Carolin Ioramashvili

Small businesses within the digital sector are spread across the USA. However, a significant number of promising small businesses concentrate in major technology hubs, either initially or through relocation. This phenomenon can be attributed to the influential role played by localized markets for financing and acquisition, which is, in turn, driven by the dominant market positions held by major digital platforms. Our research demonstrates a clear pattern of localized acquisition markets, particularly in sectors frequently targeted by the seven largest American digital giants—Amazon, Alphabet (Google), Apple, Microsoft, Meta (Facebook), Oracle, and Adobe, collectively known as ‘Big Tech’. This localization trend has become more pronounced between 2000 and 2020. Our analysis indicates that the gravitational pull of these acquisition markets poses challenges to local initiatives aimed at fostering digital businesses. These efforts would be more successful if measures were taken to limit the market influence of digital platforms.

Background: Innovation ecosystems are an important driver of regional economic growth and development. STEM assets connected to universities may play an important role in such ecosystems. Objective: To systematically review the literature relating to the effect of university STEM assets on regional economies and innovation ecosystems, providing a better understanding of how the impact is generated and constrained, as well as identifying any gaps in knowledge. Methods: Keyword and text word searches using the Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate), Econlit (EBSCO) and ERIC (EBSCO) were performed in July 2021 and February 2023. Papers were double screened on abstract and title, and were included if there was consensus that they fulfilled the inclusion criteria of: (i) relating to an OECD country; (ii) having been published between 1 January 2010 and 28 February 2023; and (iii) concerning the impact of STEM assets. Data extraction was undertaken for each article by a single reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Due to the heterogeneity of the study designs and outcome measures used, it was not possible to perform a quantitative synthesis of results. A narrative synthesis was subsequently undertaken. Results: Of the 162 articles identified for detailed review, 34 were accepted as being sufficiently relevant to the study to be included for final analysis. Three important features identified were that the literature: i) is predominately concerned with supporting new businesses; ii) describes a high level of involvement with a university in providing that support; and iii studies economic impacts at local, regional and national levels. Discussion: The evidence points to a gap in the literature relating to looking at the broader impact of STEM assets and any corresponding transformational, system-level effects that go beyond narrowly defined, short to medium-term outcomes. The main limitation of this review is that information on STEM assets in the non-academic literature is not captured.