Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does context matter in academic entrepreneurship? The role of barriers and drivers in the regional and national context

The Journal of Technology Transfer volume 41, pages 1457–1482 (2016)Cite this article

An Erratum to this article was published on 07 February 2017

Abstract

With pressure on universities to better contribute to society, academic entrepreneurship is an increasingly recognised source of new knowledge and technologies as well as being a driver of the movement to a knowledge society. However, whilst growing, the level of academic entrepreneurship in Europe is still relatively low. Two reasons that are factors influencing this are inhibitors (barriers) and facilitators (drivers), however the understanding of how their interplay influences academic entrepreneurship, particularly across different context is lacking. For this reason, this study focussed on two environmental settings, European regions and countries, seeking to understand if it is the hurdle (barrier) or (and/or) tail-wind (drivers) that most impacts academic entrepreneurship and how does the regional or national context influence this. An online survey was translated into 22 languages and undertaken in 33 countries in Europe and the European Economic Area. From the original data set, 12 countries in four European regions provided a sample of 2925 responses, with a second step to focus on four ‘lead’ countries within those regions. The results show that there is a significant difference in the university-business cooperation barriers and drivers that effect academic entrepreneurship in the European regions. Furthermore, different barriers and drivers were found to significantly affect the four lead countries with barriers and drivers being able to provide a good explanation of the extent of academic entrepreneurship in the UK and Germany, and a limited explanation of entrepreneurial activity by Spanish and Polish academics. Overall the article contributes to the literature of resource-based theory and also the understanding of factors influencing European academic entrepreneurship.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  • Abreu, M., Grinevich, V., Hughes, A., & Kitson, M. (2009). Knowledge exchange between academics and business, public and the third sector. Cambridge: UK Innovation Research Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmad, N., & Seymour, R. G. (2008). Defining entrepreneurial activity. 9 Nov, 2013. Retrieved from OECD: http://www.oecd.org/std/business-stats/39651330.pdf.

  • Aldridge, T. T., & Audretsch, D. (2011). The Bayh–Dole act and scientist entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1058–1067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, T. R., Daim, T. U., & Lavoie, F. F. (2007). Measuring the efficiency of university technology transfer. Technovation, 27(5), 306–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B. (Ed.). (2002). Entrepreneurship: Determinants and policy in a European–US comparison (Vol. 27). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, T., Pashby, I., & Gibbons, A. (2002). Effective university–industry interaction: A multi-case evaluation of collaborative R&D Projects. European Management Journal, 20, 272–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumol, W. J. (1996). Entrepreneurship: Productive, unproductive, and destructive. Journal of Business Venturing, 11(1), 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bekkers, R. N. A. & Freitas, I. M. (2010). Catalysts and barriers: Factors that affect the performance of university-industry collaborations. In 4th ZEW Conference on economics of innovation and patenting. Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW) Mannheim, 19–20 May, 2011.

  • Birley, S. (1985). The role of networks in the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing, 1(1), 107–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birley, S. (2002). Universities, academics, and spinout companies: Lessons from Imperial. International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 1(1), 133–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosma, N., & Harding, R. (2006). Summary results. Global entrepreneurship monitor. London: Babson College & London Business School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulton, G., & Lucas, C. (2011). What are universities for? Chinese Science Bulletin, 56(23), 2506–2517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandstetter, H. (1997). Becoming an entrepreneur—a question of personality structure? Journal of Economic Psychology, 18, 157–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruneel, J., D’Este, P., & Salter, A. (2010). Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university–industry collaboration. Research Policy, 39(7), 858–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruneel, J., Ratinho, T., Clarysse, B., & Groen, A. (2011). An assessment of evolving business incubators’ value proposition. Are they helping? An Examination of Business Incubators’ Impact on Tenant Firms, 37–72.

  • Caloghirou, Y., Hondroyiannis, G., & Vonortas, N. S. (2003). The performance of research partnerships. Managerial and Decision Economics, 24(2–3), 85–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casson, M. (1982). The entrepreneur: An economic theory. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colyvas, J., Crow, M., Gelijns, A., Mazzoleni, R., Nelson, R. R., Rosenberg, N., & Sampat, B. N. (2002). How do university inventions get into practice? Management Science, 48(1), 61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO (2014). The Global Innovation Index 2014: The human factor in innovation. Fontainebleau, Ithaca, and Geneva.

  • Corsten, H. (1987). Technology transfer from universities to small and medium-sized enterprises—an empirical survey from the standpoint of such enterprises. Technovation, 6(1), 57–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Este, P., & Patel, P. (2007). University–industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry? Research Policy, 36(9), 1295–1313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2010). Why do academics work with industry? A study of the relationship between collaboration rationales and channels of interaction. Journal of Technology Transfer, 36, 316–339.

