{"id":{"repo_id":"purdue-thes","oai_identifier":"oai:docs.lib.purdue.edu:open_access_dissertations-2643"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/purdue-thes/oai:docs.lib.purdue.edu:open_access_dissertations-2643","repository":{"repo_id":"purdue-thes","name":"Purdue University","base_url":"https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/do/oai/"},"display":{"title":"Research, Science and Technology Parks: A Global Comparison of Best Practices","abstract":"The purpose of this study was to determine if significant differences exist in the evaluation of effectiveness and efficiency between North American, European, and Asian research parks (RPs). Park directors and staff responded to 25 questions from the Survey for Research, Science and Technology Parks. Effectiveness was measured by director's perception of the RP's contribution to economic growth and job creation. Efficiency was evaluated by the interactions between local universities and research parks, assessment of the ecosystem's basic characteristics, and the culture of innovation in the ecosystem. A stratified sampling procedure from a population of 793 parks was used; analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) were used to test for significance. 130 RPs from three continents participated in this study. No significant differences were found in the evaluation of RPs' directors on effectiveness and efficiency of RPs.","abstract_html":"The purpose of this study was to determine if significant differences exist in the evaluation of effectiveness and efficiency between North American, European, and Asian research parks (RPs). Park directors and staff responded to 25 questions from the Survey for Research, Science and Technology Parks. Effectiveness was measured by director's perception of the RP's contribution to economic growth and job creation. Efficiency was evaluated by the interactions between local universities and research parks, assessment of the ecosystem's basic characteristics, and the culture of innovation in the ecosystem. A stratified sampling procedure from a population of 793 parks was used; analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) were used to test for significance. 130 RPs from three continents participated in this study. No significant differences were found in the evaluation of RPs' directors on effectiveness and efficiency of RPs.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Ruiz Villacres, Hugo Danilo"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Technology","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Nathan W Hartman","James L Mohler","Richard M French","Jenny L Daugherty"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2015,"date_issued":"2015-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2015-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:54:44Z","subjects":["Best Practices","Knowledge based economy","Knowledge Cities","Research Parks","Science Parks","Technological Innovation"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/open_access_dissertations/1427","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Nathan W Hartman","James L Mohler","Richard M French","Jenny L Daugherty"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Ruiz Villacres, Hugo Danilo"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Technology"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Best Practices","Knowledge based economy","Knowledge Cities","Research Parks","Science Parks","Technological Innovation"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/open_access_dissertations/1427"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The purpose of this study was to determine if significant differences exist in the evaluation of effectiveness and efficiency between North American, European, and Asian research parks (RPs). Park directors and staff responded to 25 questions from the Survey for Research, Science and Technology Parks. Effectiveness was measured by director's perception of the RP's contribution to economic growth and job creation. Efficiency was evaluated by the interactions between local universities and research parks, assessment of the ecosystem's basic characteristics, and the culture of innovation in the ecosystem. A stratified sampling procedure from a population of 793 parks was used; analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) were used to test for significance. 130 RPs from three continents participated in this study. No significant differences were found in the evaluation of RPs' directors on effectiveness and efficiency of RPs."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Research, Science and Technology Parks: A Global Comparison of Best Practices"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Nathan W Hartman","James L Mohler","Richard M French","Jenny L Daugherty"],"dc:creator":["Ruiz Villacres, Hugo Danilo"],"dc:description.abstract":["The purpose of this study was to determine if significant differences exist in the evaluation of effectiveness and efficiency between North American, European, and Asian research parks (RPs). Park directors and staff responded to 25 questions from the Survey for Research, Science and Technology Parks. Effectiveness was measured by director's perception of the RP's contribution to economic growth and job creation. Efficiency was evaluated by the interactions between local universities and research parks, assessment of the ecosystem's basic characteristics, and the culture of innovation in the ecosystem. A stratified sampling procedure from a population of 793 parks was used; analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) were used to test for significance. 130 RPs from three continents participated in this study. No significant differences were found in the evaluation of RPs' directors on effectiveness and efficiency of RPs."],"dc:identifier":["https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/open_access_dissertations/1427"],"dc:subject":["Best Practices","Knowledge based economy","Knowledge Cities","Research Parks","Science Parks","Technological Innovation"],"dc:title":["Research, Science and Technology Parks: A Global Comparison of Best Practices"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Technology"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:54:44Z"}