The determinants of the potential effectiveness of government-supported industrial research institutes

This paper analyses the main factors which determine the effectiveness of government-supported industrial research institutes (GSIRIs). GSIRIs are viewed as a sub-system of a larger, more complex system that is composed of the industrial environment, the universities, and the government. The interactions between GSIRIs and each of the components of their environment are examined.The potential effectiveness of a GSIRI is largely affected by the relationship, or ‘distance’, between industry's level of sophistication in performing its R&D activities and the nature of the university's applied research activities. The government influences this distance by affecting the supply of, and demand for, industrial R&D. Government usually intervenes by establishing specialized GSIRIs when the gap between industry's needs and the university's supply of R&D services is great. The role of a GSIRI may decline over time if industry becomes more sophisticated and/or the university becomes more applied.     

Success breeds success: The linkage between relationship intensity and tangible outcomes in industry–university collaborative ventures

While advancing new technologies has not traditionally been a major focus of industry–university collaboration, this article stresses that industry–university alliances can be instrumental in facilitating the industrial firm's advancement of both knowledge and new technologies. To investigate this phenomenon, this study focuses on industry–university relationships within the context of university research centers. The results from this multi-method, cross-sectional study indicate that a positive, two-way linkage exists between the intensity of industry–university relationships and the level of tangible outcomes generated. Results also show that while organization size and length of relationship do not significantly affect these dynamics, the industrial firm's geographic proximity to the university research center does. The implications of these findings for both industrial firms and universities are discussed.     

Innovation on demand—Can public procurement drive market success of innovations?

Public procurement has been at the centre of recent discussions on innovation policy. We embed it into the broader framework of public policies to stimulate innovation: regulations, R&D subsidies and basic research at universities. We synthesize the characteristics of all four instruments conceptionally and quantitatively compare their effects on innovation success for 1100 firms in Germany. We find that public procurement and knowledge spillovers from universities propel innovation success equally. The benefits of university knowledge apply uniformly to all firms. However, public procurement is especially effective for smaller firms in regions under economic stress and in distributive or technological services.     

韩锋,张永庆

随着全球创新网络及知识经济迅速发展,研发产业作为一种战略性新型产业,对于产业结构升级转型具有重要作用.研发产业集聚及产业空间布局演进过程具有其特殊性的内在机理和外在作用机制,对于区域经济发展及地理空间的演变发挥着重要作用,其演化路径及作用机理分析对于深化研发产业性质特征、演化动力、空间集散形态及产业融合具有重要意义,其空间集聚分析对于丰富空间经济学及新经济地理学内涵与外延的研究具有一定的推动意义和现实参鉴价值.从文献回顾、研发产业的空间形态及表现、研发产业集聚的动力因素、研发产业集聚对于区域空间重构的演化路径及作用机理分析等方面阐述研发集聚重构区域空间内容,结合欧美日等发达国家的研发产业集聚案例及实证分析系统说明研发集聚的技术创新能力及空间辐射影响力.最后通过研发产业集聚对于区域空间重构的演化路径和研发产业集聚导致区域地理实体空间结构的变化及区域指向的变更、研发产业集散的时空过程导致产业资源的整合和空间重组、研发产业集聚加速区域创新能力提升及研发联盟的空间响应机制、研发产业集聚导致的集聚经济和外部经济加速空间溢出效应形成等4个方面,系统分析研发产业集聚对于区域空间重构的作用机理.     

Cooperative R&D and firm performance

We analyse the impact of R&D cooperation on firm performance differentiating between four types of R&D partners (competitors, suppliers, customers, and universities and research institutes), and considering two performance measures: labour productivity and productivity in innovative (new to the market) sales. Using data on a large sample of Dutch innovating firms in two waves of the Community Innovation Survey (1996, 1998), we examine the impact of R&D cooperation in 1996 on subsequent productivity growth in 1996–1998. The results confirm a major heterogeneity in the rationales and goals of R&D cooperation. Competitor and supplier cooperation focus on incremental innovations, improving the productivity performance of firms. University cooperation and again competitor cooperation are instrumental in creating innovations generating sales of products that are novel to the market, improving the growth performance of firms. Furthermore, customers and universities are important sources of knowledge for firms pursuing radical innovations, which facilitate growth in innovative sales in the absence of formal R&D cooperation.     

