Advertisement

The Journal of Technology Transfer

, Volume 44, Issue 4, pp 1134–1162 | Cite as

Mapping the emergence of international university research ventures

  • Sergey KolesnikovEmail author
  • Seokkyun Woo
  • Yin Li
  • Philip Shapira
  • Jan Youtie
Article

Abstract

Research universities are expanding their institutional research presence overseas through the creation of research centers, facilities and partnerships outside of their home countries. We argue that such international university research ventures (IURV) are a distinct type of intermediary node in global knowledge networks occurring at the intersection of three trends: (1) expanding international research collaborations, (2) globalization of higher education, and (3) growing demand for capacity building in science, technology and innovation in emerging economies. To understand and characterize the scope and scale of this phenomenon we undertake an exploratory study of IURVs of 108 research-intensive universities in the United States. Data on U.S. IURV locations and their characteristics is collected from university websites and other secondary sources. We find that 54 U.S. research universities have established at least one IURV, with 183 IURVs in total created in 59 countries. A conceptual framework based on motivations and pathways of IURV emergence is developed. It distinguishes between strategy-driven, collaboration-driven, policy-driven and problem-driven IURVs. Insights from the mapping of U.S. IURVs are discussed, along with implications for future research.

Keywords

University internationalization Globalization of R&D Global knowledge networks Joint research venture 

JEL Classification

I23 L24 O19 O32 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research reported here is based upon work supported by the U.S. Army Research Laboratory and the U.S. Army Research Office through the Department of Defense Minerva Research Initiative under grant #W911-NF- 15-1-0322. Sergey Kolesnikov worked on the project while at the School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology. We are grateful to Juan Rogers and Mark Zachary Taylor for helpful comments and to Jon Schmid and Olufunke Adebola for additional research assistance.

