Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

University Knowledge Production and Innovation: Getting a Grip

  • Essay Review
  • Published:
Minerva Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Today universities are increasingly seen as motors of innovation: they not only need to provide trained manpower and publications to society, but also new products, new processes and new services that create firms, jobs, and economic growth. This function of universities is controversial, and a huge and still expanding literature has tried to understand it. The approach of this paper is integrative; it uses the existing literature to answer a number of straightforward questions about the creation of innovations with university knowledge production: how does this happen, to what extent, and if it is desirable. In this way this article grounds the issue. Creating innovation with university knowledge production is relevant, justified and important but this has not been, is not and will not become the core function of universities. The existing literature, in other words, overestimates the importance of university knowledge production - in general, and for innovation in particular.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We prefer to use the term "knowledge production" as a broad reference to what laboratories do. For a discussion of the differences between different types of laboratories, see Van Rooij (2011).

  2. To further emphasize this point, we preferably cite older literature over newer literature. In addition, because this is a short paper, we also cite selectively.

References

  • Anderson, Timothy R., Tugrul U. Daim, and Francois F. Lavoie. 2007. Measuring the efficiency of university technology transfer. Technovation 27: 306–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blume, Stuart S. 1986. The development of Dutch science policy in international perspective, 1965–1985. The Hague: RAWB.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, Michel, et al. 1992. Defining the strategic profile of research labs: The research compass card method. In Science and technology in a policy context, ed. Anthony F.J. van Raan, 184–199. Leiden: DSWO Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Wesley M., et al. 1998. Industry and the academy: Uneasy partners in the cause of technological advance. In Challenges to research universities, ed. Roger G. Noll, 171–199. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Solla Price, Derek J. 1963. Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edgerton, David. 2004. The linear model did not exist: Reflections on the history and historiography of research in industry in the twentieth century. In The science-industry nexus: History, policy, implications, eds. Karl Grandin, Nina Worms, and Sven Widmalm, 31–57. Sagamore Beach, MA: Science History Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, Henry. 1983. Entrepreneurial scientists and entrepreneurial universities in American academic science. Minerva 21: 198–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, Henry, and Loet Leydesdorff. 2000. The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and ‘‘Mode 2’’ to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy 29: 109–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feller, Irwin, Catherine P. Ailes, and J. David Roessner. 2002. Impacts of research universities on technological innovation in industry: Evidence from engineering research centers. Research Policy 31: 457–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, Roger L. 1990. Organized research units: Their role in the development of university. Journal of Higher Education 61: 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, Roger L. 1986. To advance knowledge: The growth of American research universities, 1900–1940. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, Michael, and Ron Johnston. 1974. The role of science in technological innovation. Research Policy 3: 220–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godin, Benoit, and Joseph P. Lane. 2013. Pushes and pulls: Hi(S)tory of the demand pull model of innovation. Science, Technology & Human Values 38(5): 621–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimaldi, Rosa, Martin Kenney, Donald S. Siegel, and Mike Wright. 2011. 30 years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy 40: 1045–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hessels, Laurens K., and Harro van Lente. 2008. Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda. Research Policy 37: 740–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, Ernst. 2003. Speuren op de tast: Een historische kijk op industriële en universitaire research. Maastricht: Maastricht University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hounshell, David A. 1996. The evolution of industrial research in the United States. In Engines of innovation: U.S. industrial research at the end of an era, eds. Richard S. Rosenbloom, and William J. Spencer, 13–85. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hounshell, David A. 2004. Industrial research: Commentary. In The science-industry nexus: History, policy, implications, eds. Karl Grandin, Nina Worms, and Sven Widmalm, 59–65. Sagamore Beach, MA: Science History Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, Adam B. 1989. Real effects of academic research. American Economic Review 79: 957–970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline, Ronald. 1995. Construing ‘technology’ as ‘applied science’: Public rhetoric of scientists and engineers in the United States, 1880-1945. Isis 86: 194–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • König, Wolfgang. 1996. Science-based industry or industry-based science? Electrical engineering in Germany before World War I. Technology & Culture 37: 70–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langrish, J., et al. 1972. Wealth from knowledge: Studies of innovation in industry. London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larédo, Philippe. 1995. Structural effects of EC RT&D programmes. Scientometrics 34: 473–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lécuyer, Christophe. 2005. What do universities really owe industry? The case of solid state electronics at Stanford. Minerva 43: 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lintsen, Harry. 2006. De aard van de technische wetenschappen. In Gedreven door nieuwsgierigheid: Een selectie uit 50 jaar TU/e-onderzoek, eds. Harry Lintsen, and Hans Schippers, 147–155. Eindhoven: Stichting Historie der Techniek.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, Edwin. 1991. Academic research and industrial innovation. Research Policy 20: 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, Ben R. 1996. The use of multiple indicators in the assessment of basic research. Scientometrics 36: 343–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, Ben R., and John Irvine. 1983. Assessing basic research: Some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy. Research Policy 12: 61–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinelli, Arianna, Martin Meyer, and Nick von Tunzelmann. 2008. Becoming an entrepreneurial university? A case study of knowledge exchange relationships and faculty attitudes in a medium-sized, research-oriented university. Journal of Technology Transfer 33: 259–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, W. F. 1962. The origins of the basic inventions underlying DuPont’s major product and process innovations. In The rate and direction of inventive activity: Economic and social factors, 323–358. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  • Onida, Fabrizio, and Franco Malerba. 1989. R&D cooperation between industry, universities and research organizations in Europe. Technovation 9: 137–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Packer, Kathryn, and Andrew Webster. 1996. Patenting culture in science: Reinventing the scientific wheel of credibility. Science, Technology & Human Values 21: 427–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, Marti, and David Jary. 1995. The McUniversity: Organization, management and academic subjectivity. Organization 2: 319–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt, Keith. 1998. Do patents reflect the useful output of universities? Research Evaluation 7: 105–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, James B. 1959. Yardsticks for industrial research: The evaluation of research and development output. New York: The Ronald Press Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quintas, Paul, and Ken Guy. 1995. Collaborative, pre-competitive R&D and the firm. Research Policy 24: 325–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, Nathan, and Richard Nelson. 1994. American universities and technical advances in industry. Research Policy 23: 325–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salter, Ammon J., and Ben R. Martin. 2001. The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: A critical review. Research Policy 30: 509–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salter, Ammon, et al. 2000. Talent, not technology: The Impact of publicly funded research on innovation in the UK. Brighton: SPRU.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schofer, Evan, and John W. Meyer. 2005. The worldwide expansion of higher education in the twentieth century. American Sociological Review 70: 898–920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scranton, Philip. 2006. Technology, science and American innovation. Business History 48: 311–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapin, Steven. 2012. The ivory tower: The history of a figure of speech and its cultural uses. The British Journal for the History of Science 45: 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tait, Joyce, and Robin Williams. 1999. Linear-plus model: Policy approaches to research and development: Foresight, framework and competitiveness. Science and Public Policy 26: 101–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, David J. 1986. Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy 15: 285–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Rooij, Arjan. 2007. The company that changed itself: R&D and the transformations of DSM. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Van Rooij, Arjan. 2011. Knowledge, money and data: An integrated account of the evolution of eight types of laboratory. British Journal for the History of Science 44: 427–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Science, Institute for Science, Innovation and Society, Radboud University Nijmegen, Mailbox Number 77, PO BOX 9010, 6500 GL, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Arjan van Rooij

Authors
  1. Arjan van Rooij
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arjan van Rooij.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

van Rooij, A. University Knowledge Production and Innovation: Getting a Grip. Minerva 52, 263–272 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-014-9254-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-014-9254-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation