IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipe/ipetds/0206.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

University-enterprise Interaction in Brazil: The Role of the Public Research Infrastructure

Author

Listed:
  • Fernanda De Negri
  • Luiz Ricardo Cavalcante
  • Patrick Franco Alves

Abstract

This paper discusses the university-enterprise interactions in the Brazilian innovation system by focusing on the characteristics of the public research infrastructure which affects its propensity to interact with the industrial sector. Logistic regressions have been used to identify, in a wide set of explanatory variables, the characteristics of the research infrastructure which increase its probability of supplying technological services to firms. Besides the primary data collected from a survey carried out in a sample of institutions related to the Brazilian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MCTI), data concerning the scientific and technological production of the researchers affiliated to each laboratory have also been used in the regressions. The choice of the explanatory variables was based in a brief literature review on the role of the research infrastructure in the national innovation systems. Aiming at supporting the discussion of the results of the regressions, this review also included a brief report of the recent interactions between the research infrastructure and the industrial sector in Brazil. The main findings of the logistic regressions are: i) the size of the laboratory (as measured by the number of affiliated researchers) and of the qualification of its research team positively and significantly affects its propensity to interact with the industrial sector; ii) multidisciplinary laboratories tend to interact more with the industrial sector than laboratories focused on a single field of expertise; iii) there seems to be a tradeoff between scientific publications and market oriented research, since the number of papers published by the affiliated researchers is negatively correlated to the probability of supplying technological services to firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Fernanda De Negri & Luiz Ricardo Cavalcante & Patrick Franco Alves, 2015. "University-enterprise Interaction in Brazil: The Role of the Public Research Infrastructure," Discussion Papers 0206, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
    • Handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:0206
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/TDs/ingles/dp_206.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    2. Jones, Charles I, 1995. "R&D-Based Models of Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 759-784, August.
    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. Lutz Arnold & Christian Bauer, 2009. "On the growth and welfare effects of monopolistic distortions," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 97(1), pages 19-40, May.
    2. Blackburn, Keith & Forgues-Puccio, Gonzalo F., 2009. "Why is corruption less harmful in some countries than in others?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 797-810, December.
    3. Benjamin Montmartin & Nadine Massard, 2015. "Is Financial Support For Private R&D Always Justified? A Discussion Based On The Literature On Growth," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 479-505, July.
    4. Basso, Henrique S. & Jimeno, Juan F., 2021. "From secular stagnation to robocalypse? Implications of demographic and technological changes," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 833-847.
    5. Christian Groth & Karl-Josef Koch & Thomas Steger, 2006. "Rethinking the Concept of Long-Run Economic Growth," CESifo Working Paper Series 1701, CESifo.
    6. Steven Bond‐Smith, 2022. "Discretely innovating: The effect of limited market contestability on innovation and growth," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 69(3), pages 301-327, July.
    7. Trimborn, Timo & Koch, Karl-Josef & Steger, Thomas M., 2008. "Multidimensional Transitional Dynamics: A Simple Numerical Procedure," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 301-319, June.
    8. Matthias Firgo & Peter Mayerhofer, 2015. "Wissens-Spillovers und regionale Entwicklung - welche strukturpolitische Ausrichtung optimiert des Wachstum?," Working Paper Reihe der AK Wien - Materialien zu Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft 144, Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien, Abteilung Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Statistik.
    9. B. Bhaskara Rao & Arusha Cooray, 2012. "How useful is growth literature for policies in the developing countries?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(6), pages 671-681, February.
    10. Gomes, Orlando, 2008. "Too much of a good thing: Endogenous business cycles generated by bounded technological progress," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 933-945, September.
    11. Chen, Ping-Chuan & Hung, Shiu-Wan, 2016. "An actor-network perspective on evaluating the R&D linking efficiency of innovation ecosystems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 303-312.
    12. Henrik Braconier & Fredrik Sjöholm, 1998. "National and international spillovers from R&D: Comparing a neoclassical and an endogenous growth approach," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 134(4), pages 638-663, December.
    13. Stefano Magrini & Alessandro Spiganti, 2021. "The Day After Covid-19: Implications for Growth, Specialization, and Inequality," Working Papers 2021:13, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    14. Volker Grossmann & Thomas M. Steger & Timo Trimborn, 2016. "Quantifying Optimal Growth Policy," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 18(3), pages 451-485, June.
    15. Christoph Meister & Bart Verspagen & Guntram B. Wolff, 2006. "European Productivity Gaps: Is R&D the Solution?," Chapters, in: Susanne Mundschenk & Michael H. Stierle & Ulrike Stierle-von Schütz & Iulia Traistaru-Siedschlag (ed.), Competitiveness and Growth in Europe, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. James B. Ang & Jakob B. Madsen, 2012. "Risk capital, private credit, and innovative production," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(4), pages 1608-1639, November.
    17. Olsson, Ola, 2001. "Why Does Technology Advance in Cycles?," Working Papers in Economics 38, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    18. Pop Silaghi, Monica Ioana & Alexa, Diana & Jude, Cristina & Litan, Cristian, 2014. "Do business and public sector research and development expenditures contribute to economic growth in Central and Eastern European Countries? A dynamic panel estimation," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 108-119.
    19. Maemir, H. & Ziesemer, T., 2014. "Multinational production and trade in an endogenous growth model with heterogeneous firms," MERIT Working Papers 2014-038, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    20. Aaltonen, Aleksi Ville & Seiler, Stephan, 2014. "Quantifying spillovers in open source content production: evidence from Wikipedia," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60284, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ipe:ipetds:0206. 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: Fabio Schiavinatto (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipeaabr.html .

    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.