University research centers and the composition of research collaborations

Research collaboration is perhaps the singular feature that university research centers, broadly defined, share. Yet, there has been little systematic study of the center-level attributes that facilitate (or hinder) research collaboration at the individual level. This paper estimates whether center-level measures of research capacity and structure affect center affiliated university scientists’ and engineers’ collaborative behaviors. We consider the effects of center multidisciplinarity, size, and center ties to private firms and to federally funded centers programs on the time allocated to collaboration with researchers from industry, other universities, government laboratories, and abroad. Our analyses compare center to non-center scientists and also address within-group differences among center scientists. The findings demonstrate some center-level attributes to “map” to the expected collaborative behaviors while other center-level attributes do not. We conclude with a discussion of areas for future research and implications for the design and management of university research centers.     

《美国创新战略》实施对中国的主要影响及应对策略

在《美国创新战略》中,美国发起的清洁能源革命将进一步强化美国的技术领先优势,加剧已非常激烈的新能源竞争;知识产权政策将使中美知识产权纠纷进一步升级,并逐步成为中美贸易平衡问题的"新借口"和美国"敲打"中国的新手段;新的《横向并购指南》扩大了执法机构的自由裁量权,增加了中国企业在美开展并购活动的不确定性;国内外市场准入制度帮助美国企业扩大在中国的市场份额,并限制中国高技术产品的出口。为此,中国应加强对《美国创新战略》实施影响的应对部署,加强对美国创新政策的研究以争取主动权,加强对WTO研发补贴、创新政策等相关规则的研究。     

浅议科技计划项目的立项与管理

本文对科技计划项目管理的重要性进行了阐述,详细分析了我国目前科技计划项目管理中存在的5个方面问题,并针对主要存在的问题提出了改进科技计划项目管理的几点建议:即科技计划项目立项科学和规范可以在很大程度上解决科研计划项目分散、低水平重复及科研成果产业化率低等问题;科学规范的科技计划项目的课题制管理制度是我们必然的选择;编制好科技计划项目科研执行计划和建立科技计划项目的中后期评估机制,是加强项目研发过程管理的有效手段。     

美国大学技术商业化组织模式创新的经验与启示——以“概念证明中心”为例

技术商业化是大学科技成果转化的重要途径。为填补技术商业化过程中的资金缺口,加速大学创新的商业化进程,提高大学科技成果转化能力,美国大学内演化出一种新的组织模式——概念证明中心。该类组织通过制度创新,构建有效的开放创新网络,充分利用区域资源把创新与创业紧密地结合在一起,实现了大学科技与产业的协同发展。这一案例对促进中国大学科技成果转化有重要启示:大学内部不仅要通过组织模式创新与制度设计构建和谐的创新生态系统,而且还要积极融入区域创新生态系统。     

Inside multi-disciplinary science and engineering research centers: The impact of organizational climate on invention disclosures and patents

Much past research on commercialization activities by university scientists and engineers has focused on the role of resources in the extra-organizational commercialization environment, such as the availability of venture capital funding. By contrast, our theoretical and empirical interest was in intra-organizational dynamics impacting the context in which scientists and engineers work. Drawing upon organizational psychology literature on the construct of organizational climate, we posited that researchers working in an intra-organizational climate that supports commercialization and encourages intra-organizational boundary-spanning will be more likely to produce invention disclosures and patents. Our data from 218 respondents at 21 engineering research centers was both multi-method (i.e., qualitative data from interviews, longitudinal archival data, and survey data) and multi-level. Our results showed that an organizational climate characterized by support for commercialization predicted invention disclosures one year later and an organizational climate characterized by boundary-spanning predicted patent awards two years later.     

Opening the ivory tower's door: An analysis of the determinants of the formation of U.S. university spin-off companies

This paper presents findings from an analysis of the determinants of the formation of university spin-off companies within the university's research park. We find that university spin-off companies are a greater proportion of the companies in older parks and in parks that are associated with richer university research environments. We also find that university spin-off companies are a larger proportion of companies in parks that are geographically closer to their university and in parks that have a biotechnology focus.     