大学与高科技园区的共生结构及其在泉州的发展途径

高校拥有人才与科研的优势,可以为高科技园区的自主创新提供强大的技术支持。高科技园区的高技术需求和项目研发经费可以为大学的人才培养与科研成果转化提供帮助。两者之间优势互补,通过有效的合作,定能构建的共生结构,使大学的社会功能得以延伸和实现,发挥大学的智力辐射作用和促进知识产权参与创业。一直以来,泉州都是以劳动密集型的民营企业为主,随着企业转型压力的提高,民营企业在向高科技高附加值企业转化的过程中,必将面临人才与高技术的短缺。泉州高科技园区的建设与发展,应该成为新兴的高科技企业与大学合作的平台．成为人才与科技交流合作的平台,发挥传统的科技产业优势,引入新的亮点,推动地方经济的发展。     

公共研发投资对企业研发投入杠杆作用的研究

在我国,由政府支持的公共研发部门(主要包括高等院校和科研院所)和企业构成了社会研发系统。在此系统内,企业的研发投资决策变化,会影响公共研发投资杠杆作用的效果。本文运用FGLS方法,利用2009-2013年规模以上工业企业省际面板数据,从社会研发系统的视角,探讨了当系统内企业受政府RD资助强度变化时,公共研发投资对企业研发投入杠杆作用的变化。研究发现公共研发投资的杠杆作用存在区域差距,在政府对企业RD资助强度大的地区,政府支持高等院校研发会促进本地区企业研发投入,且促进效应会因其对企业RD资助强度大而加剧,但支持科研院所研发会挤出本地区企业研发投入;而在资助强度小的地区,影响则完全相反。因此各级政府在进行公共研发投资时应注意科技投入的精准化,合理搭配政策工具。     

Universities and industrially relevant science: Towards measurement models and indicators of entrepreneurial orientation

Which university departments engaged in industrially relevant science are likely candidates to become entrepreneurial? At present, there are neither measurement models nor leading indicators that can answer such questions at an international comparative level. This paper introduces concepts, theory, and a measurement model for identifying (the early stages of) a university's enterpreneurial orientation within a quantitative analytical framework. This approach focuses specifically on university–industry interactions, in which the connectivity between academic science and industrial research is captured and measured empirically in terms of (1) public–private co-authored research articles, and (2) references (‘citations’) within corporate research articles to university research articles.The paper examines a range of country-level and institutional determinants of industrially relevant science, across 18 research areas of significant industrial interest, and at two different levels of analysis: research systems of OECD countries, and large sets of research universities within those countries. The results of these large-scale analyses, along with those of a case study dealing with European universities active in the field of immunology research, suggest that many structural factors determine university–industry interactions and (the potential for) entrepreneurial orientation. The two connectivity indicators appear to be of minor significance compared to a university's country of location and the magnitude of its research activities in industrially relevant fields of science.     

R & D in Israeli industry

This paper deals with several aspects of R & D activity in Israel's manufacturing industries on three levels — the economy, industrial branch and the firm. Relative to other industrial countries, Israel is characterized by a high share of R & D expenditure in GNP but a low level of industrial R & D. If we take registered patents as an indicator of R & D output no significant correlation is found between this measure and expenditure on R & D; this may point to a low level of success or to the nature of R & D being directed more to small improvements of existing products and processes than to new inventions. An inter-industry analysis shows that R & D expenditure is positively correlated with average firm size and capital per employee and negatively correlated with concentration ratio. A positive correlation was also found with respect to increase in sales and export per employee but not with the rate of growth of export. Although most R & D is performed by large companies there is no significant correlation between R & D expenditure and firm's size among firms engaged in R & D, nor between R & D expenditure and firm's profitability. Concerning the relationship between domestic R & D and imports of technology a tentative conclusion is that Israel does not derive sufficient benefit from the international stock of knowledge.     

