. The Region of Southern Denmark: Region Syddanmark, September 2017.Google Scholar
Syddanmark, Region. Robotter og automatisering: Udvikling og perspektiver for Fyn. The Region of Southern Denmark: Region Syddanmark, August 2018.Google Scholar
Syddansk Universitet and Pluss. Økosystemanalyse af forretningsområdet for robotteknologi i Region Syddanmark. Odense: Syddansk Universitet and Pluss, June 2018.Google Scholar
Uddannelses- og Forskningsministeriet, Styrelsen for Forskning og Innovation. Klyngestrategi 2.0: Strategi for Danmarks klynge- og netværksindsats 2016–2018. Copenhagen: Uddannelses- og Forskningsministeriet, Styrelsen for Forskning og Innovation, 2016. 6.Google Scholar
The archives of the University of Southern Denmark Google Scholar
The Danish Central Business Register Google Scholar
Infomedia Google Scholar
Folketingstidende (records of the Danish Parliament)Google Scholar
Management System of the University of Southern Denmark (ESDH)Google Scholar
Aoki, Masahiko. Toward a Comparative Institutional Analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aoki, Masahiko, Kim, Hyung-Ki, and Okuno-Fujiwara, Masahiro, eds. The Role of Government in East Asian Economic Development: Comparative Institutional Analysis. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boje, Per. Vejen til velstand: Marked, stat og utopi. Vol. 1. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2014.Google Scholar
Foreman-Peck, James, and Federico, Giovanni, eds. European Industrial Policy: The Twentieth-Century Experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Gerschenkron, Alexander. Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1962.Google Scholar
Grabas, Christian, and Nützenadel, Alexander, eds. Industrial Policy in Europe after 1945: Wealth, Power and Economic Development in the Cold War. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.10.1057/9781137329905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guzzetti, Luca. A Brief History of European Union Research Policy. Brussels: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1995.Google Scholar
Johansen, Hans Christian, and Boje, Per. En dansk nicheproduktion: Historien om Lactosan-Sanovo Holding A/S. Odense: Odense University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
Mazzucato, Mariana. The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths. London: Penguin Books, 2018.Google Scholar
Mazzucato, Mariana. The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy. London: Allen Lane, 2018.Google Scholar
Mirowski, Philip, and Plehwe, Dieter, eds. The Road from Mont Pèlerin: The Making of the Neoliberal Thought Collective. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musacchio, Aldo, and Lazzarini, Sergio G.. Reinventing State Capitalism: Leviathan in Business, Brazil and Beyond. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014.10.4159/harvard.9780674419582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, Ove Kaj. Konkurrencestaten. Copenhagen: DJØF Forlag, 2011.Google Scholar
Scranton, Philip, and Fridenson, Patrick. Reimagining Business History. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013.Google Scholar
Steno, Carsten. A Cluster of Success: Universal Robots and the Danish Robotics Environment 1986 to 2016. Copenhagen: Underskoven, 2016.Google Scholar
Steno, Carsten. Hvor markedet tøver: Vækstfonden 1992–2017. Denmark: The Danish Growth Fund, 2017.Google Scholar
Steno, Carsten. En klynge, der virker: Universal Robots og det fynske robotmiljø – 1986 til 2016. Copenhagen: Underskoven, 2016.Google Scholar
Thurbon, Elizabeth. Developmental Mindset: The Revival of Financial Activism in South Korea. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2016.Google Scholar
Weiss, Linda. America Inc.? Innovation and Enterprise in the National Security State. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2014.Google Scholar
Wilson, John F., and Popp, Andrew, eds. Industrial Cluster and Regional Business Networks in England, 1750–1970. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2003.Google Scholar
Christensen, René Schrøder. “Skibsbygning og værftsanlæg – omstilling til containerskibe.” In Odense Staalskibsværft 1918–2012. Bind 2. 1959–2012: Lindøværftet og Munkebo, edited by Toftgaard, Jens, 695–745. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2016.Google Scholar
Christensen, René Schrøder. “Optakten til robotklyngen: Spredning af viden og teknologi fra Odense Staalskibsværft.” In Nye industrihistorier: Robotbyen Odense og andre industribyer i forandring, edited by Jeppe Nevers, Kristoffer Jensen, and Toftgaard, Jens. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 93–132.Google Scholar
Fear, Jeffrey. “German Capitalism.” In Creating Modern Capitalism: How Entrepreneurs, Companies, and Countries Triumphed in Three Industrial Revolutions, edited by McCraw, Thomas K., 135–182. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
Grabas, Christian, and Nützenadel, Alexander. “Industrial Policies in Europe in Historical Perspective.” Vienna: European Commission, working paper, 2013.Google Scholar
Lamberty, Julian. “Den odenseanske robotklynge: Udviklingshistorie og sammensætning.” In Nye industrihistorier: Robotbyen Odense og andre industribyer i forandring, edited by Nevers, Jeppe, Jensen, Kristoffer, and Toftgaard, Jens. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2020, 133–195.Google Scholar