  • D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2011). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 316–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davey, T., Baaken, T., Deery, M., & Galán-Muros, V. (2011a). 30 Best Practice Case Studies in University-Business Cooperation. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission, DG Education and Culture. ISBN 978-92-79-23168-1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davey, T., Baaken, T., Galán-Muros, V., & Meerman, A. (2011b). Study on the cooperation between Higher Education Institutions and Public and Private Organisations in Europe. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission, DG Education and Culture. ISBN 978-92-79-23167-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davey, T., Galán-Muros, V., Meerman, A. & Kusio, T., (2013). In State of University-Business Cooperation (UBC) Report in Poland. European Commission, DG Education & Culture. ISBN No. 978-94-91901-00-3.

  • Davey, T., Plewa, C., & Struwig, M. (2011c). Entrepreneurship perceptions and career intentions of international students. Education + Training, 53(5), 335–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Silva (2012). Academic entrepreneurship in a resource constrained environment, Ph.D. dissertation. The University of Manchester 2012.

  • Dickson, K., Coles, A., & Smith, H. (1998). Science in the marketplace: The role of the scientific entrepreneur. In W. During & R. Oakey (Eds.), New technology based firms in the 1990s. London: Paul Chapman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdis, K., & Varga, A. (2009). The academic entrepreneur: Myth or reality for increased regional growth in Europe? In Working paper intangible assets and regional economic growth 1.3f.

  • Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university–industry linkages. Research Policy, 27(8), 823–833.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H. (2000). The second academic revolution: MIT and the rise of entrepreneurial science. London: Gordon & Breach.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H. (2004). The evolution of the entrepreneurial university. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 1(1), 64–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., Asplund, P., & Nordman, N. (2001). Beyond Humboldt: Emergence of academic entrepreneurship in the US and Sweden. Document de Travail, (27), 9–10.

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eun, J. H., Lee, K., & Wu, G. (2006). Explaining the “University-run enterprises” in China: A theoretical framework for university–industry relationship in developing countries and its application to China. Research Policy, 35(9), 1329–1346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagerberg, J., & Verspagen, B. (1996). Heading for Divergence? Regional growth in Europe reconsidered. Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(3), 431–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2009). Factors fostering academics to start up new ventures: An assessment of Italian founders’ incentives. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(4), 380–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, S. J., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2001). Academic and surrogate entrepreneurs in university spin-out companies. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 127–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, C. (1995). The ‘National System of Innovation’ in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(1), 5–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaglio, C. M., & Katz, J. A. (2001). The psychological basis of opportunity identification: Entrepreneurial alertness. Small Business Economics, 16(2), 95–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galán-Muros, V., Davey, T., Testar Ymbert, X., Meerman, A., Sánchez Contreras A. (2013). In State of University-Business Cooperation (UBC). Report in Spain. European Commission, DG Education & Culture. ISBN No. 978-90-820668-5-2.

  • GEM-Monitor, G. E. (2013). Monitor Global de la Actividad Emprendedora. Informe México 2013 [consultado 19 Ene 2015].

  • Gilad, B., & Levine, P. (1986). A behavioral model of entrepreneurial supply. Journal of Small Business Management, 24, 45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Göktepe, D. (2004). Literature review on Mechanisms of Transferring University Research Results: Licensing and Spin-off Company Formation (Internal Research Paper Division of Innovation) mimeo. In Conference on “Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Growth”, November 2004. Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology (KTH). http://www.infra.kth.se/cesis/events/conference-nov2004.pdf.

  • Göktepe-Hulten, D., & Mahagaonkar, P. (2010). Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: In the expectation of money or reputation? The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(4), 401–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2011). 30 years after Bayh–Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1045–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B., Link, A., & Scott, J. (2001). Barriers inhibiting industry from partnering with universities: Evidence from the Advanced Technology Program. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 87–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay, D. B., Butt, F., & Kirby, D. A. (2002). Academics as entrepreneurs in a UK University. In G. Williams (Ed.), The enterprising university: Reform, excellence and equity. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., Camp, S. M., & Sexton, D. L. (2001). Strategic entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial strategies for wealth creation. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6–7), 479–491. ISO 690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howells, J., Nedeva, M., & Georghiou, L. (1998). Industry-academic links in the UK. Manchester PREST: University of Manchester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L. (2012). Strategic management knowledge transfer, absorptive capacity and the attainment of strategic objective of MNCs’ Chinese subsidiaries. Modern Economy, 3, 424–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huczynski, A., & Buchanan, D. (2001). Organizational behaviour. Harlow: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inzelt, A. (2004). The evolution of university–industry–government relationships during transition. Research Policy, 33(6), 975–995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ireland, R. D., Hitt, M. A., & Sirmon, D. G. (2003). A model of strategic entrepreneurship: The construct and its dimensions. Journal of Management, 29(6), 963–989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, M., Hellström, T., Adler, N., & Norrgren, F. (2000). From sponsorship to partnership in academy-industry relations. R&D Management, 30(3), 255–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones-Evans, D. (1997). Technical entrepreneurship, experience and the management of small technology—based firms—exploratory evidence from the UK. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 9(1), 65–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones-Evans, D. (1998). Universities, technology transfer and spin-off activities: Academic entrepreneurship in different European regions. Targeted Socio-Economic Research Project, (1042).

