Carencias y necesidades del Sistema Español de Ciencia ... - ICONO

27. Etzkowitz, H., “The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industrylinkages”, Research Policy 27, 823-833 (1998).28. European Commission, “Innovation in a Knowledge-driven Economy”, COM (2000).29. European Commission, “Towards a European Research Area”, COM(2000) 6.30. European Commission, “First report on progress toward the European Research Area”, SEC (2001).31. European Commission, “The regional dimension of the European Research Area”, COM (2001).32. European Commission. Working documents “Development of an open coordination method for thecomparative evaluation (benchmarking) of national research policies-objectives, methodology andindicators” SEC 1842 .2000. (b) Progress report on benchmarking of internal research policies, SEC(2001) 1002.33. European Commission (2001) Innovative small and medium-sized enterprises and the creation ofemployment, Innovation Papers Nº23.34. European Commission, “More research for Europe: towards 3% of GDP”, COM (2002).35. European Commission (2003) Industrial relations as a key to strengthening innovation in Europe,Innovation Papers Nº 36.36. European Commission “The role of universities in the Europe of knowledge”, COM (2003).37. European Commission, “Guidelines for the management of intellectual property in publicly fundedresearch organisations”, G. Capart et al., Research Directorate General, (2003).38. European Commission (2003): “Trend report: Industry-Science relationships”. European Trend Chart onInnovation. www.cordis.lu.39. European Comission (2003): “Thematic Report: Cluster Policies”. European Trend Chart on Innovation.www.cordis.lu.40. European Commission (2003): “Thematic report: Industry-science relations. October 2002”. Europeantrend chart on innovation. www.cordis.lu.41. European Commission, Benchmarking of Business Incubators, Final Report (2002) Centre for Strategy andevaluation services.42. European Commission, “Third European Report on Science & Technology Indicators 2003”, (2004).43. Fernández de Lucio, I., y Conesa, F., (1996): “Estructuras de Interfaz en el Sistema Español de Innovación.Su papel en la difusión de tecnología” Vol. 1 y 2, CTT, Universitat Politécnica de València.44. Fernández de Lucio, I., Castro Martínez, E., Conesa, F., Gutiérrez, A. (2000): “Las relaciones universidadempresa:entre la transferencia de tecnología y el aprendizaje”. Espacios, 21 (2), pp.127-147.45. “Gestion de la Propriété Intellectuelle”. Plan d’Action 2002. Gouvernement du Québec.46. Geuna A. y Nesta, L. “University Patenting and its Effects on Academic Research”, SEWPS, Science andTechnology Policy Research (SPRU), 2003 [http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/].47. Gil J. A. (coord), Empresas e Innovación en la Unión Europea, Minerva Ediciones, Madrid, (2002).48. Goldman A. Ch., Williams, T. “Paying for University Research Facilities and Administration”, Washigton,DC: RAND, (2000).49. HEFCE, Higher Education Business Interaction Survey 2000-01, (2003).50. Joint Costing and Pricing Steering Group, Transparency review, [www.jcpsg.ac.uk].51. Lambert Review of Business-University Collaboration, HM Treasury, UK Government, 2003.52. Landabaso, M, (2001): “Clusters and opportunities for less favoured regions, low/middle incomepopulations and small enterprises”.53. Lewis, D.A. (2001) “Does Technology Incubation Work? A Critical review, Reviews of EconomicDevelopment, 11, 1-48.54. Livingstone, A. (1997) “Report on UBC spin-off company formation and growth”, The University ofBritish Columbia, University-Industry Liaison Office, accessible en [www.ubc.ca].55. Lorenz, E. (10999): “Organisational innovation, governance structure and innovative capacity in Britishand French industry”. DRUID w.p. nº 99-1.80