IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v63y2020ics0160791x20302657.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bringing Laxmi and Saraswati together: Nano-scientists and academic entrepreneurship in India

Author

Listed:
  • Pandey, Poonam
  • Pansera, Mario

Abstract

Innovation fuelled by Science & Technology is seen as the panacea for growth, inclusive development and international competitiveness. Aligned with this view, there is a growing interest in the role of academic entrepreneurship in contributing to these goals. A huge emphasis is also given to ready-made, transportable success models of innovation to be replicated into a variety of local contexts. Most of the scholarly literature in this domain focusses on the global north whereas studies on in the global south remain scarce. In this paper, we focus on scientists working in the field of nanotechnology in India. Drawing on semi-structured interviews and document analysis, the paper contributes to shed light on the perceptions of scientists and policy makers about the changing role of Indian universities in the context of global aspirations associated to academic entrepreneurship, and the socio-cultural aspects underpinning such perceptions.

Suggested Citation

  • Pandey, Poonam & Pansera, Mario, 2020. "Bringing Laxmi and Saraswati together: Nano-scientists and academic entrepreneurship in India," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:63:y:2020:i:c:s0160791x20302657
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101440
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X20302657
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101440?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ankrah, Samuel & AL-Tabbaa, Omar, 2015. "Universities–industry collaboration: A systematic review," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 387-408.
    2. Colyvas, Jeannette A., 2007. "From divergent meanings to common practices: The early institutionalization of technology transfer in the life sciences at Stanford University," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 456-476, May.
    3. Niosi, Jorge & Reid, Susan E., 2007. "Biotechnology and Nanotechnology: Science-based Enabling Technologies as Windows of Opportunity for LDCs?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 426-438, March.
    4. Jeff S. Armstrong & Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2003. "Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture and firm performance in biotechnology," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 149-170.
    5. Valentina Tartari & Ammon Salter & Pablo D'Este, 2012. "Crossing the Rubicon: exploring the factors that shape academics' perceptions of the barriers to working with industry," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 36(3), pages 655-677.
    6. Chang, Yuan-Chieh & Yang, Phil Y. & Chen, Ming-Huei, 2009. "The determinants of academic research commercial performance: Towards an organizational ambidexterity perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 936-946, July.
    7. Etzkowitz, Henry, 1998. "The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 823-833, December.
    8. Bengt-Åke Lundvall, 2007. "National Innovation Systems—Analytical Concept and Development Tool," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 95-119.
    9. Kenney, Martin & Richard Goe, W., 2004. "The role of social embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship: a comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 691-707, July.
    10. Wong, Poh-Kam & Ho, Yuen-Ping & Singh, Annette, 2007. "Towards an "Entrepreneurial University" Model to Support Knowledge-Based Economic Development: The Case of the National University of Singapore," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 941-958, June.
    11. Alice Lam, 2007. "Knowledge Networks and Careers: Academic Scientists in Industry–University Links," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(6), pages 993-1016, September.
    12. Lutz Bornmann, 2013. "What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? a literature survey," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 217-233, February.
    13. Arvanitis, Spyros & Kubli, Ursina & Woerter, Martin, 2008. "University-industry knowledge and technology transfer in Switzerland: What university scientists think about co-operation with private enterprises," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1865-1883, December.
    14. Soete, Luc, 2019. "Science, technology and innovation studies at a crossroad: SPRU as case study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 849-857.
    15. Pansera, Mario & Owen, Richard, 2018. "Framing inclusive innovation within the discourse of development: Insights from case studies in India," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 23-34.
    16. Arocena, Rodrigo & Göransson, Bo & Sutz, Judith, 2015. "Knowledge policies and universities in developing countries: Inclusive development and the “developmental university”," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 10-20.
