We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byJosue Harwood
Modified over 2 years ago
© Marc Isabelle Knowledge, Finance and Innovation International Symposium, Dunkerque, France September 2006 Marc ISABELLE IMRI (Université Paris-Dauphine) & CEA Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation
© Marc Isabelle Outline of the presentation Introduction –K & T transfer: a third new mission for public research? Overview –A new taxonomy than expands on Pasteurs quadrant –Changes in profiles are towards more applied research Implications for public policy and perspectives Main references –The linear model and its parricide children –Strong substitution features show at the margin –Tracking sources of financial support is the main drive for change Results –Research activities are distributed rather than dichotomous Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation –The increased relevance of public research: some pitfalls –Why using the expanded taxonomy at CEA? –The survey / the sample
© Marc Isabelle K & T transfer: a third new mission for public research? Reforms since 1980s, first experienced in US (Bayh-Dole act) –more collaboration between PROs and firms –growth in patent filing by PROs –increase in commercialisation of Knowledge & Technologies by PROs Reforms have double purpose = increased pressure for relevance of public research (Pavitt, 2001) –speed the innovation rate in the economy –increase leveraging of resources from their activities by PROs Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation Traditional missions = research, higher education connected to surge of biotechs and ICT NB– applies to universities – but for government research centres, traditional missions have long been research and K & T transfer does this increased pressure for relevance apply to them?
© Marc Isabelle Linear model = innovation stems from scientific knowledge development born 1945, 1980 In practice, especially since 1980s –multiple feedback loops (Kline & Rosenberg, 1986) –highly interactive process (triple helix: Leydesdorff & Etzkowitz, 1996) –multidisciplinary (Gibbons et al., 1994) –use-inspired basic research (Stokes, 1997) Applied research & Develop ment New products & processe s Basic research in principle, zero pressure for relevance (not in practice) research activities are not exogenous (irrelevant?) anymore The linear model and its parricide children Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation
© Marc Isabelle The increased relevance of public research: some pitfalls (1) Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation Skewing problem (Florida & Cohen, 1999) = shift to more short-term and applied research in response to the requirements of industrial partners Market misallocation of research resources = can not trigger research activities that arent expected to be useful but that can end up extremely useful empirical evidence =Yes (Rahm; Morgan; Henderson & al., 1998; Blumenthal & al., 1986; Goddard & Isabelle, 2006) No (Hicks & Hamilton, 1999; Ranga & al., 2003; Van Looy & al., 2004) Tragedy of anti-commons (Heller & Eisenberg, 1998) = IP over basic inventions fragments the S&T knowledge base – coordination costs to gather complementary inventions for innovation –slows down innovation as well as further research empirical evidence in upstream research = Yes (Murray & Stern, 2006) No (Walsh, Cho & Cohen, 2005)
© Marc Isabelle The increased relevance of public research: some pitfalls (2) Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation i.Secrecy problem (Florida & Cohen, 1999) = delays and restrictions over disclosure of results imposed by industrial partners empirically documented (Cohen & al., 1994; Blumenthal & al., 1997; Isabelle & Goddard, 2006) – more empirical studies required to provide clear-cut answers – do these pitfalls come together of separately? – what exactly are the drives for change? Restrictions on formal (i.) or informal (ii.) scientific communication –slow down further research –duplicate efforts i.Withholding of results, restrictions on informal exchange empirical evidence = Yes (Walsh & Hong, 2003; Goddard & Isabelle, 2006) No (Blumenthal & al., 1997)
© Marc Isabelle Stokes 2D taxonomy of research activities NoYes Pure basic research (Bohr) Use-inspired basic research (Pasteur) No Pure applied research (Edison) Considerations of use? Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation A new taxonomy than expands on Pasteurs quadrant Quest for fundamental understanding? The expanded taxonomy Technical achievements Curiosity-driven Use-inspired Open access Proprietary – more complete (proprietary vs. open-access) – more precise (e.g. room for activities that are use-inspired and curiosity-driven) – operational (?) Fundamental knowledge
© Marc Isabelle Why using the expanded taxonomy at CEA? A government research centre, not a university Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation 2 nd largest public research organisation in France CEA Scientific research S&T fields Energy Defence Information & Health Technological research Activities distributed over large bandwidth of the Science – Technology spectrum while focused on three S&T fields – ranks 4 th in France in terms of publications quality (citations) – 3 rd French applicant of European patents (2000) – specific technological missions, a scientific pool – no statutory difference between scientists and engineers – two divisions dedicated to SR, three TR – an established capacity to design, build and operate large scientific instruments every dimension of expanded taxonomy anticipated to apply more than marginally
