Skip to main content

The Rise of the University’s Third Mission

  • Chapter
Reform of Higher Education in Europe

Abstract

The last decades have seen a fundamental upheaval in the organisation of modern life, and the university as an institution has been as widely affected by these changes as business, governments, and civil society groups. Higher education has been confronted with increasing marketisation of the State and aggressive re-regulation of the public sector. Internationalisation has created new potential markets for students, alongside increasing access to research collaborators, but it opened universities up to competition with and comparison against institutions in other countries. The growing importance of knowledge production and innovation for economic life has created new potential roles for universities and challenged the traditional societal privileges and monopolies which they have long enjoyed. But these changes have come at the same time as an evolution in the process of change: a growing role for the State in creating and regulating markets in public services has come with a greater role for the State in guiding this reform process.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bonaccorsi, A. (2008). Search regimes and the industrial dynamics of science. Minerva, 46, 285–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benneworth, P. (2007). Leading innovation: Building effective regional coalitions for innovation. London: National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benneworth, P., & Jongbloed, B. W. A. (2009). Who matters to universities? A stakeholder perspective on humanities, arts and social sciences valorisation. Higher Education. DOI 10.1007/s10734-009-9265-2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boschma, R. A. (2005). Proximity and innovation. A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bush, V. (1945). Science: The endless frontier. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesborough, H. (2003). Open innovation, the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. Oxford: Pergamon/IAU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. R. (2004). Sustaining change in universities: Continuities in case studies and concepts. Berkshire: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daalder, H. (1982). The sudden revolution and the sluggish aftermath: A retrospective since 1968. In H. Daalder & E. Shils (Eds.), Universities, politicians and bureaucrats: Europe and the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delanty, G. (2002). The university and modernity: A history of the present. In K. Robins & F. Webster (Eds.), The virtual university: Knowledge, markets and management. Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delors, J. (1988). Our Europe: The community and national development. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC. (1995). Green paper on innovation. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC. (2003). Communication from the commission: The role of the universities in the Europe of knowledge. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC. (2005). Mobilising the brainpower of Europe: Enabling universities to make their full contribution to the Lisbon strategy. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H. (2008). The triple helix: University-Industry-Government innovation in action. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fawcett, C. B. (1924). The provinces of England. A study of some geographical aspects of devolution (Rev. ed., 1961). London: Hutchinson University Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geuna, A. (1999). The economics of knowledge production. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goddard, J. B., & Chatterton, P. (2003). The response of universities to regional needs. In F. Boekema, E. Kuypers, & R. Rutten (Eds.), Economic geography of higher education: Knowledge, infrastructure and learning regions. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenhow, T. M. (1831, April 5). The expediency of establishing an academic institution, of the nature of a college or university, for the promotion of literature and science, more especially amongst the middle classes of the community, briefly considered. Paper read to the Literature and Philosophical Society of Newcastle upon Tyne, 13 pp. Available in Newcastle University Library Archive.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grit, K. (2000). Economisering als probleem: Een studie naar de bedrijfsmatige stad en de ondernemende universiteit. Assen, NL: Van Gorcum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hippel, E. von. (2006). Democratising innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson. (1975). The origins of the university grants committee. Minerva, 13(4), 583.

    Google Scholar 

  • Innovatieplatform. (2007a). Intentieverklaring valorisatie. Ondertekend door: VSNU, NWO, Platform Beta Techniek, HBO Raad, STW, TNO, MKB Nederland, VNO-NCW, GTIs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Innovatieplatform. (2007b). Verzilveren van kennis: Valorisatie van universitaire kennis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jongbloed, B. W. A. (2004). Mapping university-business interactions, a research proposal to identify indicators of interaction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jongbloed, B., Enders, J., & Salerno, C. (2007). Higher education and its communities: Interconnections, interdependencies and a research agenda. Higher Education, 56(3), 303–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilger, C., & Bartenbach, K. (2002). New rules for German Professors. Science, 298(5596), 1173–1175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landabaso, M. (1999). Innovation and regional development policy. In R. Rutten, S. Bakkers, K. Morgan, & F. Boekema (Eds.), Learning regions, theory, policy and practice. London: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larédo, P., & Mustar, P. (2004). Public sector research: A growing role in innovation systems. Minerva, 42, 11–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lepori, B., van den Besselaar, P., Dinges, M., Potì, B., Reale, E., Slipersæter, S., et al. (2007). Comparing the evolution of national research policies: What patterns of change? Science and Public Policy, 34(6), 372–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Etzkowitz, H. (1996). Emergence of a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Science and Public Policy, 23, 279–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, B. R. (2003). The changing social contract for science and the evolution of the university. In A. Geuna, A. J. Salter, & W. E. Steinmueller (Eds.), Science and innovation: Rethinking the rationales for funding and governance. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • MOCW. (2003). Wetenschapsbudget 2004. Den Haag: Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap.

