Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Technology proximity between firms and universities and technology transfer

Contents:

Author Info

  • Martin Woerter

    ()

Abstract

This paper investigates the technological orientation of firms and universities and their propensity to have knowledge and technology transfer (KTT) activities. This study looks at the technological potential for KTT and how it is used, emphasizing differences between smaller and larger firms. To this end we collected information about the technology activities of firms (patent statistics) and the technology activities of universities. Furthermore, we used survey data on technology transfer activities. We combined the three datasets and found—especially for smaller firms—that great technology proximity fosters transfer activities with different universities (case 1). The same is true if proximity is low and expertise is considerable at universities in the respective technology field (case 2). In both cases additional transfer potential exists. In the second case firms engage in transfer activities in order to update and modify their knowledge base and as a consequence improve “competitiveness” in certain technology fields. Furthermore, firms show a tendency to diversify their contacts with universities in order to avoid knowledge lock-in. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10961-011-9207-x
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Springer in its journal The Journal of Technology Transfer.

Volume (Year): 37 (2012)
Issue (Month): 6 (December)
Pages: 828-866

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:37:y:2012:i:6:p:828-866

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=104998

Related research

Keywords: Innovation; Knowledge and technology transfer; Technology proximity; Universities; Firms; O30;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Paula E. Stephan, 1996. "The Economics of Science," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(3), pages 1199-1235, September.
  2. Giuliana Battisti & Heinz Hollenstein & Paul Stoneman & Martin Woerter, 2007. "Inter And Intra Firm Diffusion Of Ict In The United Kingdom (Uk) And Switzerland (Ch) An Internationally Comparative Study Based On Firm-Level Data," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(8), pages 669-687.
  3. Santoro, Michael D. & Chakrabarti, Alok K., 2002. "Firm size and technology centrality in industry-university interactions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1163-1180, September.
  4. Tom Broekel, 2007. "A Concordance between Industries and Technologies Matching the technological fields of the Patentatlas to the German Industry Classification," Jena Economic Research Papers 2007-041, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
  5. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
  6. Kaufmann, Alexander & Tödtling, Franz, 2000. "Science-Industry Interaction In The Process Of Innovation - The Importance Of Boundary-Crossing Between Systems," ERSA conference papers ersa00p428, European Regional Science Association.
  7. Spyros Arvanitis & Nora Sydow & Martin Woerter, 2005. "Is There Any Impact of University-Industry Knowledge Transfer on the Performance of Private Enterprises? – An Empirical Analysis Based¨on Swiss Firm Data," KOF Working papers 05-117, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
  8. Spyros Arvanitis & Ursina Kubli & Nora Sydow & Martin Woerter, 2005. "Knowledge and Technology Transfer (KTT) Activities Between Universities and Firms in Switzerland: The Main Facts : An Empirical Analysis Based on Firm-level Data," KOF Working papers 05-115, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
  9. Timothy F. Bresnahan & Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 2002. "Information Technology, Workplace Organization, And The Demand For Skilled Labor: Firm-Level Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 117(1), pages 339-376, February.
  10. Nooteboom, B. & Vanheverbeke, W.P.M. & Duysters, G.M. & Gilsing, V.A. & Oord van den, A,J,, 2005. "Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity," Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies (ECIS) working paper series 05.05, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies (ECIS).
  11. Ron Boschma & Anne L. J. ter Wal, 2007. "Knowledge Networks and Innovative Performance in an Industrial District: The Case of a Footwear District in the South of Italy," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 177-199.
  12. Audretsch, David B & Stephan, Paula E, 1996. "Company-Scientist Locational Links: The Case of Biotechnology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 641-52, June.
  13. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon, 2004. "Searching high and low: what types of firms use universities as a source of innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1201-1215, October.
  14. Shapiro, Carl & Willig, Robert D, 1990. "On the Antitrust Treatment of Production Joint Ventures," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(3), pages 113-30, Summer.
  15. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  16. Lee, Yong S, 2000. " The Sustainability of University-Industry Research Collaboration: An Empirical Assessment," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 111-33, June.
  17. Hollenstein, Heinz, 2004. "Determinants of the adoption of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT): An empirical analysis based on firm-level data for the Swiss business sector," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 315-342, September.
  18. Schartinger, Doris & Schibany, Andras & Gassler, Helmut, 2001. " Interactive Relations between Universities and Firms: Empirical Evidence for Austria," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 255-68, June.
  19. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
  20. Malerba, Franco, 2007. "Innovation and the dynamics and evolution of industries: Progress and challenges," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 675-699, August.
  21. Bronwyn H. HALL, 2004. "University-Industry Research Partnerships in the United States," Economics Working Papers ECO2004/14, European University Institute.
  22. Uwe Cantner & Andreas Meder, 2007. "Technological proximity and the choice of cooperation partner," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 45-65, June.
  23. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
  24. Matthew E. Kahn, 2005. "The Death Toll from Natural Disasters: The Role of Income, Geography, and Institutions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(2), pages 271-284, May.
  25. Dosi, Giovanni, 1988. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 1120-71, September.
  26. Santoro, Michael D & Gopalakrishnan, Shanthi, 2001. " Relationship Dynamics between University Research Centers and Industrial Firms: Their Impact on Technology Transfer Activities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 163-71, January.
  27. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-96, September.
  28. Patrick Greenlee & Bruno Cassiman, 1999. "Product market objectives and the formation of research joint ventures," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(3), pages 115-130.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:37:y:2012:i:6:p:828-866. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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