“拜-杜”法案、权利配置创新与大学职务成果转化——以美国常青藤大学为样本的发现

“拜-杜”法案是美国首创、全球广泛扩散的旨在推进大学职务成果转化的制度创新。我国在2002年引进该制度创新,但却未像美国那样取得全球瞩目的制度绩效。本文以美国常青藤大学为样本,研究大学的职务成果权利配置创新,发现“法人优先、发明人劣后”的处置权配置,“大学、技术许可办公室、基层学术单位、教师”四方分配兼容的收益权配置,既实现了该法案的落地、取得巨大的制度创新绩效,又推动大学完成了法人主导、有组织有目标开展创新活动的现代化转型。根据这些研究发现,论文提出了我国大学在法人层面推进职务成果权利配置创新、加快现代化转型的政策启示。     

我国产业共性技术研发与产业化的政府资助模式与管理研究

产业共性技术研发和成果产业化的政府资助研究是科技管理的重要研究领域之一。基于对产业共性技术研发及产业化的政府资助理论述评,结合企业、高校、科研院所和其他机构的问卷调研与访谈,从产业共性技术研发和产业化的政府资助模式以及资助项目管理两个方面分别对我国产业共性技术研发及产业化进行调查研究,重点调研分析了在产业生命周期的不同阶段对政府资助政策的需求和政府资助项目管理中存在的主要问题,并提出针对性的政策建议。     

Effects of foreign acquisitions on R&D activity: Evidence from firm-level data for France

This paper investigates the causal effect of foreign acquisitions on the research and development (R&D) activities of domestic target firms over the period 1994–2004. Using accounting data on French innovative manufacturing firms, we implement appropriate difference-in-difference estimation techniques associated with a matching propensity score procedure. We find that the acquisitions of French firms by foreign companies boost R&D spending. There is a simultaneous rise in the external and in-house R&D expenditures of French acquired firms. R&D is more contracted out to local research providers, in particular to local public laboratories and universities. The increase in internal R&D spending benefits to development, but also basic and applied research. Finally, the growth of the R&D budget is not only financed by internal resources but also receives financing from external partners, especially parent companies. Thus, our results call into question the idea that foreign takeovers hamper the R&D development of target firms and are detrimental to the national innovation system of the host country. First, acquisitions appear to bring efficiency gains enough to counterbalance the various costs of integration and market power effects, pushing firms to invest more in R&D. Acquisitions do not seem to incite managers to take shorter term and more financial driven decisions at the expense of R&D. Second, when motivated by technology sourcing and overseas R&D development, acquisitions might be used to access the specific know-how of target firms and to tap into the knowledge of the national innovation system. Then, purchaser firms could be more likely to develop the innovative capability of target firms and to strengthen their linkages with local partners than to reduce them and relocate R&D abroad.     

Liberalisation and R&D in network industries: The case of the electricity industry

Electricity sector liberalisation has coincided with a significant decline in R&D spending. This paper reviews the industrial organisation literature on R&D and innovation to explore the likely causes of the decline in R&D spending in the electricity sector. Meanwhile, R&D productivity and innovative outputs in utilities and equipment suppliers appear to have improved. However, a lasting decline in R&D expenditure can have a negative long-term effect on technological progress and innovation in the sector. We conclude that the decline in R&D could have been predicted from the literature. We also discuss the need to reorient the post-liberalisation technology policy.     

不同执行部门R&D投入对全要素生产率的影响——基于中美比较的视角

本文基于1998-2011年中国30个省市及1987-2011年美国50个州的地区面板数据,采用GMM模型对比分析了两国不同执行部门的RD投入对全要素生产率影响效果的差异。研究结果表明,在中国各执行部门RD效果比较中,工业企业最强,余下依次为科研机构和高等学校;而美国高等学校RD投入对其全要素生产率的影响弹性系数最大,其次为企业,最末为联邦政府的科研机构。相对于美国来讲,中国对高等学校RD重视程度明显不足。因此,中国应坚持以企业为主导,同时保证资金和政策向高校合理倾斜,实现产学研结合的研发模式,才能为未来中国经济的可持续发展奠定坚实基础。     

高校技术交易管理制度对科研人员研发行为影响研究

选取技术交易中的技术开发和技术许可两个维度,分析高校技术交易管理制度对科研人员研发行为的影响。研究发现高校技术交易管理制度会影响高校科研人员的技术交易选择,短期来看,科研人员倾向于选择技术开发研发项目,而较少选择技术许可项目;长期来看,会激励科研人员"单兵作战"的技术开发研发行为的增多,降低高校进行"团体作战"的技术转让的数量,不利于高校开展技术许可活动。     

