Date: 15 Nov 2012
Participation and commitment in third-party research funding: evidence from Italian Universities
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Over the last few years, the emergence of universities’ third mission has significantly affected objectives, sources of funding and financing methods, as well as the management, of universities. Although the university–industry relationships have been widely investigated, several interesting theoretical and empirical issues still remain open in the literature. In this paper we construct an original data set, combining financial information with structural and organizational data on Italian University departments, with a twofold aim. First, to describe the importance and the extent of third-party funding in the Italian system of research as well as the pattern of evolution over the last few years. Second, to investigate the factors that influence both the probability and the intensity of the commitment of departments in third-party activities by building a multi-level framework combining factors at individual, departmental, university and territorial levels. The results obtained suggest a number of policy implications for universities and policy makers. On one hand, universities should explicitly recognize the role of dedicated internal organizations and provide training for professional staff capable of acting as value-added intermediaries. On the other hand, if policy makers wish to improve the relationships between universities and external actors, disciplinary differences across departments as well as regional inequalities in growth levels should be carefully considered, giving up a one-size-fits-all approach.
Andrea Bonaccorsi: On leave from Department of Energy and Systems Engineering, University of Pisa.
Abramo, G., Cicero, T., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2012). The dispersion of research performance within and between universities as a potential indicator of the competitive intensity in higher education systems. Journal of Informetrics, 6, 155–168.CrossRef
Abreu, M., Grinevich, V., Hughes, A., & Kitson, M. (2009). Knowledge exchange between academics and the business, public and third sectors. Cambridge: UK Innovation Research Centre.
Agrawal, A., Cockburn, I., & McHale, J. (2006). Gone but not forgotten: Knowledge flows, labor mobility and enduring social relationships. Journal of Economic Geography, 6, 571–591.CrossRef
Allison, P., & Long, S. (1990). Departmental effects on scientific productivity. American Sociological Review, 55, 469–478.CrossRef
Anselin, L., Varga, A., & Acs, Z. (1997). Local Geographic Spillovers between University research and high technology innovations. Journal of Urban Economics, 42(3), 422–448.CrossRef
Arvanitis, S., Kubli, U., & Woerter, M. (2008). University–industry knowledge and technology transfer in Switzerland: What university scientists think about co-operation with private enterprises. Research Policy, 37(10), 1865–1883.CrossRef
Auranen, O., & Nieminen, M. (2010). University research funding and publication performance—An international comparison. Research Policy, 39, 822–834.CrossRef
Azagra-Caro, J. M., Archontakis, F., Gutiérrez-Gracia, A., & Fernández-de-Lucio, I. (2006). Faculty support for the objectives of university–industry relations versus degree of R&D cooperation: The importance of regional absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 35(1), 37–55.CrossRef
Baldini, N., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2007). To patent or not to patent? A survey of Italian inventors on motivations, incentives, and obstacles to university patenting. Scientometrics, 70(2), 333–354.CrossRef
Bekkers, R., & Bodas Freitas, I. M. (2008). Analyzing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter? Research Policy, 37(10), 1837–1853.CrossRef
Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2008). Academic entrepreneurs: Organizational change at the individual level. Organization Science, 19(1), 69–89.CrossRef
Boardman, P. C. (2008). Beyond the stars: The impact of affiliation with university biotechnology centers on the industrial involvement of university scientists. Technovation, 28(5), 291–297.CrossRef
Boardman, P. C., & Corley, E. A. (2008). University research centers and the composition of research collaborations. Research Policy, 37(5), 900–913.CrossRef
Boardman, P. C., & Ponomariov, B. L. (2009). University researchers working with private companies. Technovation, 29(2), 142–153.CrossRef
Bonaccorsi, A., Colombo, M., Guerini, M., & Rossi Lamastra, C. (2012). The spatial range of university knowledge and the creation of knowledge intensive firms. Small Business Economics (Submitted to).
Bonaccorsi, A., & Daraio, C. (2003). Age effects in the organisation of science. The case on the Italian National Research Council. Scientometrics, 58(1), 49–90.
Bonaccorsi, A., & Daraio, C. (2005). Exploring size and agglomeration effects on public research productivity. Scientometrics, 63, 87–120.CrossRef
Bonaccorsi, A., & Daraio, C. (2007). Universities and strategic knowledge creation. Specialization and performance in Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRef
Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61–74.CrossRef
Bottazzi, L., & Peri, G. (2003). Innovation and spillovers in regions: Evidence from European patent data. European Economic Review, 47(4), 687–710.CrossRef
Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2007). Impacts of grants and contracts on academic researchers’ interactions with industry. Research Policy, 36(5), 694–707.CrossRef
Brandt, T., & Schubert, T. (2012). Is the university model an organizational necessity? Scale and agglomeration effects in science. Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0834-2.