© Marc Isabelle First wave to test expanded taxonomy (January 2006) Target = network of outstanding researchers within CEA (Research Directors) Likert-scale based questionnairequestionnaire Distributed over CEAs divisions, over S&T fields The sample 37 answers (very good response rate, over 80%) Division of Matter Sciences over-represented Division of Nuclear Energy under-represented bias towards basic research vs. applied research as compared to whole CEA Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation The survey
© Marc Isabelle Yes, essentially Use-inspired Yes, to a lower extent No Curiosity-driven Yes, essentially Yes, to a lower extent No 5%62%11% 16%0% Yes, essentially Technical Yes, to a lower extent achievements No Fundamental knowledge Yes, essentially Yes, to a lower extent No 3%51%3% 24%3% 8%0% Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation Research activities are distributed rather than dichotomous Yes, essentially Proprietary Yes, to a lower extent No Open-access Yes, essentially Yes, to a lower extent No 3%27%5% 38%11%0% 11%0% Stokes taxonomy cannot grasp this mixed picture
© Marc Isabelle Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation Changes in profiles are towards more applied research …but not that clearly towards less basic research 1=Much more2 = More3 = Unchanged4 = Less5 = Much less
© Marc Isabelle Strong substitution features show at the margin When one type of research is said to be increasing, the other is systematically said to be decreasing of left unchanged –use-inspired vs. curiosity-driven Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation –technical achievements vs. fundamental knowledge generation –proprietary vs. open-access
© Marc Isabelle % of respondents answer that sources of financial support are essential drive for change (competitive resources include government grants, European projects, contracts with firms) For these researchers, changes are very homogenously biased towards more applied research and less fundamental research Tracking sources of financial support is the main drive for change More & Much more Less & Much less Technical achievements Use-inspiredProprietary Fundamental knowledge Curiosity- driven Open-access 78% (46%) 94% (68%) 72% (51%) 28% (16%) 50% (30%) 33% (16%) % subset (% whole sample) All types of research are impacted (no differences between subset profile and whole sample profile) Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation
© Marc Isabelle Implications for public policy… THANK YOU! Pressure for increased relevance of research also at play in government labs (not only universities) Increase sample size by launching surveys second wave Perform non-parametric statistical tests to better assess robustness of results Design and run econometric ordered logit model to better analyse relations between research style, changes and sources of change Balance between recurring / non-recurring financial support has strong impact on research style Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation funding policies should be explicit about their choice in terms of the relative volumes of fundamental and applied research Changes occur homogenously across various dimensions of expanded taxonomy and exhibit substitution features … and perspectives
© Marc Isabelle Main references Florida R., Cohen W.M., (1999), Engine or infrastructure? The university role in economic development, in: L.M. Branscomb, F. Kodama, Florida R., (eds), Industrializing Knowledge. University-Industry Linkages in Japan and the United States, Cambridge: MIT Press. Heller M., Eisenberg R., (1998), Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research, Science, Vol Henderson R., Jaffe A.B., Trajtenberg M., (1998), Universities as a source of commercial technology: a detailed analysis of university patenting, , The Review of Economics and Statistics, 80, Pavitt K., (2001), Public policies to support basic research: What can the rest of the world learn from US theory and practice? (And what they should not learn), Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(3), Ranga L.M., Debackere K., von Tunzelmann N., (2003), Entrepreneurial universities and the dynamics of academic knowledge production: A case study of basic vs. applied research in Belgium, Scientometrics, 58(2), Van Looy B., Ranga M., Callaert J., Debackere K., Zimmermann E., (2004), Combining entrepreneurial and scientific performance in academia: towards a compounded and reciprocal Matthew-effect?, Research Policy, 33, Hicks D., Hamilton K., (1999), Does university-industry collaboration adversely affect university research?, Issues in Science and Technology, Real Numbers. Expanding Pasteurs Quadrant with the proprietary vs. open-access dimension: Illustration in a large public research organisation Murray F., Stern S., (2006), Do formal intellectual property rights hinder the free flow of scientific knowledge? An empirical test of the anti-commons hypothesis, Paper presented at the Druid Summer Conference, Copenhagen, June Walsh J.P., Cho C., Cohen W.M., (2005), Patents, Material Transfers and Access to Research Inputs in Biomedical Research, Final Report to the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in Genomic and Protein-Related Inventions, September.
