IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/16041.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Role of Public Research Institutes in National Innovation Systems in Industrialized Countries: The cases of Fraunhofer, NIST, CSIRO, AIST, and ITRI

Author

Listed:
  • Patarapong INTARAKUMNERD
  • GOTO Akira

Abstract

Public research institutes (PRIs) were established for many reasons including promoting defense related research and health related research. Helping domestic industries remain as one of the important missions for PRIs even when the countries have become industrialized and firms' technological capabilities are high. PRIs aim to upgrade existing industries, especially small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), as well as spearheading new ones. They can conduct research to solve today's problems in the existing industries and those of next-generation technologies which may lead to the creation of new industries. Moreover, the relationship between PRIs and firms and non-firm actors such as universities became more intense, open, horizontal, international, and long term. To reduce risk and uncertainty inherent in the research mentioned above, the intermediary roles of PRIs are becoming increasingly important. The emphasis and the ways that PRIs help industry change over time and vary across countries as they are an integral part of national innovation systems. This makes generalization difficult, but the experiences of five leading PRIs in Germany, Taiwan, Japan, Australia, and the United States shows that the balances between contract research vs. longer term research with its own initiative, mobility of researchers vs. retaining core researchers, and competitive grants and funds from industry vs. block grants from governments are important in keeping PRIs relevant to industry needs and maintaining research standards. These balances depend on the nature of the national innovation system in which they are embedded. The governance of PRIs is of particular importance to maintain proper balances.

Suggested Citation

  • Patarapong INTARAKUMNERD & GOTO Akira, 2016. "Role of Public Research Institutes in National Innovation Systems in Industrialized Countries: The cases of Fraunhofer, NIST, CSIRO, AIST, and ITRI," Discussion papers 16041, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:16041
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/16e041.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harro van Lente & Marko Hekkert & Ruud Smits & Bas van Waveren, 2003. "Roles of Systemic Intermediaries in Transition Processes," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(03), pages 247-279.
    2. P. Intarakumnerd & Cristina Chaminade, 2011. "Innovation policies in Thailand: towards a system of innovation approach?," Asia Pacific Business Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 241-256, April.
    3. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    4. Michael Hobday, 1995. "Innovation In East Asia," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 226.
    5. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco, 2001. "The Geography of Innovation and Economic Clustering: Some Introductory Notes," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 10(4), pages 817-833, December.
    6. 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 569-596, September.
    7. AfDB AfDB, . "Annual Report 2012," Annual Report, African Development Bank, number 461.
    8. J Friso Den Hertog & Edward Huizenga, 2000. "The Knowledge Enterprise," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Knowledge Enterprise Implementation of Intelligent Business Strategies, chapter 1, pages 3-21, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Mathews, John A., 2002. "The origins and dynamics of Taiwan's R&D consortia," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 633-651, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Giannopoulou, Eleni & Barlatier, Pierre-Jean & Pénin, Julien, 2019. "Same but different? Research and technology organizations, universities and the innovation activities of firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 223-233.
    2. Haydar Yalcin & Tugrul Daim, 2021. "Mining research and invention activity for innovation trends: case of blockchain technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 3775-3806, May.
    3. Mulligan, Kevin & Lenihan, Helena & Doran, Justin & Roper, Stephen, 2022. "Harnessing the science base: Results from a national programme using publicly-funded research centres to reshape firms’ R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    4. Mahdi Khelfaoui & Luc Bernier, 2023. "Research and technology organizations as entrepreneurship instruments: the case of the Institut National d’Optique in the Canadian optics and photonics industry," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, December.
    5. Chen, Kaihua & Zhang, Chao & Feng, Ze & Zhang, Yi & Ning, Lutao, 2022. "Technology transfer systems and modes of national research institutes: evidence from the Chinese academy of sciences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    6. Lian, Xiangpeng & Guo, Ying & Su, Jun, 2021. "Technology stocks: A study on the characteristics that help transfer public research to industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    7. Aridi, Anwar & Querejazu, Daniel & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2021. "Knowledge transfer activities and conditions for impact in Bulgarian public research institutions: A survey-based diagnostic," MERIT Working Papers 2021-026, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    8. Bo Liu & Yun-Fei Shao & Guowei Liu & Debing Ni, 2022. "An Evolutionary Analysis of Relational Governance in an Innovation Ecosystem," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, April.
    9. Pfeil, Katharina & Necker, Sarah & Feld, Lars P., 2023. "Compliance management in research institutes: Boon or bane?," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 23/1, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..
    10. Xiong, Xi & Yang, Guo-liang & Guan, Zhong-cheng, 2020. "Estimating the multi-period efficiency of high-tech research institutes of the Chinese Academy of Sciences: A dynamic slacks-based measure," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    11. Song Wang & Jiexin Wang & Chenqi Wei & Xueli Wang & Fei Fan, 2021. "Collaborative innovation efficiency: From within cities to between cities—Empirical analysis based on innovative cities in China," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 1330-1360, September.
    12. Bonnin Roca, Jaime & O'Sullivan, Eoin, 2020. "Seeking coherence between barriers to manufacturing technology adoption and innovation policy," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    13. Patrick Lehnert & Curdin Pfister & Dietmar Harhoff & Uschi Backes-Gellner, 2020. "Innovation Effects and Knowledge Complementarities in a Diverse Research Landscape," Economics of Education Working Paper Series 0164, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW), revised Jan 2022.
    14. Zhang, Ningning & You, Dingyi & Tang, Le & Wen, Ke, 2023. "Knowledge path dependence, external connection, and radical inventions: Evidence from Chinese Academy of Sciences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(4).

