IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v25y1996i3p359-378.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A morphology of Japanese and European corporate research networks

Author

Listed:
  • Hicks, Diana M.
  • Isard, Phoebe A.
  • Martin, Ben R.

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Hicks, Diana M. & Isard, Phoebe A. & Martin, Ben R., 1996. "A morphology of Japanese and European corporate research networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 359-378, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:25:y:1996:i:3:p:359-378
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0048-7333(95)00830-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Rosenberg, Nathan & Nelson, Richard R., 1994. "American universities and technical advance in industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 323-348, May.
    2. Narin, Francis & Olivastro, Dominic, 1992. "Status report: Linkage between technology and science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 237-249, June.
    3. Gambardella, Alfonso, 1992. "Competitive advantages from in-house scientific research: The US pharmaceutical industry in the 1980s," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 391-407, October.
    4. Hicks, Diana, 1995. "Published Papers, Tacit Competencies and Corporate Management of the Public/Private Character of Knowledge," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 401-424.
    5. Freeman, C., 1991. "Networks of innovators: A synthesis of research issues," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 499-514, October.
    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. Kapoor, Rahul & McGrath, Patia J., 2014. "Unmasking the interplay between technology evolution and R&D collaboration: Evidence from the global semiconductor manufacturing industry, 1990–2010," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 555-569.
    2. Yin Li & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2015. "Why do technology firms publish scientific papers? The strategic use of science by small and midsize enterprises in nanotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1016-1033, December.
    3. Pavitt, Keith, 1998. "The social shaping of the national science base," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 793-805, December.
    4. Soh, Pek-Hooi & Subramanian, Annapoornima M., 2014. "When do firms benefit from university–industry R&D collaborations? The implications of firm R&D focus on scientific research and technological recombination," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 807-821.
    5. Mueller, Matthias & Bogner, Kristina & Buchmann, Tobias & Kudic, Muhamed, 2015. "Simulating knowledge diffusion in four structurally distinct networks: An agent-based simulation model," Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 05-2015, University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
    6. Veugelers, Reinhilde, 1997. "Internal R & D expenditures and external technology sourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 303-315, October.
    7. Casas, Rosalba & de Gortari, Rebeca & Santos, Ma. Josefa, 2000. "The building of knowledge spaces in Mexico: a regional approach to networking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 225-241, February.
    8. Ke, Qing, 2020. "Technological impact of biomedical research: The role of basicness and novelty," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    9. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Wang, Jian, 2019. "Scientific novelty and technological impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1362-1372.
    10. Okubo, Yoshiko & Sjoberg, Cecilia, 2000. "The changing pattern of industrial scientific research collaboration in Sweden," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 81-98, January.
    11. Perkmann, Markus & King, Zella & Pavelin, Stephen, 2011. "Engaging excellence? Effects of faculty quality on university engagement with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 539-552, May.
    12. Debackere, Koenraad & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2005. "The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 321-342, April.
    13. Uwe Cantner & Holger Graf, 2011. "Innovation Networks: Formation, Performance and Dynamics," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Alan D. MacPherson, 1998. "Academic-industry linkages and small firm innovation: evidence from the scientific instruments sector," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 261-276, January.
    15. Añón Higón, Dolores, 2016. "In-house versus external basic research and first-to-market innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 816-829.
    16. Keld Laursen & Ammon Salter, 2005. "The fruits of intellectual production: economic and scientific specialisation among OECD countries," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 289-308, March.
    17. Simeth, Markus & Raffo, Julio D., 2013. "What makes companies pursue an Open Science strategy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1531-1543.
    18. Bruneel, Johan & D'Este, Pablo & Salter, Ammon, 2010. "Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 858-868, September.
    19. Scott Stern, 2004. "Do Scientists Pay to Be Scientists?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 835-853, June.
    20. Havas, Attila, 2014. "Types of knowledge and diversity of business-academia collaborations: Implications for measurement and policy," MPRA Paper 65908, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 23 May 2015.

    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:respol:v:25:y:1996:i:3:p:359-378. 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: . General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.