Lamberty, Julian. “Universitetet og konkurrencestaten: Et studie af Syddansk Universitet 1990–2016.” PhD thesis, University of Southern Denmark, Department of History, Odense, 2017.Google Scholar
Larsen, Bitten. “Lindø er ikke fortid – det er fremtid – nye virksomheder i værftets kølvand.” In Odense Staalskibsværft 1918–2012. Bind 2. 1959–2012: Lindøværftet og Munkebo, edited by Toftgaard, Jens, 839–853. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2016.Google Scholar
Nevers, Jeppe. “Fra fabrikker til innovationsklynger: Industripolitikken i globaliseringens epoke.” In Nye industrihistorier: Robotbyen Odense og andre industribyer i forandring, edited by Nevers, Jeppe, Jensen, Kristoffer, and Toftgaard, Jens. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2020, 21–57.Google Scholar
Nevers, Jeppe. “Odense som universitetsby: De første 50 år.” In Odensebogen 2016, edited by Jørgen, Thomsen et al., 141–159. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2016.Google Scholar
Perram, John W. “Lindø Center for Anvendt Matematik, 1992–1999.” In Årsberetning 1998: Odense Universitet, edited by Jalking, Christa, 53–56. Odense: University of Southern Denmark, 1999.Google Scholar
Porter, Michael E. “Clusters and Competition: New Agendas for Companies, Government, and Institutions.” In On Competition, edited by Porter, Michael E., 213–304. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, 1998.Google ScholarPubMed
Berlingske Tidende Google Scholar
Fyens Stiftstidende Google Scholar
DEA. Rapport: Globaliseringspuljen 2007–2012. En kortlægning af fordelingen. Copenhagen: DEA, November 2012.Google Scholar
Erhvervsfremmestyrelsen. Kompetenceklynger i dansk erhvervsliv – en ny brik i erhvervspolitikken. Copenhagen: Erhvervsfremmestyrelsen, January 2001.Google Scholar
Erhvervsministeriet. Erhvervsredegørelse 1993. Copenhagen: Erhvervsministeriet, 1993.Google Scholar
Erhvervs- og boligstyrelsen. De danske kompetenceklynger – Kortlægning ved hjælp af kvantitative metoder. Copenhagen: Erhvervs- og boligstyrelsen, December 2002.Google Scholar
European Commission. “Research and Innovation Funding: Making a Real Difference.” European Commission, 2016.Google Scholar
Fonden for Entreprenørskab–Young Enterprise. Entreprenørskab fra ABC til ph.d. Kortlægning af entreprenørskabsundervisning i det danske uddannelsessystem. Copenhagen: Fonden for Entreprenørskab–Young Enterprise, 2010.Google Scholar
Fonden for Entreprenørskab–Young Enterprise. Entreprenørskab fra ABC til ph.d. Kortlægning af entreprenørskabsundervisning i det danske uddannelsessystem. Copenhagen: Fonden for Entreprenørskab–Young Enterprise, 2014.Google Scholar
Forsknings- og Uddannelsesministeriet, Styrelsen for Institutioner og Uddannelsesstøtte. Performanceregnskab for innovationsmiljøerne 2017. Copenhagen: Styrelsen for Institutioner og Uddannelsesstøtte, 2017.Google Scholar
Industriministeriet. Danmark i Det indre marked. Copenhagen: Industriministeriet, 1989.Google Scholar
Industriministeriet. Erhvervspolitisk redegørelse 1991: EFs erhvervspolitik. Copenhagen: Industriministeriet, 1991.Google Scholar
Ministeriet for Forskning, Innovation og Videregående Uddannelser. Strategi for samarbejde om Danmarks klynge- og netværksindsats. Copenhagen: Ministeriet for Forskning, Innovation og Videregående Uddannelser, April 2013.Google Scholar
Kommune, Odense. Erhvervs- og vækstpolitik. Odense: Odense Kommune, February 2007.Google Scholar
Robotics, Odense. Insight Report 2019: Realising Robotics Potential. Odense: Odense Robotics, February 2019.Google Scholar
Robotics, Odense. Insight Report 2020: Global Robotics Footprint Made in Odense. Odense: Odense Robotics, January 2020.Google Scholar
Robotics, Odense. Leading the Next Industrial Revolution: Growth in Odense’s Robotics Cluster—Today and in the Future. Insight Report, 2018. Odense: Odense Robotics, 2018.Google Scholar
PLS Rambøll Management A/S. ‘Odense som brobygger’: Vision for Erhvervsudviklingen i Odense. Odense: Odense Kommune, 2002.Google Scholar
Regeringen. Fremgang, fornyelse og tryghed: Strategi for Danmark i den globale økonomi. Denmark: Regeringen, April 2006.Google Scholar
Syddanmark, Region. Robotter og automatisering: Styrkepositioner, udfordringer og udviklingspotentiale. The Region of Southern Denmark: Region Syddanmark, September 2017.Google Scholar
Syddanmark, Region. Robotter og automatisering: Udvikling og perspektiver for Fyn. The Region of Southern Denmark: Region Syddanmark, August 2018.Google Scholar
Syddansk Universitet and Pluss. Økosystemanalyse af forretningsområdet for robotteknologi i Region Syddanmark. Odense: Syddansk Universitet and Pluss, June 2018.Google Scholar
Uddannelses- og Forskningsministeriet, Styrelsen for Forskning og Innovation. Klyngestrategi 2.0: Strategi for Danmarks klynge- og netværksindsats 2016–2018. Copenhagen: Uddannelses- og Forskningsministeriet, Styrelsen for Forskning og Innovation, 2016. 6.Google Scholar
The archives of the University of Southern Denmark Google Scholar
The Danish Central Business Register Google Scholar
Infomedia Google Scholar
Folketingstidende (records of the Danish Parliament)Google Scholar
Management System of the University of Southern Denmark (ESDH)Google Scholar