© Marc Isabelle Mating uneasy roommates for a prosperous legacy: The case of scientific research and technological research “Creating, Managing and.
© Goddard & Isabelle DRUID Summer Conference June 18 th, 2006 John Gabriel GODDARD IMRI (Université Paris-Dauphine) Marc ISABELLE IMRI (Université.
© Marc Isabelle They invent (not patent) like they breathe: what are their incentives to do so? Short tales and lessons from researchers in a public.
© Goddard & Isabelle Groupe de Travail JERIP 03 mars 2006 John Gabriel GODDARD IMRI (Université Paris-Dauphine) Marc ISABELLE IMRI (Université Paris-Dauphine)
University Industry Relation (in open innovation era) Kazuyuki Motohashi Professor, Department of Technology Management for Innovation, The University.
Universities and Firms: A Comparative Analysis of the Interactions Between Market Process, Organizational Strategies and Governance Seminar, September.
Toolbox CRC programme managers – Dag Kavlie, RCN Analysis of indicators used for CRC Monitoring and Evaluation Ljubljana, 15 September 2009.
The Productivity Gap between Europe and the US: Trends and Causes Marcel P. Timmer Groningen Growth and Development Centre The EU KLEMS project is funded.
Innovation and Technology Transfer Innovation and Technology Transfer LIU Jian International Cooperation Department The State Intellectual Property Office.
The Impact of R&D on Innovation and Productivity Professor Derek Bosworth Intellectual Property Research Institute of Australia Melbourne University.
1 © NOKIA Stocholm/ /EO. 2 © NOKIA Stocholm/ /EO Issues Evolution of Innovation Policies Systemic approach Business perspective Future.
Designing the European Institute of Innovation and Technology: exploring the most effective model to integrate public and private research systems Colombo.
Contents Who is behind MIPEX Objectives Production and Producers MIPEX is a tool among others Underpinning framework Relevance Presentation and Users.
Innovation Policy, Environment and Growth: Basic Comments Keith Maskus University of Colorado at Boulder Prepared for CIES Workshop Graduate Institute,
Unit of EPIDEMIOLOGY SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC HEALTH HEALTH EXPECTANCY INDICATORS IN BELGIUM 4th Meeting of the Task Force on Health Expectancies.
Structural Business Statistics Expert Meeting May 2007 Vladimir López-Bassols Economic Analysis and Statistics Division (EAS) Directorate for Science,
1 Issues In Embedding The ‘Third Stream’ In HE Alice Frost and Richard Blackwell.
1 LEONARDO DA VINCI Valorisation and Thematic monitoring European Commission DG Education & Culture.
The Proposed European Institute of Technology Positioning and Complementarity with Respect to Other European R&D Instruments Christopher John Hull Advisor,
SOS Interop II Sophia Antipolis, September 20 and 21, 2005 IPRs and standards: some issues Richard Owens Director, Copyright E-Commerce Division Philippe.
SWITCH Visit to NeSC Malcolm Atkinson Director 5 th October 2004.
