IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What type of enterprise forges close links with universities and government labs? Evidence from CIS2


  • Mohnen, Pierre
  • Hoareau, Cathy



The purpose of this study is to explore the factors that allow firms to benefit from knowledge developed inuniversities and government labs or that drive them to collaborate with these institutions. A number ofstudies have examined this question from various perspectives: the characteristics of the knowledge beingtransferred, the complementarity between the assets of the two parties involved in the collaboration, and theorganizational aspects facilitating collaboration and knowledge transfer between firms anduniversities/research labs. Santoro and Gopalakrishnan (2000) review this literature and examine inparticular the organizational dimension of industry-university collaborations. Hall, Link and Scott (2000)conclude from their analysis of partnerships in the U.S. Advanced Technology Program that universitiesare invited to collaborate with industry (as a contractor or as a research partner) in projects that involve newscience, unknown technological territory. We shall focus on the economic determinants of collaborationand knowledge-sourcing from universities and government labs, factors such as size, group membership,degree of innovativeness, growth and government support.Universities and government laboratories are more than private firms heavily involved in basic R&Dbecause it has the character of a public good. Many studies, starting with Mansfield (1980), estimate a highrate of return on basic R&D. Adams (1990) estimates high spillover effects from academic R&D. Jaffe(1989) and Acs, Audretsch and Feldman (1992) even find that the geographical proximity to universitiesincreases innovation, be it measured by the degree of patenting or by the number of new productsintroduced in the market. Henderson, Jaffe and Trajtenberg (1998) find that university patents are moreimportant (cited over a few generations of citations) and more general (cited in a broad range of fields) thanthe average patent. There is thus a fair amount of empirical evidence showing that academic institutionsproduce substantial R&D spillovers.Firms should therefore be interested in forging links, perhaps even in collaborating with universities orgovernment laboratories in order to capture timely new technological opportunities stemming from basicresearch. Indeed, proximity to basic science is reported by Cohen (1995) to be one of the main determinantsof innovation. Governments in their quest to maximize the social return of innovation should also beconcerned with fostering such links between private firms and basic research institutions. Not all firms,though, are ready to seek such links and to be able to benefit from them. It would be interesting to knowwhat profile of firm it takes, for instance size, group affiliation, or the presence of research activities, toseek close contacts and collaborate with centers of basic research. Knowing that, governments could focustheir attention to this type of firms to maximize the efficiency in the allocation of public R&D money.The CIS2 (the second European Community Innovation Surveys) database contains two types ofinformation regarding industry links with universities and government labs. One is about the role ofuniversities or government labs as sources of information for innovation, and the other is aboutcollaboration with universities or government labs. Given the other information about enterprises that iscontained in the innovation surveys, we try to uncover some of the factors that encourage firms to interactwith universities or government labs.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohnen, Pierre & Hoareau, Cathy, 2002. "What type of enterprise forges close links with universities and government labs? Evidence from CIS2," Research Memorandum 009, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
  • Handle: RePEc:unm:umamer:2002009

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. David B. Audretsch & Marco Vivarelli, 1994. "Small firms and R&D spillovers : Evidence from Italy," Revue d'Économie Industrielle, Programme National Persée, vol. 67(1), pages 225-237.
    2. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2002. "Complementarity in the Innovation Strategy: Internal R&D, External Technology Acquisition and Cooperation," CEPR Discussion Papers 3284, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 1998. "R&D cooperation and spillovers: Some empirical evidence," Economics Working Papers 328, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    4. James D. Adams & Eric P. Chiang & Jeffrey L. Jensen, 2003. "The Influence of Federal Laboratory R&D on Industrial Research," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(4), pages 1003-1020, November.
    5. Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B & Feldman, Maryann P, 1994. "R&D Spillovers and Recipient Firm Size," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(2), pages 336-340, May.
    6. Duguet, E., 2000. "Knowledge Diffusion, Technological Innovation and TFP Growth at the Firm Level : Evidence from French Manufacturing," Papiers d'Economie Mathématique et Applications 2000.105, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    7. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    8. Mansfield, Edwin, 1980. "Basic Research and Productivity Increase in Manufacturing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 863-873, December.
    9. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2003. "Universities as Research Partners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 485-491, May.
    10. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2003. "Universities as Research Partners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 485-491, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    economics of technology ;

    JEL classification:


    Access and download statistics


    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:unm:umamer:2002009. 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: (Leonne Portz). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    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.