    17. Owen-Smith, Jason & Powell, Walter W, 2001. "To Patent or Not: Faculty Decisions and Institutional Success at Technology Transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 99-114, January.
    18. Subramanian, Annapoornima M. & Lim, Kwanghui & Soh, Pek-Hooi, 2013. "When birds of a feather don’t flock together: Different scientists and the roles they play in biotech R&D alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 595-612.
    19. Barnes, Tina & Pashby, Ian & Gibbons, Anne, 2002. "Effective University - Industry Interaction:: A Multi-case Evaluation of Collaborative R&D Projects," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 272-285, June.
    20. Haeussler, Carolin & Colyvas, Jeannette A., 2011. "Breaking the Ivory Tower: Academic Entrepreneurship in the Life Sciences in UK and Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 41-54, February.
    21. Roach, Michael & Sauermann, Henry, 2010. "A taste for science? PhD scientists' academic orientation and self-selection into research careers in industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 422-434, April.
    22. Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M. & Juhl, Joakim & Aarden, Erik, 2019. "Challenging the “deficit model” of innovation: Framing policy issues under the innovation imperative," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 895-904.
    23. Pandza, Krsto & Ellwood, Paul, 2013. "Strategic and ethical foundations for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1112-1125.
    24. Kaplinsky, Raphael, 2011. "Schumacher meets Schumpeter: Appropriate technology below the radar," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 193-203, March.
    25. D'Este, P. & Patel, P., 2007. "University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1295-1313, November.
    26. Phillip Phan & Donald S. Siegel & Mike Wright, 2016. "Science Parks and Incubators: Observations, Synthesis and Future Research," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Phillip H Phan & Sarfraz A Mian & Wadid Lamine (ed.), TECHNOLOGY ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND BUSINESS INCUBATION Theory • Practice • Lessons Learned, chapter 9, pages 249-272, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    27. Rosenberg, Nathan & Nelson, Richard R., 1994. "American universities and technical advance in industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 323-348, May.
    28. Anna Nilsson & Annika Rickne & Lars Bengtsson, 2010. "Transfer of academic research: uncovering the grey zone," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(6), pages 617-636, December.
    29. Michael Gibbons, 2000. "Mode 2 society and the emergence of context-sensitive science," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(3), pages 159-163, June.
    30. Henry Sauermann & Paula Stephan, 2013. "Conflicting Logics? A Multidimensional View of Industrial and Academic Science," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 889-909, June.
    31. Michela Loi & Maria Chiara Di Guardo, 2015. "The third mission of universities: An investigation of the espoused values," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 42(6), pages 855-870.
    32. Partha, Dasgupta & David, Paul A., 1994. "Toward a new economics of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 487-521, September.
    33. Martin Meyer, 2006. "Academic Inventiveness and Entrepreneurship: On the Importance of Start-up Companies in Commercializing Academic Patents," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 501-510, July.
    34. Chaminade, Cristina & Vang, Jan, 2008. "Globalisation of knowledge production and regional innovation policy: Supporting specialized hubs in the Bangalore software industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1684-1696, December.
    35. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Hessels, Laurens K., 2011. "Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 463-472, April.
    36. Pablo D’Este & Irene Ramos-Vielba & Richard Woolley & Nabil Amara, 2018. "How do researchers generate scientific and societal impacts? Toward an analytical and operational framework," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(6), pages 752-763.
    37. Schot, Johan & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2018. "Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1554-1567.
    38. Shane, Scott, 2004. "Encouraging university entrepreneurship? The effect of the Bayh-Dole Act on university patenting in the United States," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 127-151, January.
    39. Landry, Rejean & Amara, Nabil & Rherrad, Imad, 2006. "Why are some university researchers more likely to create spin-offs than others? Evidence from Canadian universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1599-1615, December.
    40. Balaji Parthasarathy, 2004. "India's Silicon Valley or Silicon Valley's India? Socially Embedding the Computer Software Industry in Bangalore," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 664-685, September.
    41. Abreu, Maria & Grinevich, Vadim, 2013. "The nature of academic entrepreneurship in the UK: Widening the focus on entrepreneurial activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 408-422.
