Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Different research markets: a disciplinary perspective

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Drawing upon the notions of academic capitalism and the transformation of academic research from traditional academic orientation into market orientation, the paper sets out to empirically scrutinize the changing nature of academic research, focusing especially on disciplinary differences. The paper is based on a survey of heads of departments and research units at Finnish universities representing all disciplinary groups (n = 255) and on in-depth interviews with Finnish academics (n = 31) in the fields of humanities, social sciences, technology and natural sciences. Based on the survey data, the funding, selection of research topics, collaboration partners, audiences and publication forums in research are analysed. Following this, five research markets are discerned: academic, corporate, policy, professional and public market, each characterized by its own values and rationality as to what is considered the reference group, basic objective and outcome of research. The paper concludes that the transformation thesis needs to be revisited and specified since on the one hand, academic orientation still remains crucially important in all disciplinary groups, and on the other hand, market orientation entails several kinds of markets, pointing to the versatility of the university–society relationship.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aittola, H., & Marttila, L. (Eds.). (2010). Yliopistojen rakenteellinen kehittäminen, akateemiset yhteisöt ja muutos [Universities’ structural development, academic communities and change] (Vol. 5). Finland: Publications of the Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becher, T. (1989). Academic tribes and territories. Milton Keynes: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories (2nd ed.). Milton Keynes: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. Guildford: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crespo, M., & Dridi, H. (2007). Intensification of university–industry relationships and its impact on academic research. Higher Education, 54, 61–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croissant, J. L., & Smith-Doerr, L. (2000). Organizational contexts of science: Boundaries and relationships between university and industry. In E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 691–718). Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deem, R. (1998). ‘New managerialism’ and higher education: the management of performances and cultures in universities in the United Kingdom. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 8(1), 47–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1997). Universities and the global knowledge economy. A triple helix of university–industry–government. London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gulbrandsen, M., & Kyvik, S. (2010). Are the concepts basic research, applied research and experimental development still useful? An empirical investigation among Norwegian academics. Science and Public Policy, 37(5), 343–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulbrandsen, M., & Smeby, J.-C. (2005). Industry funding and university professors’ research performance. Research Policy, 34, 932–950.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hakala, J. (2009). Academic cultures in the Finnish mass research university. Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 1400. Tampere: Tampere University Press.

  • Hakala, J., & Ylijoki, O.-H. (2001). Research for whom? Research orientations in three academic cultures. Organization, 8, 373–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Häyrinen-Alestalo, M., & Peltola, U. (2006). The problem of a market-oriented university. Higher Education, 52, 251–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hessels, L. K., & van Lente, H. (2008). Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda. Research Policy, 37(4), 740–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jongbloed, B., Enders, J., & Salerno, C. (2008). Higher education and its communities: Interconnections, interdependencies and a research agenda. Higher Education, 56, 303–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaukonen, E., & Nieminen, M. (1999). Modelling the triple helix from a small country perspective: The case of Finland. Journal of Technology Transfer, 24, 173–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kutinlahti, P. (2005). Universities approaching market. Intertwining scientific and entrepreneurial goals. VTT publications 589. Espoo: VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland.

  • Kyvik, S. (2007). Changes in funding university research: Consequences for problem choice and research output of academic staff. In J. Enders & B. Jongbloed (Eds.), Public–private dynamics in higher education (pp. 387–411). Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Löppönen, P., Lehvo, A., Vaahtera K., & Nuutinen, A. (Eds.). (2009). The state and quality of scientific research in Finland 2009. Publications of the Academy of Finland 10.

  • Lyytinen, A., Marttila, L., Ylijoki, O.-H., & Kaukonen, E. (2010). Rakenteet muuttuvat—muuttuuko tutkimus? [Structures are changing—What about research?]. In H. Aittola & L. Marttila (Eds.), Yliopistojen rakenteellinen kehittäminen, akateemiset yhteisöt ja muutos [Universities’ structural development, academic communities and change] (Vol. 5, pp. 23–49). Finland: Reports of the Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, B. R., & Etzkowitz, H. (2000). The origin and evolution of the university species. Vest, 13(3–4), 9–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marttila, L., Lyytinen, A., & Ylijoki, O.-H. (2010). Tutkimusyhteisöjen ja akateemisen työn muutos. Laitosjohtajakyselyn tulokset [The transformation of research communities and academic work. The survey results]. Working papers 5. The Unit for Science, Technology and Innovation Studies, University of Tampere.

  • Massy, W. F. (2009). Academic values in the marketplace. Higher Education Management and Policy, 21(3), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. (1968). Science and democratic social structure. In R. K. Merton (Ed.), Social theory and social structure. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, A. S., & Fenwick, T. (2009). Knowledge for whose society? Knowledge production, higher education, and federal policy in Canada. Higher Education, 57, 209–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D. C., & Sampat, P. N. (2005). Universities in national innovation systems. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 209–239). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieminen, M. (2005). Academic research in change. Transformation of Finnish university policies and university research during the 1990s. Helsinki: The Finnish Society of Sciences and Letters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieminen, M., & Kaukonen, E. (2004). Universities and science–industry relationships: Making a virtue out of necessity? In G. Schienstock (Ed.), Embracing the knowledge economy (pp. 196–218). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelkonen, A. (2008). The Finnish competition state and entrepreneurial policies in the Helsinki region. Research reports 254. Department of Sociology, University of Helsinki.

  • Puuska, H.-M. (2010). Effects of scholar’s gender and professional position on publishing productivity in different publication types. Analysis of a Finnish university. Scientometrics, 82, 419–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puuska, H.-M., & Miettinen, M. (2008). Julkaisukäytännöt eri tieteenaloilla [Publication patterns in different disciplines] (Vol. 33). Finland: Publications of the Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shinn, T. (2002). The triple helix and new production of knowledge: Prepackaged thinking on science and technology. Social Studies of Science, 32, 599–614.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. (1997). Academic capitalism. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statistics Finland. (2007). Research and development. http://www.stat.fi/til/tkke/index_en.html.

  • Tuunainen, J. (2005). Hybrid practices? Contributions to the debate on the mutation of science and university. Higher Education, 50, 275–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuunainen, J., & Knuuttila, T. (2008). Determining the norms of science: From epistemological criteria to local struggle on organizational rules? In J. Välimaa & O.-H. Ylijoki (Eds.), Cultural perspectives on higher education (pp. 67–80). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Välimaa, J., & Hoffman, D. (2008). Knowledge society discourse and higher education. Higher Education, 56, 265–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ylijoki, O.-H. (2003). Entangled in academic capitalism? A case-study on changing ideals and practices of university research. Higher Education, 45, 307–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ylijoki, O.-H. (2008). A clash of academic cultures: The case of Dr. X. In J. Välimaa & O.-H. Ylijoki (Eds.), Cultural perspectives on higher education (pp. 75–89). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ziman, J. (1996). Post-academic science: Constructing knowledge with networks and norms. Science Studies, 9, 67–80.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Unit for Science, Technology and Innovation Studies, School of Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Tampere, 33014, Tampere, Finland

    Oili-Helena Ylijoki

  2. Higher Education Group, School of Management, University of Tampere, 33014, Tampere, Finland

    Anu Lyytinen

  3. Development Unit, Tampere University of Applied Sciences, 33520, Tampere, Finland

    Liisa Marttila

Authors
  1. Oili-Helena Ylijoki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anu Lyytinen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Liisa Marttila
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oili-Helena Ylijoki.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ylijoki, OH., Lyytinen, A. & Marttila, L. Different research markets: a disciplinary perspective. High Educ 62, 721–740 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-011-9414-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-011-9414-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation