IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v10y2001i1p67-79.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evolution of specialisation: public research in the chemical and pharmaceutical industries

Author

Listed:
  • Aldo Geuna

Abstract

This aims to contribute to the debate over the relationship between public scientific research and industrial innovation, analysing, in particular, the importance of distance in the process of knowledge transfer from public research to industrial innovation. It also examines the evolution of scientific specialisation in the chemical and pharmaceutical fields in the four largest European countries (the UK, Germany, France, and Italy), the European Union as a whole, the USA and Japan. The results show that the chemical and pharmaceutical sectors have completely different perceptions of, and make different use of, public research, and that the pharmaceutical sector relies on international, and particularly North American, research much more than does the chemical sector. The country-level analysis of specialisation patterns indicates that the USA has a much more integrated and persistent specialisation profile in medical chemistry and pharmacy & pharmacology than the other countries. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Aldo Geuna, 2001. "Evolution of specialisation: public research in the chemical and pharmaceutical industries," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 67-79, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:10:y:2001:i:1:p:67-79
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154401781777169
    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 search 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. Maxim N. Kotsemir & Tatiana E. Kuznetsova & Elena G. Nasybulina & Anna G. Pikalova, 2015. "Empirical Analysis of Multinational S&T Collaboration Priorities –The Case of Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 53/STI/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    2. Havas, Attila, 2010. "Diversity in firms’ innovation strategies and activities: Main findings of interviews and implications in the context of the Hungarian national," MPRA Paper 55852, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Brusoni, Stefano & Geuna, Aldo, 2003. "An international comparison of sectoral knowledge bases: persistence and integration in the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1897-1912, December.
    4. Maxim Kotsemir & Tatiana Kuznetsova & Elena Nasybulina & Anna Pikalova, 2015. "Identifying Directions for Russia’s Science and Technology Cooperation," Foresight-Russia Форсайт, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 9(4 (eng)), pages 54-72.
    5. Abramo, Giovanni & D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea & Di Costa, Flavia, 2022. "Revealing the scientific comparative advantage of nations: Common and distinctive features," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1).

    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:oup:rseval:v:10:y:2001:i:1:p:67-79. 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://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.