    42. Jain, Sanjay & George, Gerard & Maltarich, Mark, 2009. "Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 922-935, July.
    43. Welsh, Rick & Glenna, Leland & Lacy, William & Biscotti, Dina, 2008. "Close enough but not too far: Assessing the effects of university-industry research relationships and the rise of academic capitalism," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1854-1864, December.
    44. Lockett, Andy & Siegel, Donald & Wright, Mike & Ensley, Michael D., 2005. "The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: Managerial and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 981-993, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Amara, Nabil & Olmos-Peñuela, Julia & Fernández-de-Lucio, Ignacio, 2019. "Overcoming the “lost before translation” problem: An exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 22-36.
    2. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.
    3. Christopher S. Hayter & Andrew J. Nelson & Stephanie Zayed & Alan C. O’Connor, 2018. "Conceptualizing academic entrepreneurship ecosystems: a review, analysis and extension of the literature," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 1039-1082, August.
    4. Pablo D’Este & Irene Ramos-Vielba & Richard Woolley & Nabil Amara, 2018. "How do researchers generate scientific and societal impacts? Toward an analytical and operational framework," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(6), pages 752-763.
    5. Victoria Galan-Muros & Todd Davey, 2019. "The UBC ecosystem: putting together a comprehensive framework for university-business cooperation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1311-1346, August.
    6. Sabrina Backs & Markus Günther & Christian Stummer, 2019. "Stimulating academic patenting in a university ecosystem: an agent-based simulation approach," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 434-461, April.
    7. Christian Sandström & Karl Wennberg & Martin W. Wallin & Yulia Zherlygina, 2018. "Public policy for academic entrepreneurship initiatives: a review and critical discussion," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1232-1256, October.
    8. Victoria Galán-Muros & Peter Sijde & Peter Groenewegen & Thomas Baaken, 2017. "Nurture over nature: How do European universities support their collaboration with business?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 184-205, February.
    9. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Luca Secondi & Enza Setteducati & Alessio Ancaiani, 2014. "Participation and commitment in third-party research funding: evidence from Italian Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 169-198, April.
    10. Ryan, Paul & Geoghegan, Will & Hilliard, Rachel, 2018. "The microfoundations of firms’ explorative innovation capabilities within the triple helix framework," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 76, pages 15-27.
    11. B. Urban & J. Chantson, 2019. "Academic entrepreneurship in South Africa: testing for entrepreneurial intentions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 948-980, June.
    12. DâEste,Pablo & Llopis,Oscar & Yegros,Alfredo, 2013. "Conducting pro-social research: cognitive diversity, research excellence and awareness about the social impact of research," INGENIO (CSIC-UPV) Working Paper Series 201303, INGENIO (CSIC-UPV).
    13. Tartari, Valentina & Salter, Ammon, 2015. "The engagement gap:," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 1176-1191.
    14. Ani Gerbin & Mateja Drnovsek, 2016. "Determinants and public policy implications of academic-industry knowledge transfer in life sciences: a review and a conceptual framework," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 979-1076, October.
    15. Tartari, Valentina & Perkmann, Markus & Salter, Ammon, 2014. "In good company: The influence of peers on industry engagement by academic scientists," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1189-1203.
    16. Zhiyan Zhao & Anders Broström & Jianfeng Cai, 2020. "Promoting academic engagement: university context and individual characteristics," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 304-337, February.
    17. Tijssen, Robert J.W., 2018. "Anatomy of use-inspired researchers: From Pasteur’s Quadrant to Pasteur’s Cube model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1626-1638.
    18. Oscar LLOPIS & Joaquin AZAGRA-CARO, 2015. "Who do you care about? Scientists’ personality traits and perceived beneficiary impact," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2015-29, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    19. Larsen, Maria Theresa, 2011. "The implications of academic enterprise for public science: An overview of the empirical evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 6-19, February.
    20. Abreu, Maria & Grinevich, Vadim, 2013. "The nature of academic entrepreneurship in the UK: Widening the focus on entrepreneurial activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 408-422.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:63:y:2020:i:c:s0160791x20302657. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.