IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v71y2007i2d10.1007_s11192-007-1666-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do material transfer agreements affect the choice of research agendas? The case of biotechnology in Belgium

Author

Listed:
  • Victor Rodriguez

    (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven)

  • Frizo Janssens

    (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven)

  • Koenraad Debackere

    (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven)

  • Bart Moor

    (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven)

Abstract

In this paper we examine whether and to what extent material transfer agreements influence research agenda setting in biotechnology. Research agendas are mapped through patents, articles, letters, reviews, and notes. Three groups are sampled: (1) documents published by government and industry which used research materials received through those agreements, (2) documents published by government and industry which used in-house materials, (3) documents published by academia. Methodologically, a co-word analysis is performed to detect if there is a difference in underlying scientific structure between the first two groups of documents. Secondly, interviews with practitioners of industry and government are intended to capture their opinion regarding the impact of the signed agreements on their own research agenda choices. The existence of synchronic and diachronic common terms between co-word clusters, stemming from the first two groups of publications, suggests cognitive linkage. Moreover, interviewees generally do not consider themselves constrained in research agenda setting when signing agreements for receiving research materials. Finally, after applying a co-word analysis to detect if the first group of documents overlaps with the third group we cannot conclude that agreements signed by industry and government affect research agenda setting in academia.

Suggested Citation

  • Victor Rodriguez & Frizo Janssens & Koenraad Debackere & Bart Moor, 2007. "Do material transfer agreements affect the choice of research agendas? The case of biotechnology in Belgium," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(2), pages 239-269, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:71:y:2007:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-007-1666-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-007-1666-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-007-1666-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-007-1666-3?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. Carayol, Nicolas, 2003. "Objectives, agreements and matching in science-industry collaborations: reassembling the pieces of the puzzle," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 887-908, June.
    2. Ed Noyons, 2001. "Bibliometric mapping of science in a policy context," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 50(1), pages 83-98, January.
    3. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    4. Fiona Murray & Scott Stern, 2005. "Do Formal Intellectual Property Rights Hinder the Free Flow of Scientific Knowledge? An Empirical Test of the Anti-Commons Hypothesis," NBER Working Papers 11465, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Loet Leydesdorff, 1997. "Why words and co‐words cannot map the development of the sciences," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 48(5), pages 418-427, May.
    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. Rodriguez, Victor & Janssens, Frizo & Debackere, Koenraad & De Moor, Bart, 2008. "On material transfer agreements and visibility of researchers in biotechnology," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 89-100.
    2. Rodriguez, Victor, 2008. "Governance of material transfer agreements," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 122-128.
    3. Topalli, Margerita & Ivanaj, Silvester, 2016. "Mapping the evolution of the impact of economic transition on Central and Eastern European enterprises: A co-word analysis," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 51(5), pages 744-759.
    4. Ehsan Mohammadi, 2012. "Knowledge mapping of the Iranian nanoscience and technology: a text mining approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(3), pages 593-608, September.

    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. Walsh, John P. & Huang, Hsini, 2014. "Local context, academic entrepreneurship and open science: Publication secrecy and commercial activity among Japanese and US scientists," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 245-260.
    2. Thursby, Marie & Thursby, Jerry & Gupta-Mukherjee, Swasti, 2007. "Are there real effects of licensing on academic research? A life cycle view," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 577-598, August.
    3. Lee Branstetter & Yoshiaki Ogura, 2005. "Is Academic Science Driving a Surge in Industrial Innovation? Evidence from Patent Citations," NBER Working Papers 11561, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Simeth, Markus & Raffo, Julio D., 2013. "What makes companies pursue an Open Science strategy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1531-1543.
    5. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Jofre-Bonet, Mireia & Lawson, Cornelia, 2015. "The double-edged sword of industry collaboration: Evidence from engineering academics in the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 1160-1175.
    6. Carayol, Nicolas & Matt, Mireille, 2006. "Individual and collective determinants of academic scientists' productivity," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 55-72, March.
    7. Michelle Gittelman, 2007. "Does Geography Matter for Science-Based Firms? Epistemic Communities and the Geography of Research and Patenting in Biotechnology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 724-741, August.
    8. Pierre Azoulay & Waverly Ding & Toby Stuart, 2005. "The Determinants of Faculty Patenting Behavior: Demographics or Opportunities?," NBER Working Papers 11348, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Landry, Réjean & Saïhi, Malek & Amara, Nabil & Ouimet, Mathieu, 2010. "Evidence on how academics manage their portfolio of knowledge transfer activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1387-1403, December.
    10. Nicolas Carayol, 2003. "The incentive properties of the Matthew Effect in the academic competition," Working Papers of BETA 2003-11, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    11. repec:wip:wpaper:6 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Blandinieres, Florence & Pellens, Maikel, 2021. "Scientist's industry engagement and the research agenda: Evidence from Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-001, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    13. Carayol, Nicolas & Matt, Mireille, 2004. "Does research organization influence academic production?: Laboratory level evidence from a large European university," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1081-1102, October.
    14. Senator Jeong & Hong-Gee Kim, 2010. "Intellectual structure of biomedical informatics reflected in scholarly events," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(2), pages 541-551, November.
    15. Paula E. Stephan, 2004. "Robert K. Merton's perspective on priority and the provision of the public good knowledge," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 60(1), pages 81-87, May.
    16. Simplice A Asongu, 2013. "On the Obituary of Scientific Knowledge Monopoly," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 33(4), pages 2718-2731.
    17. Jarle Moen, 2005. "Is Mobility of Technical Personnel a Source of R&D Spillovers?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(1), pages 81-114, January.
    18. Roberto Iorio & Sandrine Labory & Francesco Rentocchini, 2014. "Academics’ Motivations and Depth and Breadth of Knowledge Transfer Activities," Working Papers 1401, c.MET-05 - Centro Interuniversitario di Economia Applicata alle Politiche per L'industria, lo Sviluppo locale e l'Internazionalizzazione.
    19. David, Paul A. & Hall, Bronwyn H., 2000. "Heart of darkness: modeling public-private funding interactions inside the R&D black box," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1165-1183, December.
    20. Petersen, Alexander M. & Rotolo, Daniele & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2016. "A triple helix model of medical innovation: Supply, demand, and technological capabilities in terms of Medical Subject Headings," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 666-681.
    21. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni B. Ramello, 2014. "Open Access Journals & Academics’ Behaviour," ICER Working Papers 03-2014, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.

    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:spr:scient:v:71:y:2007:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-007-1666-3. 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.