The ex ante assessment of knowledge spillovers: Government R&D policy, economic incentives and private firm behavior

This paper investigates the role of government R&D subsidy programs in stimulating knowledge spillovers. R&D subsidies are an effective public policy instrument when knowledge spillovers exist yet ex ante it is difficult to identify projects that have the greatest potential to increase innovation and economic growth. This paper derives a set of project and firm attributes that the literature finds generate knowledge spillovers and uses data on project proposals to estimate the degree to which a government R&D program conforms. We find that projects that were awarded R&D subsidies were more likely to have attributes such as participation in new research joint ventures and connections to universities and other firms. Following the post-award activities of firm, we find that receipt of a government R&D subsidy increased the funding from other sources when compared to firms that were not awarded funding.     

我国高校创新效率评价研究：八大区域视角

高校创新是社会进步的引擎，是新常态下转变经济发展模式、克服增长乏力的关键。因此，如何在创新资源有限的硬约束下进一步提升高校创新效率，是国家创新体系构建过程中不可回避的问题。文章对“十二五”期间我国31个省级行政单位面板数据进行实证研究，发现我国高校创新效率整体呈非DEA有效，纯技术效率较低是制约高校创新综合效率的直接原因。同时，高校创新效率及分解指标的核密度估计结果表明：高校创新技术效率“双峰”态势显著、规模效率“单峰”态势显著，而纯技术效率分布曲线形态较多变，表明技术效率双极聚集、规模效率省域差异显著、纯技术效率波动较大。最后，文章基于八大综合经济区视角系统剖析影响高校创新效率的内外部因素后得出以下结论：经济环境、社会文化环境、制度环境是影响高校创新效率的主要外因，内部治理结构、绩效考核方式、成果转化机制等是影响高校创新效率的主要内因。最后，文章据此提出了改善和优化高校创新效率的对策建议。     

产学研合作共建研发（R＆D）实体的博弈分析

共建研发实体是产学研合作的重要方式.合理的R＆D投入不仅与企业发展息息相关,而且也是大学和科研机构取得研发成果的重要保障.运用博弈论分析了产学研合作过程中共建研发实体的模式,论证了产方投向学研方的研发投入补贴对学研方总体研发费用的影响,建立了相应的博弈模型.     