  • Jones-Evans, D., Steward, F., Balazs, K., & Todorov, K. (1998). Public sector entrepreneurship in central and eastern Europe: A study of academic spin-offs in Bulgaria and Hungary. Journal of Applied Management Studies, 7, 59–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenney, M., & Goe, W. R. (2004). The role of embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 33, 691–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirzner, I. M. (1973). Competition and entrepreneurship. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Klofsten, M., & Jones-Evans, D. (2000). Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe—The case of Sweden and Ireland. Small Business Economics, 14, 299–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lam, A. (2005). Work roles and careers of R&D scientists in network organizations. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 44(2), 242–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lam, A. (2011). What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization:‘Gold’, ‘ribbon’or ‘puzzle’? Research Policy, 40(10), 1354–1368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laredo, P. (2007). Revisiting the third mission of universities: Toward a renewed categorization of university activities? Higher Education Policy, 20(4), 441–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laukkanen, M. (2003). Exploring academic entrepreneurship: Drivers and tensions of university-based business. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 10(4), 372–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levie, J., & Autio, E. (2008). A theoretical grounding and test of the GEM model. Small Business Economics, 31(3), 235–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A., & Baum, J. R. (2007). Entrepreneurial motivation. In J. R. Baum, M. Frese, & R. A. Baron (Eds.), The psychology of entrepreneurship (pp. 93–112). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Lopez-Martinez, R., Medellin, E., Scanlon, A., & Solleiro, J. (1994). Motivations and obstacles to University Industry Cooperation (UIC): A Mexican case. R&D Management, 24, 17–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Louis, K. S., Blumenthal, D., Gluck, M. E., & Stoto, M. A. (1989). Entrepreneurs in academe: An exploration of behaviours among life scientists. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 110–131.

  • Lundvall, B. A. (1999). National business systems and national systems of innovation. International Studies of Management and Organization, 29, 60–77.

  • MacPherson, A. D. (1998). Academic-industry linkages and small firm innovation: Evidence from the scientific instruments sector. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 10(4), 261–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maggiora (2008). In La disciplina del commercio. Integrata ed Aggiornita, Enti Locali, new series, 2nd edition. Cosa and Come publishers.

  • Mars, M. M., & Rios-Aguilar, C. (2010). Academic entrepreneurship (re) defined: Significance and implications for the scholarship of higher education. Higher Education, 59(4), 441–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMullan, W., & Vesper, K. (1987). New ventures and small business innovation for economic growth. R&D Management, 17(1), 3–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. (2003). Academic entrepreneurs or entrepreneurial academics? Research–based ventures and public support mechanisms. R&D Management, 33(2), 107–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer-Krahmer, F., & Schmock, U. (1998). Science-based technologies: University–industry interactions in four fields. Research Policy, 27(8), 835–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monck, C., & Segal, N. (1983). University science parks and small firms. In National small business conference, Durham University.

  • Morris, N. (2000). Science policy in action: Policy and the researcher. Minerva, 38(4), 425–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D. C., & Shane, S. (2002). Introduction to the special issue on university entrepreneurship and technology transfer. Management Science, 48(1), v–ix.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D. C., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2002). Academic patent quality and quantity before and after the Bayh–Dole act in the United States. Research Policy, 31(3), 399–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R. (Ed.). (1993). National innovation systems: A comparative analysis. Oxford University Press.

  • O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J. O., Gorman, C., & Roche, F. (2004). Universities technology transfer: A review of academic entrepreneurship literature. Irish Journal of Management, 25(2), 11–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Morse, K. P., O’Gorman, C., & Roche, F. (2007). Delineating the anatomy of an entrepreneurial university: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology experience. R&d Management, 37(1), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phan, P., & Siegel, D. S. (2006). The effectiveness of university technology transfer. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 77–144.

