IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v37y2008i9p1630-1642.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technology, security, and policy implications of future transatlantic partnerships in space: Lessons from Galileo

Author

Listed:
  • Zervos, Vasilis
  • Siegel, Donald S.

Abstract

Policy makers seek to identify an institutional framework that facilitates the commercialization of publicly funded R&D, while simultaneously addressing innovation market failure. In the space industry, the formation of such a framework is complicated by national security considerations and the fact that numerous sovereign nations are often included in the commercialization process. This paper analyses how multi-public partnerships with industry can promote commercially viable space programs, resolve market failures, and address transatlantic security concerns. The benefits and policy implications of the formation of such transatlantic multi-public-private partnerships (TMP3) are illustrated based on a case study of the design of a major European public-private project in the space industry: the Galileo space-based navigation system.

Suggested Citation

  • Zervos, Vasilis & Siegel, Donald S., 2008. "Technology, security, and policy implications of future transatlantic partnerships in space: Lessons from Galileo," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1630-1642, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:37:y:2008:i:9:p:1630-1642
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048-7333(08)00142-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Neven, Damien J & Röller, Lars-Hendrik & Waverman, Leonard, 1993. "The European Satellite Industry: Prospects for Liberalization," CEPR Discussion Papers 813, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Hagedoorn, John & Link, Albert N. & Vonortas, Nicholas S., 2000. "Research partnerships1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 567-586, April.
    3. Audretsch, David B & Feldman, Maryann P, 1996. "R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 630-640, June.
    4. Donald S Siegel & Vasilis Zervos, 2002. "Strategic research partnerships and economic performance: Empirical issues," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(5), pages 331-343, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pierre Barbaroux & Victor Santos Paulino, 2022. "Why do motives matter? A demand-based view of the dynamics of a complex products and systems (CoPS) industry," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 1175-1204, September.
    2. Bernadine J. Dykes & Ikenna Uzuegbunam, 2023. "Foreign partner choice in the public interest: Experience and risk in infrastructure public–private partnerships," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 47-66, March.
    3. Vasilis Zervos, 2017. "The European space-industrial complex: New myths, old realities," Economics of Peace and Security Journal, EPS Publishing, vol. 12(1), pages 28-36, April.
    4. Vasilis Zervos, 2011. "Conflict in Space," Chapters, in: Derek L. Braddon & Keith Hartley (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Conflict, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sara Amoroso & Alex Coad & Nicola Grassano, 2017. "European R&D networks: A snapshot from the 7th EU Framework Programme," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation JRC107546, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    2. Helmers, Christian & Patnam, Manasa & Rau, P. Raghavendra, 2017. "Do board interlocks increase innovation? Evidence from a corporate governance reform in India," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 51-70.
    3. Mafini Dosso & Antonio Vezzani, 2020. "Firm market valuation and intellectual property assets," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(7), pages 705-729, August.
    4. Sara Amoroso & Alex Coad & Nicola Grassano, 2018. "European R&D networks: a snapshot from the 7th EU Framework Programme," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(5-6), pages 404-419, August.
    5. D'Este, P. & Patel, P., 2007. "University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1295-1313, November.
    6. Daniel Nepelski & Vincent Roy & Annarosa Pesole, 2019. "The organisational and geographic diversity and innovation potential of EU-funded research networks," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 359-380, April.
    7. Anders Broström, 2012. "Firms’ rationales for interaction with research universities and the principles for public co-funding," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 313-329, June.
    8. Paulo Santos & Aurora A.C. Teixeira & Ana Brochado, 2006. "The ‘de-territorialisation of closeness’ - a typology of international successful R&D projects involving cultural and geographic proximity," FEP Working Papers 222, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    9. Anthony Arundel & Aldo Geuna, 2001. "Does Proximity Matter for Knowledge Transfer from Public Institutes and Universities to Firms?," SPRU Working Paper Series 73, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    10. Fors, Gunnar & Zejan, Mario, 1996. "Overseas R&D by Multinationals in foreign Centers of Excellence," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 111, Stockholm School of Economics.
    11. Barrios, Salvador & Navajas Cawood, Elena, 2008. "The Location of ICT activities in EU regions. Implications for regional policies," INVESTIGACIONES REGIONALES - Journal of REGIONAL RESEARCH, Asociación Española de Ciencia Regional, issue 13, pages 179-210.
    12. Anna M. Ferragina & Giulia Nunziante, 2018. "Are Italian firms performances influenced by innovation of domestic and foreign firms nearby in space and sectors?," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 45(3), pages 335-360, September.
    13. Jonas Heiberg & Bernhard Truffer, 2021. "The emergence of a global innovation system – a case study from the water sector," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(09), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    14. Apostolos Baltzopoulos & Pontus Braunerhjelm & Ioannis Tikoudis, 2016. "Spin-offs: why geography matters," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 273-303.
    15. Alexander Cordes & Ulrich Schasse, 2015. "The firm's evaluation of local research institutes and universities - an empirical analysis for Germany," ERSA conference papers ersa15p933, European Regional Science Association.
    16. Holger Patzelt & Dean A. Shepherd, 2009. "Strategic Entrepreneurship at Universities: Academic Entrepreneurs’ Assessment of Policy Programs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(1), pages 319-340, January.
    17. Grant H. Lewis, 2017. "Effects of federal socioeconomic contracting preferences," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 763-783, December.
    18. Dietmar Harhoff & Elisabeth Mueller & John Van Reenen, 2014. "What are the Channels for Technology Sourcing? Panel Data Evidence from German Companies," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 204-224, March.
    19. Li, Mingxiang, 2021. "Exploring novel technologies through board interlocks: Spillover vs. broad exploration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    20. Yu Sun & Xingxuan Kuang & Dazhi Sun, 2016. "The geographic concentration of China’s e-business enterprises: where they gather and why," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 26(1), pages 31-42, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:37:y:2008:i:9:p:1630-1642. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.