Breschi, S., & Lissoni, F. (2009). Mobility of skilled workers and co-invention networks: An anatomy of localized knowledge flows. Journal of Economic Geography, 4, 439–468.CrossRef
Bruno, G., & Orsenigo, L. (2003). Determinanti dei finanziamenti industriali alla ricerca universitaria in Italia. In A. Bonaccorsi (Ed.), Il sistema della ricerca pubblica in Italia. Milan: Franco Angeli.
Carayol, N., & Matt, M. (2004). Does research organization influence academic production? Laboratory level evidence from a large European university. Research Policy, 33, 1081–1102.CrossRef
Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. New York: Pergamon.
Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Van de Velde, E., & Vohora, A. (2005). Spinning out new ventures: A typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 183–216.CrossRef
Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2002). Links and impacts: The influence of public research on industrial R&D. Management Science, 48(1), 1–23.CrossRef
Crescenzi, R., Rodriguez-Pose, A., & Storper, M. (2007). The territorial dynamics of innovation: a Europe–United States comparative analysis. Journal of Economic Geography, 7(6), 673–709.CrossRef
Daraio, C., Bonaccorsi, A., et al. (2011). The European University landscape: A micro characterization based on evidence from the Aquameth project. Research Policy, 40, 148–164.CrossRef
D’Este, P., & Patel, P. (2007). University–industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors determining the variety of interactions with industry? Research Policy, 36(9), 1295–1313.CrossRef
D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2011). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 316–339.
Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university–industry linkages. Research Policy, 27, 823–833.CrossRef
Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29, 313–330.CrossRef
European Commission (2007). Improving knowledge transfer between research institutions and industry across Europe: Embracing open innovation, COM (2007) 182 final, Bruxelles.
Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., Santoni, S., & Sobrero, M. (2012). Complements or substitutes? The role of universities and local context in supporting the creation of academic spin-offs. Research Policy, 40(2011), 1113–1127.
Florida, R., & Cohen, W. M. (1999). Engine or infrastructure? The university role in economic development. In L. M. Branscomb, F. Kodama, & R. Florida (Eds.), Industrializing knowledge: University–industry linkages in Japan and the United States (pp. 589–610). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Fontana, R., Geuna, A., & Matt, M. (2003). Firm size and openness: The driving forces of university–industry collaboration. SPRU Electronic Working Papers Series, paper no. 103. Available at http://18.104.22.168/Units/spru/publications/imprint/sewps/sewp103/sewp103.pdf.
Fukugawa, N. (2012) University spillovers into small technology-based firms: channel, mechanism, and geography. Journal of Technology Transfer, doi:10.1007/s10961-012-9247-x, online first.
Geiger, R. L. (2004). Knowledge and money. Research universities and the paradox of the marketplace. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Geuna, A. (2001). The changing rationale for European university research funding: Are there negative unintended consequences? Journal of Economic Issues, 35, 607–632.
Giuliani, E., & Arza, V. (2008). What drives the formation of valuable ‘University–industry’ linkages? An under-explored question in a hot policy debate. SPRU Electronic Working Papers, Paper No. 170.
Greene, W. H. (1993). Econometric analysis. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Gulbrandsen, M., & Slipersæter, S. (2007). The third mission and the entrepreneurial university model. In A. Bonaccorsi & C. Daraio (Eds.), Universities and strategic knowledge creation: Specialization and performance in Europe (pp. 112–143). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Gulbrandsen, M., & Smeby, J. C. (2005). Industry funding and university professors’ research performance. Research Policy, 34(6), 932–950.CrossRef
Hall, B. H., Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2000). Universities as research partners. NBER Working Papers N°7643.
Heckman, J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47, 153–161.CrossRef
Herbst, M. (2009). Financing public universities. The case of performance funding. Dordrecht: Springer.
Hottenrott, H. (2011). The role of research orientation for attracting competitive research funding, K.U. Leuven. Dept. of Managerial Economics, Strategy and innovation, OR 1104, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
Hottenrott, H., & Thorwarth S. (2010). Industry funding of university research and scientific productivity, ZEW Discussion Paper No. 10–105, Mannheim.
Hulsbeck, M., Lehmann, E. E., & Starnecker, A. (2011). Performance of technology transfer offices in Germany. Journal of Technology Transfer, doi:10.1007/s10961-011-9243-6, online first.
Jain, S., George, G., & Maltarich, M. (2009). Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity. Research Policy, 38(6), 922–935.CrossRef
Krabel, S., & Mueller, P. (2009). What drives scientists to start their own company? An empirical investigation of Max Planck Society scientists. Research Policy, 38, 947–956.CrossRef
Landry, R., Amara, N., & Rherrad, I. (2006). Why are some university researchers more likely to create spin-offs than others? Evidence from Canadian universities. Research Policy, 35(10), 1599–1615.CrossRef
Laursen, K., Reichstein, T., & Salter, A. (2011). Exploring the effect of geographical proximity and university quality on university–industry collaboration in the United Kingdom. Regional Studies, 45(4), 507–523.CrossRef
Lee, Y. S. (1996). ‘Technology transfer’ and the research university: A search for the boundaries of university–industry collaboration. Research Policy, 25(6), 843–863.CrossRef
Lee, Y. S. (2000). The sustainability of university–industry research collaboration: An empirical assessment. Journal of Technology Transfer, 25(2), 111–133.CrossRef
Lepori, B., van den Besselaar, P., Dinges, M., Potì, B., Reale, E., Slipersaeter, S., et al. (2007). Convergence versus national specificities in research policies. An empirical study on public project funding. Research Evaluation, 27(2), 83–93.