    Google Scholar 

  • MOCW. (2005). Valorisatie van onderzoek als taak van de universiteiten. Den Haag: Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molas-Gallart, J., Salter, A., Patel, P., Scott, A., & Duran, X. (2002). Measuring third stream ctivities. Final Report to the Russell Group of Universities. Brighton: SPRU, University of Sussex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montesinos, P., Carot, J. M., Martinez, J.-M., & Mora, F. (2008). Third mission ranking for world class universities: Beyond teaching and research. Higher Education in Europe, 33(2), 259–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moulaert, F., & Sekia, F. (2003). Territorial innovation models: A critical survey. Regional Studies, 37(3), 289–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neave, G. (2000). ‘Universities’ responsibility to society: An historical exploitation of an enduring issue. In G. Neave (Ed.), Universities’ responsibility to society: International perspectives. Kidlington, Oxford: Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • NFU, VNO-NCW, & VSNU. (2004). Beschermde kennis is bruikbare kennis: Innovation charter bedrijfsleven en kennisinstellingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2001). Fostering high-tech spin-offs: A public strategy for innovation. Paris: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2004). Science and innovation policy: Key challenges and opportunities. Paris: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reich, R. (1991). The work of nations. London: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. M., Takegami, S., & Yin, J. (2001). Lessons learned about technology transfer. Technovation, 21(4), 253–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothwell, R., & Dodgson, M. (1992). European technology policy evolution: Convergence towards SMEs and regional technology transfer. Technovation, 12(4), 223–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, J. J. (1985). Science as a commodity: Policy changes, issues and threats. In M. Gibbons & B. Wittrock (Eds.), Science as a commodity: Threats to the open community of scholars. Harlow, Essex (UK): Longman Group Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schutte, F. (2000). The university-industry relations of an entrepreneurial university – the case of this university and of Twente. In F. Schutte & P. C. van der Sijde (Eds.), The university and its regions: Examples of regional development from the European consortium of innovative universities. Dortmund: ECIU.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shinn, C. (1980). The beginnings of the University Grants Committee. History of Education, 9(3), 233–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharp, M. (1990). The single market and European policies for advanced technologies. In C. Crouch & D. Marquand (Eds.), The politics of 1992: Beyond the single European market. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (1996). The emergence of a competitiveness research and development policy coalition and the commercialization of academic science and technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 21(3), 303–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tijssen, R., Hollanders, H., van Steen, J., & Nederhof, A. (2006). Wetenschaps- en technologie- indicatoren 2005. Nederlands Observatorium van Wetenschap en Technologie (NOWT).

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Kroonenberg, H. (1996). Ondernemen met kennis (Knowledge-based enterprise). Enschede: University of Twente Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Meulen, B. J. R., & Rip, A. (2001). The Netherlands: Science policy by mediation. In P. Laredo & P. Mustar (Eds.), Research and innovation policies in the new global economy: An international comparative analysis (pp. 297–324). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Ven, A., Polley, D. E., Garud, R., & Venkataraman, S. (1999). The innovation journey. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Tilburg, J. J., & Kreijen, M. (2003). Researchers op ondernemerspad; internationale benchmark studie naar spin-offs uit kennisinstellingen. Den Haag: Ministerie van Economische Zaken.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Vught, F. (Ed.), (1989). Governmental strategies and innovation in higher education. London: Jessica Kingsley.

    Google Scholar 

  • VSNU. (2005). Onderzoek van waarde: Activiteiten van universiteiten gericht op kennisvalorisatie. Den Haag: Vereniging van universiteiten.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziman, J. M. (1994). Prometheus bound: Science in a dynamic ‘steady state’. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziman, J. M. (2000). Real science: What it is, and what it means. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zomer, A. H., Jongbloed, B. W. A., & Enders, J. (2010). Do spin-offs make the academics’ heads spin? The impacts of spin-off companies on their parent research organisation. Minerva, 48(3), 331–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Sense Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zomer, A., Benneworth, P. (2011). The Rise of the University’s Third Mission. In: Enders, J., de Boer, H.F., Westerheijden, D.F. (eds) Reform of Higher Education in Europe. SensePublishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-555-0_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships