I recently attended the Triple Helix IX International Conference, which studies and celebrates the successful collaboration of industry, academia and government to forward the innovation agenda for specific regions, countries or the world.

The theme this year was “Silicon Valley: Global Model or Unique Anomaly?” There was a very lively debate on this topic, and the general consensus was that the Silicon Valley model of innovation and entrepreneurship could not be truly replicated around the world, due to a unique history, state employment laws, and a culture of risk acceptance – i.e., a high tolerance for failure, which is called “experience” in Silicon Valley.

However, there are a number of examples of smaller scale but successful science parks which embody the “triple helix” of industry, academic and government collaboration. One example is the Research Triangle Park in North Carolina (also check out this video). Another version of a “science park” is a corporate-sponsored research lab or an incubation lab on university campuses. Examples include the Disney Research Lab at Carnegie Mellon University and the Stanford Research Institute.

Finally, there are many examples of virtual “science parks,” which are really just open collaboration practices. CA Labs, for example, regularly collaborates with universities and government bodies, even though many of our offices are not located in specific science park campuses. Some examples of these collaborations include a security research project with Dalhousie University and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and a project on insider threat with RMIT University and the Australian Research Council.

Unlike Silicon Valley, RTP and many of these other science parks (whether virtual or physical) were planned, and continue to be actively managed to ensure progress and support. Silicon Valley and its success, some argue, was the result of serendipity. Even in today’s market, venture capital funding is available, companies are created daily and innovation is alive and well. Just look at the Forbes list of World’s Most Innovative Companies, and how many are headquartered in Silicon Valley.

Science parks, whether planned or accidental, simply provide an environment ripe for innovation. The very existence of these parks do not guarantee innovation, of course. However, universities provide advanced research and bright students; companies provide real-world problems, commercialization opportunities and seed funding; and governments usually provide funding, tax incentives and real estate. With this mix, and with ongoing collaboration, we have seen many successful products, services and companies born.

What do you think? Are virtual science parks as effective and innovative as physical ones? Can Silicon Valley be replicated?