IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jknowl/v5y2014i2p388-408.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governmental Support Measures for University–Industry Cooperation—Comparative View in Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Marge Seppo
  • Kärt Rõigas
  • Urmas Varblane

Abstract

This paper aims to compare governmental support measures toward enhancing university–industry cooperation in Europe. We intend to identify patterns and dynamics of governmental support measures comparing policies in 23 European countries. The main database used is the Inventory of Research and Innovation Policy measures provided by Erawatch and INNO-Policy TrendChart. The database provides in-depth overviews about policy measures across European countries. For evaluating the university–industry cooperation the perception of universities on their cooperation with industry (study of European University–Business Cooperation, Davey et al. 2011 ), the perception of enterprises on their cooperation with universities (Community Innovation Survey 2006 –2008), university–industry co-publications (Innovation Union Scoreboard 2011 ) and higher-education expenditure on R&D financed by the business sector (Eurostat 2012 ) are used in the analysis. The intensity and scope of university–industry cooperation support measures varies heavily in Europe. The analysis reveals that Finnish, Austrian, Belgian, Danish and Swedish support systems are the best balanced and provide high university–industry cooperation intensity. Estonia, together with Bulgaria and Italy are at the other end of the scale, having a small number of cooperation measures as well as a weaker cooperation from the firms’ side. The experience of countries with the highest university–industry cooperation reveals that the important is the amount of different support measures, more co-financing from the private sector and depend less on the EU structural funds. Concerning the targeted research areas, it is important to keep balance between measures directed to problem solving basic research, networking and applied research. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Marge Seppo & Kärt Rõigas & Urmas Varblane, 2014. "Governmental Support Measures for University–Industry Cooperation—Comparative View in Europe," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(2), pages 388-408, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jknowl:v:5:y:2014:i:2:p:388-408
    DOI: 10.1007/s13132-014-0193-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s13132-014-0193-8
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13132-014-0193-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Elias Carayannis & David Campbell, 2011. "Open Innovation Diplomacy and a 21st Century Fractal Research, Education and Innovation (FREIE) Ecosystem: Building on the Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Innovation Concepts and the “Mode 3” Knowledge ," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 2(3), pages 327-372, September.
    2. Nishimura, Junichi & Okamuro, Hiroyuki, 2011. "Subsidy and networking: The effects of direct and indirect support programs of the cluster policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 714-727, June.
    3. Loet Leydesdorff & Henry Etzkowitz, 1996. "Emergence of a Triple Helix of university—industry—government relations," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(5), pages 279-286, October.
    4. Elias G. Carayannis & Urmas Varblane & Tõnu Roolaht (ed.), 2012. "Innovation Systems in Small Catching-Up Economies," Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management, Springer, number 978-1-4614-1548-0, December.
    5. Cozzarin, Brian P., 2008. "Data and the measurement of R&D program impacts," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 284-298, August.
    6. Bozeman, Barry & Gaughan, Monica, 2007. "Impacts of grants and contracts on academic researchers' interactions with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 694-707, June.
    7. Loet Leydesdorff & Henry Etzkowitz, 1998. "The Triple Helix as a model for innovation studies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(3), pages 195-203, June.
    8. Busom, Isabel & Fernández-Ribas, Andrea, 2008. "The impact of firm participation in R&D programmes on R&D partnerships," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 240-257, March.
    9. Doris Schartinger, 2001. "Benchmarking industry—science relations: the role of framework conditions," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(4), pages 247-258, August.
    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. Natália Lima Figueiredo & Cristina I. Fernandes & José Luis Abrantes, 2023. "Triple Helix Model: Cooperation in Knowledge Creation," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(2), pages 854-878, June.
    2. Wenqing Wu & Kexin Yu & Saixiang Ma & Chien-Chi Chu & Shijie Li & Chengcheng Ma & Sang-Bing Tsai, 2018. "An Empirical Study on Optimal Strategies of Industry-University-Institute Green Innovation with Subsidy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, May.
    3. Duong, Phuong-Anh Nguyen & Voordeckers, Wim & Huybrechts, Jolien & Lambrechts, Frank, 2022. "On external knowledge sources and innovation performance: Family versus non-family firms," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    4. Kärt Rõigas & Marge Seppo & Urmas Varblane & Pierre Mohnen, 2014. "Which Firms Use Universities As Cooperation Partners? – The Comparative View In Europe," University of Tartu - Faculty of Economics and Business Administration Working Paper Series 93, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Tartu (Estonia).
    5. Alo Lilles & Kärt Rõigas & Urmas Varblane, 2020. "Comparative View of the EU Regions by Their Potential of University-Industry Cooperation," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(1), pages 174-192, March.
    6. Zavale, Nelson Casimiro & Macamo, Elísio, 2016. "How and what knowledge do universities and academics transfer to industry in African low-income countries? Evidence from the stage of university-industry linkages in Mozambique," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 247-261.