美国联邦政府开展的基础研究绩效评估及其启示

近十年来,对政府资助的科学研究进行的绩效评估得到了迅速推广,但在“为何评估”、“评估什么”和“如何评估”等问题上,各国有着不同的认识和做法。本文介绍了美国联邦政府开展的基础研究绩效评估的背景、《政府绩效与结果法案》（GPRA）实施前后美国国家科学基金会（NSF）和国立卫生研究院（NIH）的绩效评估实践,进而对我国的相关问题提出相应的政策建议。     

The relationship between research and innovation in the semiconductor and pharmaceutical industries (1981-1997)

This paper evaluates the impact of basic and applied research on innovation in two industries. Whereas innovation in the pharmaceutical industry is closely tied to both basic and applied research, innovation in the semiconductor industry depends mainly upon applied research. Surprisingly, many firms perform little basic research, but they produce many innovations. Within each industry, firms pursue different R&D strategies: firms that emphasize basic research absorb more basic scientific knowledge than those that emphasize applied research. These findings suggest that future research must carefully consider how industry context and the composition of R&D mediate the relationship between research and innovation.     

Research and technology policies in innovation systems: zero tillage in Brazil

The increasing complexity of technology development and adoption is rapidly changing the effectiveness of scientific and technological policies. Complex technologies are developed and disseminated by networks of agents. The impact of these networks depends on the assets they command, their learning routines, the socio-economic environment in which they operate and their history. In this new environment, scientific and technology policies should: (1) foster interactions among agents (whether public or private), (2) increase the effectiveness of public research, extension and funding institutions, (3) give sufficient freedom to researchers to set their research programs, and (4) monitor the quality of research (rather of research outputs). The evolution of innovation networks is analyzed looking at the development and diffusion of zero tillage (ZT) in Brazil.     

Influencing scientists’ collaboration and productivity patterns through new institutions: University research centers and scientific and technical human capital

This paper analyzes the effect of university research centers on the productivity and collaboration patterns of university faculty. University research centers are an important subject for policy analysis insofar that they have become the predominant policy response to scientific and technical demands that have not been met by extant institutions, including academic departments, private firms, and government laboratories. Specifically, these centers aim to organize researchers from across the disciplines and sectors which, collectively as a research unit, possess the scientific and technical capacity relevant to scientific and technical goals of the sponsoring agencies. In this paper, we measure the productivity and collaboration patterns of university researchers affiliated with a relatively large-scale and “mature” university research center to discern the effects, if any, of the center mechanism on individual scientists and engineers. Based on an analysis of longitudinal bibliometric data, the results from this case study demonstrate affiliation with the center to be effective at enhancing overall productivity as well as at facilitating cross-discipline, cross-sector, and inter-institutional productivity and collaborations.     

Innovation policy making in a federalist system: Lessons from the states for U.S. federal innovation policy making

Most observers argue that, in comparison with other advanced industrial nations, the U.S. has failed to develop a coherent and effective set of policies for industrial innovation. In contrast, in the 1980s, U.S. states forged ahead of the federal government in the development of technology policies. Yet, while some states have found the wherewithal to spend relatively large sums of money on an appropriate mix of well-designed policies; others, facing similar situations, have done little. Research conducted on the state policy-making process found that this variation was caused by a number of procedural factors. In fact, in the course of the research, two models of policy making were discovered. One was associated with well-funded and well-designed policies, the other was not.Significantly, the federal innovation policy-making process appears remarkably similar to the process of policy making followed in states doing the least. This article suggests that it is precisely because the federal policy-making process is so similar to the process in these latter states, that the U.S. has yet to develop a well-funded and well-designed innovation policy effort. This article outlines a reformulated federal policy-making process, closer to that used by the most successful states, which would significantly improve the innovation policy effort.     

