IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/gemptp/hal-01487467.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Analysing preferences for knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Rudi Bekkers
  • Bodas Freitas

Abstract

There is a wide variety of channels through which knowledge and technology is being transferred between universities and industry. This paper aims to explain the relative importance of these different channels in different contexts. For this purpose, responses from two questionnaires were analysed, addressing Dutch industrial and university researchers respectively. A reassuring result is that the perceived importance of the 23 distinct transfer channels we distinguished hardly differs between industry and university: we did not observe a major mismatch. Overall, our results suggest that the industrial activities of firms do not significantly explain differences in importance of a wide variety of channels through which knowledge between university and industry might be transferred. Instead, this variety is better explained by the disciplinary origin, the characteristics of the underlying knowledge, the characteristics of researchers involved in producing and using this knowledge (individual characteristics), and the environment in which knowledge is produced and used (institutional characteristics). Based on our findings, we offer policy recommendations.

Suggested Citation

  • Rudi Bekkers & Bodas Freitas, 2008. "Analysing preferences for knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter?," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-01487467, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:gemptp:hal-01487467
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2008.07.007
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: http://hal.grenoble-em.com/hal-01487467
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hal.grenoble-em.com/hal-01487467/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2008.07.007?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Salter, Ammon J. & Martin, Ben R., 2001. "The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 509-532, March.
    2. Jeff S. Armstrong & Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2003. "Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture and firm performance in biotechnology," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 149-170.
    3. Balconi, Margherita & Laboranti, Andrea, 2006. "University-industry interactions in applied research: The case of microelectronics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1616-1630, December.
    4. D. Schartinger & C. Rammer & J. Fröhlich, 2006. "Knowledge Interactions between Universities and Industry in Austria: Sectoral Patterns and Determinants," Springer Books, in: Innovation, Networks, and Knowledge Spillovers, chapter 7, pages 135-166, Springer.
    5. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2003. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Rudi Bekkers & Victor Gilsing & Marianne Steen, 2006. "Determining Factors of the Effectiveness of IP-based Spin-offs: Comparing the Netherlands and the US," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 545-546, September.
    7. Bekkers, R. & Gilsing, V.A. & van der Steen, M., 2006. "Determining factors of the effectiveness of IP-based spin-offs : Comparing the Netherlands and the US," Other publications TiSEM 3e40ba18-c59c-46b5-a16a-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Meyer-Krahmer, Frieder & Schmoch, Ulrich, 1998. "Science-based technologies: university-industry interactions in four fields," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 835-851, December.
    9. Cohendet, Patrick & Steinmueller, W Edward, 2000. "The Codification of Knowledge: A Conceptual and Empirical Exploration," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 9(2), pages 195-209, June.
    10. Fontana, Roberto & Geuna, Aldo & Matt, Mireille, 2006. "Factors affecting university-industry R&D projects: The importance of searching, screening and signalling," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 309-323, March.
    11. Lee, Yong S., 1996. "'Technology transfer' and the research university: a search for the boundaries of university-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 843-863, September.
    12. Mansfield, Edwin, 1998. "Academic research and industrial innovation: An update of empirical findings1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 773-776, April.
    13. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    14. Belderbos, Rene & Carree, Martin & Diederen, Bert & Lokshin, Boris & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2004. "Heterogeneity in R&D cooperation strategies," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(8-9), pages 1237-1263, November.
    15. Kingsley, Gordon & Bozeman, Barrt & Coker, Karen, 1996. "Technology transfer and absorption: an 'R & D value-mapping' approach to evaluation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 967-995, September.
    16. Monjon, Stephanie & Waelbroeck, Patrick, 2003. "Assessing spillovers from universities to firms: evidence from French firm-level data," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1255-1270, November.
    17. Levin, Richard C, 1988. "Appropriability, R&D Spending, and Technological Performance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(2), pages 424-428, May.
    18. Mansfield, Edwin, 1991. "Academic research and industrial innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    19. McMillan, G. Steven & Narin, Francis & Deeds, David L., 2000. "An analysis of the critical role of public science in innovation: the case of biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-8, January.