Lin, M.-W., & Bozeman, B. (2006). Researchers’ industry experience and productivity in university–industry research centers: A “scientific and technical human capital” explanation. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(2), 269–290.CrossRef
Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., & Bozeman, B. (2007). An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 641–655.CrossRef
Louis, K. S., Blumenthal, D., Gluck, M., & Stoto, M. A. (1989). Entrepreneurs in academe: An exploration of behaviors among life scientists. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34(1), 110–131.CrossRef
Mansfield, E. (1995). Academic research underlying industrial innovations: Sources, characteristics, and financing. Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(1), 55–65.CrossRef
McKelvey, M., & Holmén, M. (2009). Learning to compete in European universities: From social institution to knowledge business. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishers.CrossRef
Meyer-Krahmer, F., & Schmoch, U. (1998). Science-based technologies: University–industry interactions in four fields. Research Policy, 27(8), 835–851.CrossRef
Moutinho, P., Fontes, M., & Godinho, M. (2007). Do individual factors matter? A survey of scientists’ patenting in Portuguese public research organisations. Scientometrics, 70(2), 355–377.CrossRef
Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2001). To patent or not: Faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1), 99–114.CrossRef
Perkmann, M., & Walsh, K. (2008). Engaging the scholar: Three forms of academic consulting and their impact on universities and industry. Research Policy, 37(10), 1884–1891.CrossRef
Perkmann, M., & Walsh, K. (2009). The two faces of collaboration: Impacts of university industry relations on public research. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18(6), 1033–1065.CrossRef
Phan, P. H., & Siegel, D. S. (2006). The effectiveness of university technology transfer: Lessons learned from qualitative and quantitative research in the US and UK. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 66–144.CrossRef
Ponds, R., van Oort, F., & Frenken, K. (2007). The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration networks. Papers in Regional Science, 86, 423–443.CrossRef
Ponomariov, B. L. (2008). Effects of university characteristics on scientists’ interactions with the private sector: An exploratory assessment. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(5), 485–503.CrossRef
Ponomariov, B., & Boardman, C. P. (2008). The effect of informal industry contacts on the time university scientists allocate to collaborative research with industry. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), 301–313.CrossRef
Renault, C. (2006). Academic capitalism and university incentives for faculty entrepreneurship. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(2), 227–239.CrossRef
Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S., & Jiang, L. (2007). University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 691–791.CrossRef
Schartinger, D., Rammer, C., Fischer, M. M., & Fröhlich, J. (2002). Knowledge interactions between universities and industry in Austria: Sectoral patterns and determinants. Research Policy, 31(3), 303–328.CrossRef
Schartinger, D., Schibany, A., & Gassler, H. (2001). Interactive relations between universities and firms: Empirical evidence for Austria. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 255–269.CrossRef
Schmoch, U., & Schubert, T. (2009). Sustainability of incentives for excellent research. Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research Discussion Paper, Karlsruhe.
Sellenthin, M. O. (2009). Technology transfer offices and university patenting in Sweden and Germany. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(6), 603–620.CrossRef
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27–48.CrossRef
Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the Entrepreneurial University. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Stephan, P. (1996). The economics of science. Journal of Economic Literature, 34(3), 1199–1235.
Van Dierdonck, R., Debackere, K., & Engelen, B. (1990). University–industry relationships: How does the Belgian academic community feel about it? Research Policy, 19(6), 551–566.CrossRef
Varga, A. (2000). Local academic knowledge transfers and the concentration of economic activity. Journal of Regional Science, 40(2), 289–309.CrossRef
Weick, K. E. (1982). Management of organizational change among loosely coupled elements. In P. S. Goodman (Ed.), Change in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Welsh, R., Glenna, L., Lacy, W., & Biscotti, D. (2008). Close enough but not too far: Assessing the effects of university–industry research relationships and the rise of academic capitalism. Research Policy, 37(10), 1854–1864.CrossRef
Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data (2nd ed.). USA: The Mit Press.
Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Lockett, A., & Knockaert, M. (2008). Mid-range universities’ linkages with industry: Knowledge types and the role of intermediaries. Research Policy, 37, 1205–1223.CrossRef
- Participation and commitment in third-party research funding: evidence from Italian Universities
The Journal of Technology Transfer
Volume 39, Issue 2 , pp 169-198
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- University–industry relations
- Third-party research
- Italian University department
- Heckman selection model
- Industry Sectors