Growth through Research and Development - what does ... - Vinnova

More documents

Recommendations

Info

however, a question of a comparison between a number of studies that haveused different methods and data.Guellec and van Pottelsberghe (2004) show in their aggregated analysis thatR&D performed at Government universities and research institutes has aconsiderable positive effect on the growth of productivity (elasticity is 0.17per cent), but that R&D at universities has a stronger effect than R&D atGovernment research institutes. The authors believe that this points to thenecessity of the Government encouraging research institutes to collaboratewith the private sector. R&D in the public sector has a lower impact onproductivity if it is defence related. A final conclusion drawn by the authorsis that R&D at Government universities has a greater effect on productivitythe lower the percentage that is funded privately. The authors explain this bysaying that in the event of close cooperation with companies the universitiesfocus more on applied research than on basic research. It is presumed thatbasic research has greater long-term effect on growth.Audretsch and Lehmann (2005) analyse spillovers from German universitiesand expected technical universities to have a greater spillover effect thangeneral universities on a range of technologically-intensive companies.However, they found no difference in the impact of the different types ofuniversity.On the basis of survey interviews, Mansfield (1991) investigates howimportant university research is for innovations at 75 American companies.His findings are that the development of approximately 10 per cent of newindustrial products and processes would not have been possible withoutconsiderable delays if the relevant basic research had not been conducted inthe academic sector. His estimate is that the return on academic R&D is 28per cent. In a follow-up study in 1998, Mansfield shows that thesignificance of academic research is even greater - 15 per cent of the newproducts and 11 per cent of the new processes would not have beendeveloped without academic basic research. These innovations accountedfor 5 per cent of the companies' sales. Beise and Stahl (1999) haveconducted a similar study but with a much greater sample of companies – 2300 in all. They find that approximately 5 per cent of all sales for newproducts could not have taken place without academic R&D. The also findthat academic R&D has a greater impact on new products than on newprocesses. One weakness of these studies is, however, that they are based onestimates made by the managers at the companies.A new large database on EPO patents has been compiled in recent years(Giuri et al. 2007). An examination of this database reveals that universityresearchers are recorded as the inventors for almost 5 per cent of the patents.In the case of another approximately 12 per cent of the EPO patents, which18
are owned by industry, knowledge produced at the universities (probably inthe course of basic research) was decisive for the granting of the patents.Adams (1990) finds that the creation of an increased knowledge base at theuniversities (in the form of published research articles) has a positive impacton the growth of productivity in the manufacturing industry in the USA, butthat the time lags here may be several decades long (15 to 30 years). Anentirely different method is used by Narinin et al. (1997). They test to whatextent academic articles are cited in 400 000 USA patents and find thatmore than 40 per cent of all the references that are not to other patents arereferences to academic journals. They also find that references to academicjournals have increased considerably over time. A weakness of this methodis, however, that it is often the administrators at the patent office, rather thanthe inventors, who manage the references. The increase in academicreferences may be due to a new policy from the patent office to make moresuch references, or to the fact that academic research results have becomemore available to the administrators.Marsili (1999) compares the proportion of American research data that ismade up of basic research in different industrial sectors with to what degreethese sectors employ scientists. He finds that sectors that conduct a lot ofbasic research also have a high percentage of scientists among thepersonnel. He also investigates to what extent the knowledge is codified indifferent sectors by examining how often patents quote academic journals.The results show that different sectors utilise academic basic research indifferent ways. In some sectors (e.g. the pharmaceutical, chemical andpetroleum industries) the link is direct, with many academic references anda great deal of interest in academic R&D. In other sectors (such as theautomobile, telecommunications and computer industries) benefit is drawnfrom basic research more indirectly by employing researchers who solvetechnological problems.Several studies conclude that it is more probable that academic R&D willhave an impact on companies that are located in the proximity ofuniversities. Katz (1994) shows that collaboration between universities andcompanies within a country is more likely if they are located close to eachother, which indicates that research collaboration requires cooperation in thesame place. Hicks and Olivastro (1998) show that 27 per cent of thereferences in USA patents are to academic articles produced in the samefederal state as that where the patents were applied for. At the national leveltoo there is empirical evidence that patents refer to academic articles fromthe same country to a disproportionately high degree (Narin et al., 1997). Atheoretical argument that explains this proximity and interaction betweenresearchers and companies is that a part of the knowledge is tacit, i.e. theknowledge cannot be codified and is therefore tied to the researchers19
Page 1 and 2: V I N N O V A R E P O R TV R 2 0 0
Page 3: Growth through Researchand Developm
Page 7: Contents1 Introduction ............
Page 10 and 11: The Government can perform R&D itse
Page 12 and 13: that the company should appoint a c
Page 14 and 15: the foremost examples of this syste
Page 16 and 17: affected to a greater extent by the
Page 18 and 19: companies themselves relates to pro
Page 22 and 23: (Rosenberg, 1990; Pavitt, 1991). Di
Page 24 and 25: previously. In such cases, the Gove
Page 26 and 27: The direct public funding of R&D in
Page 28 and 29: 5 The transfer of knowledge fromuni
Page 30 and 31: that have both fixed and variable p
Page 32 and 33: measures should be taken to improve
Page 34 and 35: elieves that patenting and license
Page 36 and 37: A better alternative would then be
Page 38 and 39: type. The authors have examined the
Page 40 and 41: Scott and Link (2006) have reviewed
Page 42 and 43: thus comes from above. These suppor
Page 44 and 45: 6 Government funding of theuniversi
Page 46 and 47: • It can be expected that the uni
Page 48 and 49: of the funding (increased polarisat
Page 50 and 51: esearch to be effective. In additio
Page 52 and 53: funds R&D projects. On the other ha
Page 54 and 55: profit sharing between the research
Page 56 and 57: Traditionally, the tasks of the uni
Page 58 and 59: 8 ReferencesAdams, J., 1990, ‘Fun
Page 60 and 61: Dresch, S.P., 1995, ‘The Economic
Page 62 and 63: Henrekson, M. and N. Rosenberg, 200
Page 64 and 65: Link, A.N. and J.T. Scott, 2003,
Page 66 and 67: Poole, E. and J.T. Bernard, 1992,
Page 68 and 69: Zellner, C., 2003, ‘The Economics
Page 70 and 71:
tillväxtområde?11 DYNAMO 2 i halv
Page 72:
VINNOVA´s mission is to promote su
show all

Growth through Research and Development - what does ... - Vinnova

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?