    20. Santoro, Michael D. & Chakrabarti, Alok K., 2002. "Firm size and technology centrality in industry-university interactions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1163-1180, September.
    21. O'Shea, Rory P. & Allen, Thomas J. & Chevalier, Arnaud & Roche, Frank, 2005. "Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 994-1009, September.
    22. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13785 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Cohendet, Patrick & Meyer-Krahmer, Frieder, 2001. "The theoretical and policy implications of knowledge codification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1563-1591, December.
    24. Narin, Francis & Hamilton, Kimberly S. & Olivastro, Dominic, 1997. "The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-330, October.
    25. Orietta Marsili, 2001. "The Anatomy and Evolution of Industries," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2272.
    26. Beise, Marian & Stahl, Harald, 1999. "Public research and industrial innovations in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 397-422, April.
    27. Oecd, 1996. "Information Infrastructure Policies," OECD Digital Economy Papers 20, OECD Publishing.
    28. Bozeman, Barry, 2000. "Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 627-655, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bekkers, Rudi & Bodas Freitas, Isabel Maria, 2008. "Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1837-1853, December.
    2. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & Aldo Geuna & Federica Rossi, 2011. "University–Industry Interactions: The Unresolved Puzzle," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 11, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Aurora A. C. Teixeira & Luisa Mota, 2012. "A bibliometric portrait of the evolution, scientific roots and influence of the literature on university–industry links," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 719-743, December.
    4. Guijie Zhang & Yuqiang Feng & Guang Yu & Luning Liu & Yanqiqi Hao, 2017. "Analyzing the time delay between scientific research and technology patents based on the citation distribution model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1287-1306, June.
    5. De Fuentes, Claudia & Dutrénit, Gabriela, 2012. "Best channels of academia–industry interaction for long-term benefit," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1666-1682.
    6. Isabel Freitas & Tommy Clausen & Roberto Fontana & Bart Verspagen, 2011. "Formal and informal external linkages and firms’ innovative strategies. A cross-country comparison," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 91-119, February.
    7. Adele Parmentola & Marco Ferretti & Eva Panetti, 0. "Exploring the university-industry cooperation in a low innovative region. What differences between low tech and high tech industries?," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-28.
    8. Acosta, Manuel & Coronado, Daniel, 2003. "Science-technology flows in Spanish regions: An analysis of scientific citations in patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1783-1803, December.
    9. Adele Parmentola & Marco Ferretti & Eva Panetti, 2021. "Exploring the university-industry cooperation in a low innovative region. What differences between low tech and high tech industries?," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 1469-1496, September.
    10. Nelson, Andrew J., 2012. "Putting university research in context: Assessing alternative measures of production and diffusion at Stanford," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 678-691.
    11. A. Bellucci & L. Pennacchio, 2016. "University knowledge and firm innovation: evidence from European countries," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 730-752, August.
    12. Toole, Andrew A., 2012. "The impact of public basic research on industrial innovation: Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 1-12.
    13. Yuandi Wang & Die Hu & Weiping Li & Yiwei Li & Qiang Li, 2015. "Collaboration strategies and effects on university research: evidence from Chinese universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 725-749, May.
    14. Larsen, Maria Theresa, 2011. "The implications of academic enterprise for public science: An overview of the empirical evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 6-19, February.
    15. Gallego, Jorge & Rubalcaba, Luis & Suárez, Cristina, 2013. "Knowledge for innovation in Europe: The role of external knowledge on firms' cooperation strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 2034-2041.
    16. Igors Skute & Kasia Zalewska-Kurek & Isabella Hatak & Petra Weerd-Nederhof, 2019. "Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 916-947, June.
    17. Toole, Andrew A., 2011. "The impact of public basic research on industrial innovation: Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," ZEW Discussion Papers 11-063, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. Malo, Stéphane, 2009. "The contribution of (not so) public research to commercial innovations in the field of combinatorial chemistry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 957-970, July.
    19. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," 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 275-314, Elsevier.
    20. Perkmann, Markus & Walsh, Kathryn, 2008. "Engaging the scholar: Three types of academic consulting and their impact on universities and industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1884-1891, December.

    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:hal:gemptp:hal-01487467. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.