IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cesifo/v54y2008i2p313-324.html

Science and the University: Challenges for Future Research

Author

Listed:
  • Paula E. Stephan

Abstract

Scientific research has played a critical role in the life of the university for a considerable period of time, both in Europe and in the US. While much remains the same in the relationship between science and the university, considerable change has occurred in recent years. Here we outline three changes in this relationship, focusing both on the consequences for the university and on questions of research interest to those interested in higher education. The three changes are: (i) increased incentives to publish; (ii) changes in the reward system and (iii) increased reliance by governments and communities on universities and institutes as a source of economic growth. (JEL codes: I23) Copyright , Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Paula E. Stephan, 2008. "Science and the University: Challenges for Future Research," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 54(2), pages 313-324, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cesifo:v:54:y:2008:i:2:p:313-324
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cesifo/ifn014
    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 below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Domenico Maisano, 2011. "Proposals for evaluating the regularity of a scientist’s research output," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 279-295, July.
    2. Vanessa Sandoval-Romero & Vincent Larivière, 2020. "The national system of researchers in Mexico: implications of publication incentives for researchers in social sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 99-126, January.
    3. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2011. "Regularity in the research output of individual scientists: An empirical analysis by recent bibliometric tools," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 458-468.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Huang, Kenneth G. & Murray, Fiona E., 2010. "Entrepreneurial experiments in science policy: Analyzing the Human Genome Project," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 567-582, June.
    7. Stoetzer, Matthias-Wolfgang & Osborn, Evan, 2014. "Does gender really matter? An analysis of Jena University scientists collaboration with industry and non-profit-partners," Jena Contributions to Economic Research 2014/2, Ernst-Abbe-Hochschule Jena – University of Applied Sciences, Department of Business Administration.
    8. Julien Pénin, 2008. "More open than open innovation? Rethinking the concept of openness in innovation studies," Working Papers of BETA 2008-18, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    9. Andrea M Zimmerman, 2018. "Navigating the path to a biomedical science career," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-24, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions

    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:oup:cesifo:v:54:y:2008:i:2:p:313-324. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.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.