Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas

University-Industry Interactions: the unresolved puzzle

Book synopsis: This comprehensive and innovative Handbook applies the tools of the economics of complexity to analyse the causes and effects of technological and structural change. It grafts the intuitions of the economics of complexity into the tradition of analysis based upon the Schumpeterian and Marshallian legacies. The Handbook elaborates the notion of innovation as an emerging property of the organized complexity of an economic system, and provides the basic tools to understand the recursive dynamics between the emergence of innovation and the unfolding of organized complexity. In so doing, it highlights the role of organizational thinking in explaining the introduction of innovations and the dynamics of structural change. With a new methodological approach to the economics of technological change, this wide-ranging volume will become the standard reference for postgraduates, academics and practitioners in the fields of evolutionary economics, complexity economics and the economics of innovation.

Traditional Versus Heterodox Motives for Academic Patenting: Evidence from the Netherlands

This paper examines what motivates university researchers to patent the results of collaborative research with business firms. We provide evidence of the existence of a motivational academic patenting space comprising (i) an industry-driven domain related to traditional-market motives (protection of inventions that will be commercialized); (ii) a university-driven domain driven by various (“heterodox”) motives related mostly to signalling specific research competences and (iii) a “hybrid” publicly driven domain related to projects aligned to the research agendas of public sponsors. These three types of motivations reflect the connections between academic patenting and different types of innovation, and the roles of industry partners in proposing, financing and performing specific research projects. We use data from 16 in depth case studies of innovations developed by Dutch universities to provide preliminary empirical evidence of this typology of motivational spaces for patenting university knowledge.

How Industry Inventors Collaborate with Academic Researchers: The Choice between Shared and Unilateral Governance

We investigate under what circumstances firms (industry inventors) are more likely to engage in interactions where governance of the relationship is shared between the firm and the university, as opposed to interactions where the relationship is governed unilaterally by the firm. Using PIEMINV, an original dataset of European industry patents in the Italian region of Piedmont, we analyse the characteristics of inventors with diverse experience in projects involving interactions with universities, governed by institutional contracts or personal contracts. Our results suggest that reliance among inventors of the two forms of governance is almost equal, and that unilateral governance forms are preferred when there are high levels of trust among the parties based on embeddedness in local social and education networks. This is likely because it involves less cumbersome and more direct interactions. We find also that knowledge characteristics are not particularly important discriminants of the choice between governance forms: the advantage of shared governance seems to reside mainly in the possibility to mitigate monitoring and asymmetric information problems in contexts of relatively low levels of mutual knowledge and trust.

The governance of formal university--industry interactions: understanding the rationales for alternative models

This article develops a conceptual framework to explain the economic rationale underpinning the choice of different modes of governance of formal university–industry interactions: personal contractual interactions, where the contract regulating the collaboration involves a firm and an individual academic researcher, and institutional interactions, where the relationship between the firm and the academic is mediated by the university. Although institutional interactions, for numerous reasons, have become more important, both governance modes are currently being implemented. We would argue that they have some important specificities that need to be understood if university–industry knowledge transfer is to be managed effectively and efficiently.

The motivations, institutions and organization of university-industry collaborations in the Netherlands

This study builds on the economics and organization literatures to explore whether and how institutions and organizational structure complement or substitute each other to create specific spaces of alignment where specific individual actors’ motivations co-exist. Focusing on university-industry collaborations, the study examines whether and how different axes of alignment of university and industry motivations are integrated in projects with specific technological objectives and organizational structures, benefitting from the presence of specific institutions designed to facilitate collaboration. Empirically, the study relies on in-depth data on 30 university-industry collaborations in the Netherlands, and provides preliminary evidence that the technological objective and organizational structure of collaboration are malleable variables allowing the integration of both partners’ objectives and expectations. Different institutional incentives for university-industry collaboration favor specific axes of alignment of motivations and certain types of collaborative projects’ design. Hence, our exploratory results suggest that specific organizational and technological structures tend to prevail in the presence of specific institutions.