    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. Vivarelli, Marco, 2018. "Globalisation, structural change and innovation in emerging economies: The impact on employment and skills," MERIT Working Papers 2018-037, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    2. Vivarelli, Marco, 2014. "Structural Change and Innovation as Exit Strategies from the Middle Income Trap," IZA Discussion Papers 8148, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Marco Vivarelli, 2015. "Structural Change and Innovation in Developing Economies: A Way Out of the Middle Income Trap ?," LEM Papers Series 2015/09, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    4. Lööf, Hans, 2022. "What prevents spillovers from the pool of knowledge?," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 489, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    5. Daniel Gama e Colombo, 2016. "Impact Assessment of Tax Incentives to Foster Industrial Innovation in Brazil: The Case of Law 11,196/05," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2016_30, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).
    6. Dodgson, Mark & Mathews, John & Kastelle, Tim & Hu, Mei-Chih, 2008. "The evolving nature of Taiwan's national innovation system: The case of biotechnology innovation networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 430-445, April.
    7. Marco Vivarelli, 2014. "The Middle Income Trap: A Way Out Based on Technological and Structural Change," DISCE - Quaderni del Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali dises1403, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
    8. Richard Harris & John Moffat, 2011. "R&D, Innovation and Exporting," SERC Discussion Papers 0073, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    9. Wipo, 2011. "World Intellectual Property Report 2011- The Changing Face of Innovation," WIPO Economics & Statistics Series, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, number 2011:944, April.
    10. Davide Consoli & Pier Paolo Patrucco, 2011. "Complexity and the Coordination of Technological Knowledge: The Case of Innovation Platforms," Chapters, in: Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 8 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Thomas Bolli & Martin Woerter, 2013. "Technological Diversification and Innovation Performance," KOF Working papers 13-336, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    12. Barge-Gil, Andrés & López, Alberto, 2014. "R&D determinants: Accounting for the differences between research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1634-1648.
    13. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2017. "Digital knowledge generation and the appropriability trade-off," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 991-1002.
    14. Andrés Barge-Gil & Alberto López, 2015. "R versus D: estimating the differentiated effect of research and development on innovation results," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(1), pages 93-129.
    15. Erika Raquel Badillo & Rosina Moreno, 2016. "Are Collaborative Agreements in Innovation Activities Persistent at the Firm Level? Empirical Evidence for the Spanish Case," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 49(1), pages 71-101, August.
    16. Hyunbae Chun & Sung-Bae Mun, 2012. "Determinants of R&D cooperation in small and medium-sized enterprises," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 419-436, September.
    17. Jeon, Heesang, 2015. "Knowledge and Contemporary Capitalism in Light of Marx's Value Theory," Thesis Commons g5njk, Center for Open Science.
    18. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2013. "Globalization Localized Technological Change and the Knowledge Economy," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201325, University of Turin.
    19. Mathew, Nanditha & Paily, George, 2020. "STI-DUI innovation modes and firm performance in the Indian capital goods industry: Do small firms differ from large ones?," MERIT Working Papers 2020-008, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    20. Hervas-Oliver, Jose-Luis & Sempere-Ripoll, Francisca & Boronat-Moll, Carles, 2012. "Process innovation objectives and management complementarities: patterns, drivers, co-adoption and performance effects," MERIT Working Papers 2012-051, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:eti:dpaper:16041. 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: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.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.