    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. Francesco Campanella & Maria Rosaria Della Peruta & Stefano Bresciani & Luca Dezi, 2017. "Quadruple Helix and firms’ performance: an empirical verification in Europe," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 267-284, April.
    2. Lee, Young Hoon & Kim, YoungJun, 2016. "Analyzing interaction in R&D networks using the Triple Helix method: Evidence from industrial R&D programs in Korean government," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 93-105.
    3. Sophie Boutillier, 2019. "Small Entrepreneurship, Knowledge and Social Resources in a Heavy Industrial Territory. The Case of Eco-Innovations in Dunkirk, North of France," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(3), pages 997-1018, September.
    4. Fabiano, Gianluca & Marcellusi, Andrea & Favato, Giampiero, 2021. "R versus D, from knowledge creation to value appropriation: Ownership of patents filed by European biotechnology founders," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    5. Daniela MajerÄ Ã¡ková & Mittelman Alexandra & Michal GreguÅ¡, 2021. "Wine as an Investment Opportunity," European Journal of Economics and Business Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 5, January -.
    6. Ryan, Paul & Geoghegan, Will & Hilliard, Rachel, 2018. "The microfoundations of firms’ explorative innovation capabilities within the triple helix framework," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 76, pages 15-27.
    7. Boardman, P. Craig & Corley, Elizabeth A., 2008. "University research centers and the composition of research collaborations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 900-913, June.
    8. Atiase, Victor Yawo & Kolade, Oluwaseun & Liedong, Tahiru Azaaviele, 2020. "The emergence and strategy of tech hubs in Africa: Implications for knowledge production and value creation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    9. Martin Meyer & Kevin Grant & Piera Morlacchi & Dagmara Weckowska, 2014. "Triple Helix indicators as an emergent area of enquiry: a bibliometric perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(1), pages 151-174, April.
    10. Corley, Elizabeth A. & Boardman, P. Craig & Bozeman, Barry, 2006. "Design and the management of multi-institutional research collaborations: Theoretical implications from two case studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 975-993, September.
    11. Natália Lima Figueiredo & Cristina I. Fernandes & José Luis Abrantes, 2023. "Triple Helix Model: Cooperation in Knowledge Creation," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(2), pages 854-878, June.
    12. Hernández-Trasobares, Alejandro & Murillo-Luna, Josefina L., 2020. "The effect of triple helix cooperation on business innovation: The case of Spain," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    13. Talya Ponchek, 2016. "To Collaborate or Not to Collaborate? A Study of the Value of Innovation from a Sectoral Perspective," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 7(1), pages 43-79, March.
    14. Hiroyuki Okamuro & Junichi Nishimura, 2020. "What Shapes Local Innovation Policies? Empirical Evidence from Japanese Cities," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-22, February.
    15. Ratinho, Tiago & Amezcua, Alejandro & Honig, Benson & Zeng, Zhaocheng, 2020. "Supporting entrepreneurs: A systematic review of literature and an agenda for research," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    16. Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "The triple helix: an evolutionary model of innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 243-255, February.
    17. Elias G. Carayannis & David F. J. Campbell, 2021. "Democracy of Climate and Climate for Democracy: the Evolution of Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Innovation Systems," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(4), pages 2050-2082, December.
    18. André Luis Rossoni & Eduardo Pinheiro Gondim Vasconcellos & Renata Luiza Castilho Rossoni, 2024. "Barriers and facilitators of university-industry collaboration for research, development and innovation: a systematic review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(3), pages 1841-1877, September.
    19. Victoria Galan-Muros & Todd Davey, 2019. "The UBC ecosystem: putting together a comprehensive framework for university-business cooperation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1311-1346, August.
    20. Elias G. Carayannis & David F. J. Campbell & Evangelos Grigoroudis, 2022. "Helix Trilogy: the Triple, Quadruple, and Quintuple Innovation Helices from a Theory, Policy, and Practice Set of Perspectives," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(3), pages 2272-2301, September.

    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:spr:jknowl:v:5:y:2014:i:2:p:388-408. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.