FRAMING THE BAYH-DOLE DEBATE: MAJOR POLICY ISSUES AAAS Science & Technology Colloquium April 11, 2003 Marie Thursby DuPree College of Mgmt, Georgia Tech.
QUESTIONS Has licensing generated sponsored research? How has it affected knowledge sharing & use of research? Has faculty research been diverted in response.
The design of the risk capital market in Slovakia ESTER meeting,Tel Aviv January 12, 2005.
Fair Socio-Economic Impacts of Advanced Communications by: Gabriella Cattaneo, Databank Consulting Bruxelles, 24 November 1998 DATABANK CONSULTING ACTS.
Page 1 Digital Transformations A Research Programme at London Business School Funded by the Leverhulme Trust The Social/Economic Impact of Information.
1 Presentation to the Overseas Development Institute Friday, 30 January 2004 London Development Cooperation Report 2003 Presentation by Richard Manning,
Innovative Firms and Markets Outline Entrepreneurship and new firms Innovation and firms Markets and innovation Empirical evidence on returns to innovation.
Measuring Inbound Diffusion from Publicly Funded Research Organizations to Innovative Firms: A Statistical Perspective Frances Anderson Science, Innovation.
1 ZIMBABWE COUNTRY REPORT PRESENTED AT THE SADC REGIONAL WORRKSHOP ON SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION (STI) POLICY REVIEW: SEPT. 2008, GABORONE,
University as an Engine of Innovation and Entrepreneurship Petteri Sinervo Development Manager BID Business and Innovation Development University of Turku.
Regions as the driving forces of European competitiveness: From theory to practice Interregional Seminar and Partnership Fair Enhancing university-business.
Research and Innovation Research and Innovation SME support under HORIZON
23 rd November 2011 MCST Conference: Amplifying the Competitiveness of Manufacturing in Malta Industry’s views of Research for Competitiveness Ing. Ray.
Cross Country Comparison of Reforms The View of Top Executives in 11 European Countries Preliminary Results from the COCOPS Executive Survey Gerhard Hammerschmid.
COGITA is made possible by Bologna, 23 October 2014 European Public Policies on CSR: The perceptions SMEs Eleni Apospori, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of.
Making Universities More Entrepreneurial Dr. David Woollard Special projects Manager.
November 20GEOINFO 20061/25 A Robust Strategy for Handling Linear Features in Topologically Consistent Polyline Simplification Department of Computer Engineering.
Heterogeneity among research spin-offs: the case of “intellectual property-based firms” Margarida Fontes - INETI & DINAMIA Oscarina Conceição - DINAMIA.
Committee Meeting, June 9, 2008 Strategic Institutional Research Plan.
Science Technology Links Aldo Geuna Department of economics University of Torino.
E CONOMIC R ATIONALES U NDERLYING I NNOVATION P OLICIES Analysis of Policy–Making Practices in Finland, Spain and the United Kingdom Roberto E Lopez–Martinez.
1 The Role of Clusters and Competence Centres in Smart Specialisation Dr Dimitri CORPAKIS, Head of Unit Regional Dimension of Innovation - C5 Directorate.
€ Design | Measuring Design Value Berlin, October 2014 Design as factor of innovation/ creation of economic value Prof. Eusebi Nomen – Barcelona Design.
Towards Science, Technology and Innovation2/10/2014 Sustainable Development Education, Research and Innovation Vision for Knowledge Economy Professor Maged.
1 Banking Services for Everyone? Barriers to Bank Access and Use Around the World Thorsten Beck Asli Demirgüç-Kunt Maria Soledad Martinez Peria The World.
What do we know about innovation? by Jan Fagerberg, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
1 Alternative measures of well-being Joint work by ECO/ELSA/STD.
SAMO PAVLIN, UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA – COOPERATION BETWEEN HEI AND BUSINESSES - WHY DO WE NEED TO COOPERATE? CMEPIUS, LJUBLJANA 25. OKTOBER 2013 LOOKING.
Page 1 IOP Genomics Workshop Patents and Patenting Biotech Inventions Annemieke Breukink, Ph.D. September 8th, 2009.
© 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.