Government policies towards industrial innovation: a review

Existing economic theories show that continuing innovation, diffusion, and technical and managerial improvement are necessary for economic growth and international competitiveness in the industrially advanced countries. But knowledge of why, where and how governments should intervene in the processes of industrial innovations stems more from trial and error than from systematic empirical information of the nature and extent of the hindrances to economically and socially desirable innovations, and of the effectiveness of alternative government policies to remove them. Nonetheless, past empirical studies do offer some clues.Differences amongst industrial sectors. The sources of new technology vary widely amongst inustrial sectors: in the costs of innovation, in the relative importance of outside suppliers of equipment and materials, of large and small firms, and of full-time R & D departments as compared to part-time innovative activities (sect. 7, 8). Similarly, the conditions for successful innovation vary amongst sectors (sect.6). Thus, government policies designed to influence innovation are likely to act with different intensities in different industries.The management of innovation. Nonetheless, there are some features common to innovation in different industries. Considerable costs beyond R & D are often necessary before the innovations reach commercial use (sect.4). And the following managerial characteristics are in general associated with successful innovation: a deliberate policy of seeking innovations; close and careful attention to customer requirements; good personal communications both within the firm and with outside sources of relevant knowledge; a style of management that is ‘organic’ and ‘participatory’ rather than ‘hierarchical’ and ‘authoritarian’; strong project leadership; and a strong engineering capability (sect. 6).R & D managers are still unable to predict the outcome of R & D projects to a useful degree of accuracy and, in the literature on methods of project selection, very little attention is paid to market uncertainties. Furthermore, a greater use of conventional investment appraisal criteria in deciding on R & D projects may re-inforce the already observed tendency in industry towards short-term, low-risk projects, to the neglect of longer-term, high-risk projects (sect. 5).Governments should therefore examine whether the benefits of policies towards education and management advisory services for innovation might outweigh their costs. They may also have a significant role to play in financing longer-term research that is basic to the development of industrial technology (subsect. 12.5).The nature of market and production demands. The direction of industrial innovation is often very sensitive to market and production demands (sect. 3). This fact, together with the high degree of market uncertainty facing innovating firms (sect. 5), suggest that governments can potentially influence both the pace and the direction of industrial innovation through their influence on the scale of industrial, consumer and public service demands. However, this potential influence will become real only if users of innovations are able to specify the innovations that they need, or to evaluate those that they get. This is generally the case for industrial demand, but not in consumer and public service markets, where fashion, insensitivity to users' needs and lack of technical competence often prevail. Government-funded technological institutes and laboratories are ideally placed to provide such technical competence (sub-sect. 12.3).Economic incentives and rewards for innovation. A whole range of economic factors are said to influence the resources, the incentives and the rewards for innovation: for example, the degree of monopoly or the degree of competition, the patent system, the level of profits, the level of taxation, and the level of demand. The empirical evidence on the effects of most of these factors on industrial innovation is either inconclusive or non-existent. However, in the USA a close relationship has been observed between growth of industry sales and growth of industry-financed R & D activities (sect. 10). The rate of growth of demand is also one of the key factors influencing the rate of diffusion of innovations amongst their potential population of users (sects. 11, 12.2).The government-financed scientific and technological infrastructure. Scientific and technological knowledge from outside of innovating firms is often crucial to the completion of successful innovations, and three UK studies show that a significant proportion of this outside knowledge comes from government-financed technological institutes and laboratories, and from the universities (sect. 3). If the same is true in other countries, it should be an essential feature of any government policy towards industrial innovation to know how effectively government-funded laboratories and universities provide supportive knowledge to industry, and how government laboratories should be organised and financed (subsect. 12.4).Direct government-financing of innovative activities in industry. Governments specifically finance R & D activities in industrial firms, although these expenditures are less than those for general industrial development (sect. 13). These R & D activities in industry are relatively more important in France and UK, than in F.R. Germany and the Netherlands.In the four countries, more than 70% of all civilian government R & D activities related to industry are spent on aircraft, space, nuclear energy and electronics (subsect. 14.4). In all these high technologies, governments attempted in the 1960's to implement ‘policies for innovation’, involving government procurement, industrial mergers and attempts at European co-operation, in addition to the financing of R & D (subsect. 14.5). Government expenditures on civilian R & D related to other industrial sectors are very much smaller in all four countries (subsect 14.4).Where should governments intervene? A, number of attempts have been made to develop a formal framework of criteria to assist governments in deciding where they should intervene in industrial innovation. They all run into the following difficulties: dealing with multiple policy objectives; assessing national costs and benefits; comparing with alternative policies, choosing appropriate policy instruments (sect. 17).How should governments intervene? Very little information is available on the effectiveness of various policy instruments that have been used by governments in order to promote innovation in industry. Although it is often possible to measure the inputs into such policies, the measurement of their outputs (or results) is more difficult. Nonetheless, detailed studies would enable some such measurements to be made, and internationally comparable studies would increase the range of experiences and the number of cases that could be examined (sect. 18).Why should governments intervene? A full appreciation of the nature and scale of hindrances to industrial innovation, on which governments should act to remove, requires direct information on what innovations are (or are not) being introduced by industry, and why they are (or are not) being inyroduced. This information can best be obtained from analyses of the behaviour of industrial firms. They would differ from most existing innovation studies that concentrate on asking how firms must behave in order to make successful innovation, by asking what innovations are attempted, and why firms are stimulated to attempt them (sect. 19).     

研究型大学研发与首都区域专利产出的动态计量经济分析

运用动态计量经济学的分布滞后、单位根检验、协整分析和G ranger因果检验模型,对研究型大学研发投入与首都区域专利产出进行了动态计量经济实证分析,结果显示:首都地区研发投入在影响专利产出过程中存在2期的滞后效应;研究型大学研发经费投入每增加1%,首都区域研发产出当年将增长0.3%,大学研发投入在3年内共使得专利产出增长了0.6%;大学研发投入与专利产出之间存在长期稳定的动态均衡关系,但是其对专利产出没有表现出预期的促进作用;专利产出是大学研发投入G ranger意义上的原因,但研发投入没能有效地促进首都区域专利产出,二者之间还没有形成一种协调联动的发展机制。