依托创新基地建设高校二级学院网站的模式应用研究——以玉林师范学院为例

高校二级学院作为学校推进数字化校园建设的前沿阵地,其网站的建设在校园数字化进程中发挥着重要作用,而数字化校园的统一信息门户平台为二级学院门户网站群建设和管理提供了建设基础。根据玉林师范学院实际情况,利用自身资源和技术优势,通过依托大学生创新基地,以专业社团为主体,建设玉林师范学院二级学院网站,探索为学生提高动手能力、积累项目经验提供范例。     

研究型大学的国际科技合作分析--以浙江大学的中美合作为例

本文以浙江大学与美国的科技合作为例 ,探讨了研究型大学的国际科技合作。文章介绍了浙江大学与美国科技合作的现状和特点 ,详细讨论了合作给双方带来的利惠及所存在的问题 ,最后对中美科技合作的前景作了初步展望 ,并提出了相应的建议。     

Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions

This study updates the debate on the sources of innovation. Using techniques like factor analysis, multidimensional scaling, and pathfinder analysis, we examine the most influential articles that have dealt with the topic. Our analysis provides three main findings. The first more precisely highlights the role of demand as a source of innovation. The second illustrates how competences enable firms to match technology with demand and capitalize on technology and demand as sources of innovation. The third unveils a distinction between external and internal sources of innovations. The sources of innovation can be purely external or internally generated competences that enable the firm to integrate external knowledge within its boundaries. Our work contributes to the classic debate by providing a more granular understanding of how technology and demand interact. In discussing our findings, we link our framework to strategy, innovation and entrepreneurship studies that expressly call for a better understanding of technology and demand factors in value creation and capture.     

Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change: Combining insights from innovation systems and multi-level perspective in a comprehensive ‘failures’ framework

The recent policy debates about orientating research, technology and innovation policy towards societal challenges, rather than economic growth objectives only, call for new lines of argumentation to systematically legitimize policy interventions. While the multi-level perspective on long-term transitions has attracted quite some interest over the past years as a framework for dealing with long-term processes of transformative change, but the innovation systems approach is still the dominant perspective for devising innovation policy. Innovation systems approaches stress the importance of improving innovation capabilities of firms and the institutional settings to support them, but they are less suited for dealing with the strategic challenges of transforming systems of innovation, production and consumption, and thus with long-term challenges such as climate change or resource depletion. It is therefore suggested to consider insights from transition studies more prominently in a policy framework that is based on the innovation systems approach and the associated notion of ‘failures’. We propose a comprehensive framework that allows legitimizing and devising policies for transformative change that draws on a combination of market failures, structural system failures and transformational system failures.     

当代美国EAP领域改革的研究及对我国的启示

主要介绍了美国21世纪EAP领域面临的挑战，对以美国医学会2001年的报告为框架进行的相关改革研究进行探讨，并在此基础上提出了对我国EAP发展的几点启示，以期能够提升EAP在国内的发展速度，提高其发展的质量。     

美日国家创新系统对比研究：演进脉络

美国、日本作为世界公认的经济强国和创新型国家,各自国家创新系统的发展历程却经历了不同的路径,形成的创新系统既有相同之处又存在相异点。本文在分析美国、日本各自国家创新系统的演进脉络特点的基础上,对两国的创新系统进行了对比分析。     

Accounting for change in national systems of innovation: A friendly critique based on the U.S. case

This paper advances a friendly critique of the national systems of innovation approach and offers some suggestions for its future development. I argue that the approach has difficulty accounting for bounded change in national systems. I review three recent changes in the U.S. innovation system - the Internet boom and bust of the late 1990s and early 2000s, the response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the acceleration of productivity growth since the mid-1990s - in order to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the framework in this respect. Future research might be enriched, at least in the case of large national innovation systems, by absorbing concepts developed in other strands of institutionalist literature, such as “intercurrence” and “embeddedness”.