IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/adr/anecst/y2024i153p39-76.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Lab Funding Matter for the Technological Application of Scientific Research? An Empirical Analysis of French Labs

Author

Listed:
  • Basheer Kalash
  • Sarah Guillou
  • Lionel Nesta
  • Michele Pezzoni

Abstract

This paper investigates how competitive grant funding in public research labs is associated with the type of knowledge produced. The empirical analysis is conducted on 349 French research labs observed between 2011 and 2015. To assess the type of knowledge produced by labs, we look at the lab publications' distance from the technological frontier: the closer a publication to the technological frontier, the more applied its knowledge content. We measure grant funding intensity within labs as the number of national and European grants per researcher. We also identify grants in partnership with private companies. We find that a higher intensity of national grants is associated with a lower share of publications close to the technological frontier and a higher share of publications not connected to the technological frontier, while European grant intensity shows the opposite association. We also find that a company being a partner in a grant is associated with a higher share of lab publications at the technological frontier.

Suggested Citation

  • Basheer Kalash & Sarah Guillou & Lionel Nesta & Michele Pezzoni, 2024. "Does Lab Funding Matter for the Technological Application of Scientific Research? An Empirical Analysis of French Labs," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 153, pages 39-76.
    • Handle: RePEc:adr:anecst:y:2024:i:153:p:39-76
    DOI: 10.2307/48767560
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/48767560
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2307/48767560?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Francesco Lissoni & Patrick Llerena & Maureen McKelvey & Bulat Sanditov, 2008. "Academic patenting in Europe: new evidence from the KEINS database," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 87-102, June.
    2. Francesco Lissoni & Fabio Montobbio, 2015. "The Ownership of Academic Patents and Their Impact. Evidence from Five European Countries," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 66(1), pages 143-171.
    3. Valerio Sterzi & Michele Pezzoni & Francesco Lissoni, 2019. "Patent management by universities: evidence from Italian academic inventions," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(2), pages 309-330.
    4. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    5. Jacob, Brian A. & Lefgren, Lars, 2011. "The impact of research grant funding on scientific productivity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9), pages 1168-1177.
    6. Carayol, Nicolas & Matt, Mireille, 2006. "Individual and collective determinants of academic scientists' productivity," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 55-72, March.
    7. Alberto Martín-Martín & Mike Thelwall & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2021. "Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 871-906, January.
    8. Crow, Michael & Bozeman, Barry, 1987. "R&D laboratory classification and public policy: The effects of environmental context on laboratory behavior," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 229-258, October.
    9. Ayoubi, Charles & Pezzoni, Michele & Visentin, Fabiana, 2019. "The important thing is not to win, it is to take part: What if scientists benefit from participating in research grant competitions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 84-97.
    10. Alberto Martín-Martín & Mike Thelwall & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2021. "Correction to: Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 907-908, January.
    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. Huegel, Matthias, 2024. "University scientists’ multiple goals achievement: Social capital and its impact on research performance and research commercialization," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    2. Hottenrott, Hanna & Lawson, Cornelia, 2013. "Fishing for Complementarities: Competitive Research Funding and Research Productivity," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201318, University of Turin.
    3. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Jofre-Bonet, Mireia & Lawson, Cornelia, 2015. "The double-edged sword of industry collaboration: Evidence from engineering academics in the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 1160-1175.
    4. Katrin Hussinger & João N. Carvalho, 2022. "The long-term effect of research grants on the scientific output of university professors," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(4), pages 463-487, April.
    5. Young-Hwan Lee, 2021. "Determinants of research productivity in Korean Universities: the role of research funding," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1462-1486, October.
    6. Lawson, Cornelia & Geuna, Aldo & Finardi, Ugo, 2021. "The funding-productivity-gender nexus in science, a multistage analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(3).
    7. Hottenrott, Hanna & Lawson, Cornelia, 2017. "Fishing for complementarities: Research grants and research productivity," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-38.
    8. Marco Corsino & Salvatore Torrisi, 2023. "University engagement in open innovation and intellectual property: evidence from university–industry collaborations," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 50(4), pages 781-813, December.
    9. Sarah Guillou & Basheer Kalash & Lionel Nesta & Michele Pezzoni & Evens Salies & Marc-Antoine Faure, 2023. "Impact de la nature du financement de la recherche sur ses résultats," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-04026916, HAL.
    10. Pingluo Xue & Chongyang Shen & Huaizhi Tang & Yunjia Liu & Yuanfang Huang, 2024. "Knowledge Atlas of Cultivated Land Quality Evaluation Based on Web of Science Since the 21st Century (2000–2023)," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-15, October.
    11. Buenstorf, Guido, 2009. "Is commercialization good or bad for science? Individual-level evidence from the Max Planck Society," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 281-292, March.
    12. Chompunuch Saravudecha & Duangruthai Na Thungfai & Chananthida Phasom & Sodsri Gunta-in & Aorrakanya Metha & Peangkobfah Punyaphet & Tippawan Sookruay & Wannachai Sakuludomkan & Nut Koonrungsesomboon, 2023. "Hybrid Gold Open Access Citation Advantage in Clinical Medicine: Analysis of Hybrid Journals in the Web of Science," Publications, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-9, March.
    13. Diogo Da Fonseca-Soares & Josicleda Domiciano Galvinicio & Sayonara Andrade Eliziário & Angel Fermin Ramos-Ridao, 2022. "A Bibliometric Analysis of the Trends and Characteristics of Railway Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-19, October.
    14. Charles Ayoubi & Michele Pezzoni & Fabiana Visentin, 2021. "Does It Pay to Do Novel Science? The Selectivity Patterns in Science Funding," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 48(5), pages 635-648.
    15. Abubakari Malik & Peter B. K. Mbewe & Neema Kavishe & Theresa Mkandawire & Pelumi Adetoro, 2024. "Sustainable Construction Practices in Building Infrastructure Projects: The Extent of Implementation and Drivers in Malawi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-18, December.
    16. Pragati Verma & P. K. Ghosh, 2024. "The economics of forest carbon sequestration: a bibliometric analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 2989-3019, February.
    17. Pénin, Julien, 2011. "Sur les conséquences du brevet d’invention dans la science : résultats d’une enquête auprès des inventeurs académiques français," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 87(2), pages 137-173, juin.
    18. Schneider, Kate R & Remans, Roseline & Bekele, Tesfaye Hailu & Aytekin, Destan & Conforti, Piero & Dasgupta, Shouro & DeClerck, Fabrice & Dewi, Deviana & Fabi, Carola & Gephart, Jessica A & Masuda, Yu, 2025. "Governance and resilience as entry points for transforming food systems in the countdown to 2030," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 127092, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Belén Álvarez-Bornstein & Adrián A. Díaz-Faes & María Bordons, 2019. "What characterises funded biomedical research? Evidence from a basic and a clinical domain," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 805-825, May.
    20. Catalina Martínez & Valerio Sterzi, 2021. "The impact of the abolishment of the professor’s privilege on European university-owned patents," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3), pages 247-282, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Competitive Grants; Scientific Publications; Technological Frontier; French Research Labs;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:adr:anecst:y:2024:i:153:p:39-76. 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: Secretariat General or Laurent Linnemer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ensaefr.html .

    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.