IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v37y2010i7p473-484.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Channels, benefits and risks of public—private interactions for knowledge transfer: conceptual framework inspired by Latin America

Author

Listed:
  • Valeria Arza

Abstract

There are both benefits and risks involved in interactions between public research organisations (PROs) and industry. This paper proposes a conceptual framework that associates firms' and PROs' motivations, channels of interaction and benefits. It suggests that each channel triggers predominant types of benefits and claims that policy-making to support PRO—industry (PRO-I) interactions should be selective. Policy design must take into consideration the skill-related characteristics of the actors, and the characteristics of the interaction channels in order to achieve the best possible balance between the benefits and risks of PRO-I interactions. The geographical focus of the discussion is Latin America. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Valeria Arza, 2010. "Channels, benefits and risks of public—private interactions for knowledge transfer: conceptual framework inspired by Latin America," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(7), pages 473-484, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:37:y:2010:i:7:p:473-484
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/030234210X511990
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:oup:scippl:v:37:y:2010:i:7:p:473-484. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.