References

  1. Allen, S. D., & Link, A. N. (2015). US research joint ventures with international partners. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(1), 169–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007). The internationalization of higher education: Motivations and realities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3–4), 290–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bammer, G. (2008). Enhancing research collaborations: Three key management challenges. Research Policy, 37(5), 875–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barjak, F., & Robinson, S. (2007). International collaboration, mobility and team diversity in the life sciences: Impact on research performance. Social Geography Discussions, 3(1), 121–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beaver, D. D. (2001). Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): Past, present, and future. Scientometrics, 52(3), 365–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berger, M., & Hofer, R. (2011). The Internationalisation of Research and Technology Organisations (RTOs)—Conceptual notions and illustrative examples from European RTOs in China. Science Technology & Society, 16(1), 99–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bonnema, A. B., Lin, Z., Qu, L., & Jacobsen, E. (2006). Developing institutional collaboration between Wageningen University and the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences. NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 53(3–4), 369–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. (2011). The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, 2010 edition. http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/2010/. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  9. CMU. (2017a). Carnegie Mellon University Qatar. https://www.qatar.cmu.edu/. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  10. CMU. (2017b). Carnegie Mellon University Portugal Program. http://www.cmuportugal.org/. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  11. Corley, E. A., Boardman, P. C., & Bozeman, B. (2006). Design and the management of multi-institutional research collaborations: Theoretical implications from two case studies. Research Policy, 35(7), 975–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. CREATE. (2017). Campus for Research Excellence and Technological Enterprise, Singapore. https://www.create.edu.sg/. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  13. De Solla Price, D. J. (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ebersberger, B., & Edler, J. (2009). Internationalization of Public Research Organizations. Context, strategies and effects. The Atlanta Conference on Science and Innovation Policy October 2–3, 2009, Atlanta.Google Scholar
  15. Engels, A., & Ruschenburg, T. (2008). The uneven spread of global science: Patterns of international collaboration in global environmental change research. Science and Public Policy, 35(5), 347–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Etzkowitz, H. (2003). MIT and the rise of entrepreneurial science. Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Feng, Y. (2013). University of Nottingham Ningbo China and Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University: globalization of higher education in China. Higher Education, 65(4), 471–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  19. Georgia Tech. (2017). Georgia Tech - CNRS UMI 2958: An international research partnership. http://umi2958.gatech.edu/. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  20. Georghiou, L. (1998). Global cooperation in research. Research Policy, 27(6), 611–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Newcastle: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Guimon, J. (2016). Universities as multinational enterprises? The multinational university analyzed through the eclectic paradigm. Multinational Business Review, 24(3), 216–228.  https://doi.org/10.1108/MBR-07-2016-0025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Guimón, J., Chaminade, C., & Maggi, C. (2015). Policies to attract R&D-related FDI in Chile: Aligning incentives with local linkages and absorptive capacities (No. 2015/48). Lund University, CIRCLE-Center for Innovation, Research and Competences in the Learning Economy.Google Scholar
  24. Hird, M. D., & Pfotenhauer, S. M. (2017). How complex international partnerships shape domestic research clusters: Difference-in-difference network formation and research re-orientation in the MIT Portugal Program. Research Policy, 46(3), 557–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jones, B. F., Wuchty, S., & Uzzi, B. (2008). Multi-university research teams: Shifting impact, geography, and stratification in science. Science, 322(5905), 1259–1262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jonkers, K. (2009). Emerging ties: Factors underlying China’s co-publication patterns with Western European and North American research systems in three molecular life science subfields. Scientometrics, 80(3), 775–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jonkers, K., & Cruz-Castro, L. (2010). The internationalisation of public sector research through international joint laboratories. Science and Public Policy, 37(8), 559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kinser, K., & Lane, J. (2015). Foreign outposts of colleges and universities. International Higher Education, 66, 2–3.Google Scholar
  30. Kinser, K., & Lane, J. (2016). International branch campuses: Evolution of a phenomenon. International Higher Education, 85, 3–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Klerkx, L., & Guimón, J. (2017). Attracting foreign R&D through international centres of excellence: early experiences from Chile. Science and Public Policy.  https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scx011.
  32. Knight, J. (2004). Internationalization remodeled: Definition, approaches, and rationales. Journal of Studies in International Education, 8(1), 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Krige, J. (2015). Regulating the academic “Marketplace of Ideas”: Commercialization, export controls, and counterintelligence. Engaging Science, Technology, and Society, 1, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kuemmerle, W. (1999). The drivers of foreign direct investment into research and development: An empirical investigation. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lane, J. E. (2011). Global expansion of international branch campuses: Managerial and leadership challenges. New Directions for Higher Education, 2011(155), 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Laredo, P. (2007). Revisiting the third mission of universities: Toward a renewed categorization of university activities? Higher Education Policy, 20(4), 441–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 673–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Li, J. (2010). Global R&D alliances in China: Collaborations with universities and research institutes. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 57(1), 78–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2005). Universities as partners in US research joint ventures. Research Policy, 34(3), 385–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Melin, G. (2000). Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration on the individual level. Research policy, 29(1), 31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Morillo, F., Bordons, M., & Gómez, I. (2003). Interdisciplinarity in science: A tentative typology of disciplines and research areas. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology, 54(13), 1237–1249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. National Science Board. (2016). Science and Engineering Indicators. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation (NSB-2016-1).Google Scholar