  • Plewa, C., & Quester, P. G. (2006). Satisfaction with university–industry relationships: The impact of commitment, trust and championship. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 5(1–2), 79–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Stern, S. (2001). National innovative capacity. The global competitiveness report, 2002, 102–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powers, J. B., & McDougall, P. P. (2005). University start-up formation and technology licensing with firms that go public: A resource-based view of academic entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(3), 291–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinhard, M., & Schmalholz, H. (1996). Technologietransfer in Deutschland. Berlin München: Stand und Reformbedarf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, N., & Nelson, R. R. (1994). American universities and technical advance in industry. Research Policy, 23(3), 323–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., & Jiang, L. (2007). University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 691–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santoro, M. D., & Gopalakrishnan, S. (2000). The institutionalization of knowledge transfer activities within industry–university collaborative ventures. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 17, 299–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 303–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulte, P. (2004). The entrepreneurial university: A strategy for institutional development. Higher Education in Europe, 29(2), 187–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwab, K. (2014). The global competitiveness report 2014–2015. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, M., Fadahunsi, A., & Kodithuwakku, S. (2000). Tackling adversity with diversity. In S. Birley & D. Muzyka (Eds.), Financial times: Mastering entrepreneurship. The complete MBA companion in entrepreneurship. Pearson Education Ltd: Harlow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. (2002). Selling university technology: Patterns from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), 122–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S., & Stuart, T. (2002). Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science, 48(1), 154–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Link, A. N. (2004). Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: Qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 21(1), 115–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer, S., Amorós, J. E., & Moska, D. (2014). The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) 2014 global report (pp. 27–55). London Business School.

  • Spencer, J. W. (2001). How relevant is university-based scientific research to private high-technology firms? A United States–Japan comparison. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 432–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, H. H., & Jarillo, J. C. (1990). A paradigm of entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial management. Strategic Management Journal, 11(5), 17–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stifterverband für die Deutsche Wissenschaft (2007). In ‘Innovationsfaktor Kooperation. Bericht des Stifterverbandes zur Zusammenarbeit zwischen Unternehmen und Hochschulen’, Edition Stifterverband, Essen.

  • Strunz, K., Yokoyama, A. & Palma Behnke, R. (2003). Collaboration Is Key Internationally. In IEEE power and energy magazine, July/August 2003, 1540-7977/03.

  • Tartari, V., & Breschi, S. (2012). Set them free: Scientists’ evaluations of the benefits and costs of university–industry research collaboration. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(5), 1117–1147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tornatzky, L. G., Waugaman, P. G., & Gray, D. O. (2002). Innovation U.: New university roles in a knowledge economy. Atlanta: Southern Technology Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ucbasaran, D., Westhead, P., & Wright, M. (2008). Opportunity identification and pursuit: does an entrepreneur’s human capital matter? Small Business Economics, 30(2), 153–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dierdonck, R., & Debackere, K. (1988). Academic entrepreneurship at Belgian universities. R&D Management, 18(4), 341–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wakkee, I., Van der Sijde, P., & Nuijens, N. (2013). Valorisatie in Nederland: Exploratieve verkenning van het landschap van valorisatieprogrammas. Amsterdam: VU/FSW-Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, T. (2012). In A review of business-university collaboration. [Online] Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/32383/12-610-wilson-review-business-university-collaboration.pdf. Accessed on August 25, 2013.

  • World Bank EdStat, (2014). In World Bank EdStat. Accessed on February 2015.

  • Wright, M., Lockett, A., Clarysse, B., & Binks, M. (2006). University spin-out companies and venture capital. Research Policy, 35(4), 481–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yencken, J., & Ralston, L. (2005). Evaluation of Incentives for Commercialisation of Research in Australian Universities: A survey of selected Australian universities. Science and Training: Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Baden-Fuller, C., & Mangematin, V. (2007). Technological knowledge base, R&D organization, structure and alliance formation: Evidence from the biopharmaceutical industry. Research Policy, 36, 515–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to Victoria Galan-Muros for her input into the paper and also to the DG Education & Culture from the European Commission for their funding of the study on the cooperation between HEIs and public and private organisations in Europe, which contributed to this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Science-to-Business Marketing Research Centre, Münster University of Applied Sciences, Johann-Krane-Weg 27, 48149, Münster, Germany

    Todd Davey & Sue Rossano

  2. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Todd Davey & Sue Rossano

  3. Faculty of Social Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Peter van der Sijde

Authors
  1. Todd Davey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sue Rossano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter van der Sijde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sue Rossano.

Additional information

With relationship drivers primarily relating to collaborating with business for the purposes of research, it could be expected that high relationship drivers may positively impact the extent of UBC, however for entrepreneurial behaviour by academics, an individual pursuit for the creation of business, may indeed have a negative influence. As such it is anticipated that relationship drivers will have a significant but negative relationship with academic entrepreneurship.

An erratum to this article is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9547-7.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Davey, T., Rossano, S. & van der Sijde, P. Does context matter in academic entrepreneurship? The role of barriers and drivers in the regional and national context. J Technol Transf 41, 1457–1482 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9450-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9450-7

Keywords

JEL Classification

search

Navigation