  43. OECD. (1997). Revised Field of Science and Technology (FOS) classification in the Frascati Manual. http://www.oecd.org/science/inno/38235147.pdf. Accessed 30 October 2017.
  44. Olds, K. (2007). Global assemblage: Singapore, foreign universities, and the construction of a “global education hub”. World development, 35(6), 959–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Peters, M. A. (2006). The rise of global science and the emerging political economy of international research collaborations. European Journal of Education, 41(2), 225–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pfotenhauer, S. M., Jacobs, J. S., Pertuze, J. A., Newman, D. J., & Roos, D. T. (2013). Seeding change through international university partnerships: The MIT-Portugal program as a driver of internationalization, networking, and innovation. Higher Education Policy, 26(2), 217–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pfotenhauer, S. M., Wood, D., Roos, D., & Newman, D. (2016). Architecting complex international science, technology and innovation partnerships (CISTIPs): A study of four global MIT collaborations. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 104, 38–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schmid, J., Kolesnikov, S. A., & Youtie, J. (2017). Plans versus experiences in transitioning transnational education into research and economic development: A case study. Science and Public Policy.  https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scx051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Scott, J. C. (2006). The mission of the university: Medieval to postmodern transformations. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(1), 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Shams, F., & Huisman, J. (2016). The role of institutional dual embeddedness in the strategic local adaptation of international branch campuses: Evidence from Malaysia and Singapore. Studies in Higher Education, 41(6), 955–970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sidhu, R. (2009a). The ‘brand name’ research university goes global. Higher Education, 57(2), 125–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sidhu, R. (2009b). Running to stay still in the knowledge economy. Journal of Education Policy, 24(3), 237–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sidhu, R., Ho, K. C., & Yeoh, B. S. (2014). Singapore: Building a knowledge and education hub. In International education hubs (pp. 121–143). Springer.Google Scholar
  54. Skolnikoff, E. B. (1994). The elusive transformation: Science, technology, and the evolution of international politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2006). Here or there? A survey of factors in multinational R&D location: Report to the Government/University/Industry research roundtable.Google Scholar
  56. United Nations Development Programme. (2015). Human development report 2015: Work for human development. http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2015_human_development_report.pdf. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  57. United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. General Assembly Resolution A/RES/70/1, 25 September 2015. http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  58. Von Zedtwitz, M., & Gassmann, O. (2002). Market versus technology drive in R&D internationalization: Four different patterns of managing research and development. Research policy, 31(4), 569–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Vonortas, N. S. (1997). Research joint ventures in the US. Research Policy, 26(4), 577–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wagner, C. S., Brahmakulam, I., Jackson, B., Wong, A., & Yoda, T. (2001). Science and technology collaboration: Building capability in developing countries (No. RAND/MR-1357.0-WB). RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA.Google Scholar
  61. Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research policy, 34(10), 1608–1618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wagner, C. S., Park, H. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015). The continuing growth of global cooperation networks in research: A conundrum for national governments. PLoS One, 10(7), e0131816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Walsh, J. P., & Lee, Y. N. (2015). The bureaucratization of science. Research Policy, 44(8), 1584–1600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wilkins, S., & Huisman, J. (2012). The international branch campus as transnational strategy in higher education. Higher Education, 64(5), 627–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Yale University. (2017). Fudan-Yale Biomedical Research Center in China. http://world.yale.edu/china-research-centers. Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  67. Youtie, J., Li, Y., Rogers, J., & Shapira, P. (2017). Institutionalization of international university research ventures. Research Policy, 46(9), 1692–1705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Youtie, J., Libaers, D., & Bozeman, B. (2006). Institutionalization of university research centers: the case of the National Cooperative Program in Infertility Research. Technovation, 26(9), 1055–1063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Youtie, J., & Shapira, P. (2008). Building an innovation hub: A case study of the transformation of university roles in regional technological and economic development. Research Policy, 37(8), 1188–1204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zacharewicz, T., Sanz Menendez, L., Jonkers, K. (2017), The Internationalisation of Research and Technology Organisations, EUR 28442 EN.  https://doi.org/10.2760/944413.
  71. Zhang, H., Patton, D., & Kenney, M. (2013). Building global-class universities: Assessing the impact of the 985 Project. Research Policy, 42(3), 765–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Zitt, M., Bassecoulard, E., & Okubo, Y. (2000). Shadows of the past in international cooperation: Collaboration profiles of the top five producers of science. Scientometrics, 47(3), 627–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Organization Research and DesignArizona State UniversityPhoenixUSA
  2. 2.School of Public PolicyGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA
  3. 3.Enterprise Innovation InstituteGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA
  4. 4.Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, Alliance Manchester Business SchoolUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations