IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

“Universities, Entrepreneurship and Local Economic Development'

  • Navid Bazzazian


  • Thomas √Östebro
Registered author(s):

    There has been an increased trend in the number of spin-offs generated by universities in the past thirty years. Past research reveals that the majority of these start-ups are located in the same region as the university from which they originated. In this paper, we investigate critically what universities do to encourage entrepreneurship to increase regional economic development. We will also discuss whether maximizing local entrepreneurship necessarily maximizes total welfare. Unfortunately, the scientific evidence reviewed in this paper indicates that policy changes at universities typically have very little impact on commercialization of research and the benefits to the universities are marginal. For example, current evidence indicates that creating incubators and science parks on university grounds have no discernable effects on local start-up rates. Further, from a theoretical perspective we have reviewed articles showing that introducing Technology Licensing Offices (TLOs), the most popular method to stimulate research commercialization, may likely introduce economic inefficiencies, hold-ups and decision biases that deviate from what is optimal. The median university among the top U.S. research-based institutions creates less than two academic spin-offs per year and so the relative effects on local economic conditions through TLO efforts and policies are bound to be marginal. Nevertheless the evidence also shows that the scientific stature of the faculty, the commercialization culture at the university, and the sheer number of science and engineering students graduated do have important positive effects on local start-up rates. Increasing expenditures on university staff and students causes increases in regional productivity growth and innovation and the marginal effects are much bigger in structurally weak regions. Evidence confirms that university spin-offs disproportionally favor local development. Maybe as much as 80 percent of all university spin-offs are and remain locally situated. However, universities that maximize local effects will not maximize their societal impact. Instead, it appears more efficient if universities simply try to maximize licensing revenues and not worry about the number of spin-offs and their locations.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by European Regional Science Association in its series ERSA conference papers with number ersa10p822.

    in new window

    Date of creation: Sep 2011
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa10p822
    Contact details of provider: Postal: Welthandelsplatz 1, 1020 Vienna, Austria
    Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Georg Von Graevenitz & Dietmar Harhoff & Richard Weber, 2010. "The Effects of Entrepreneurship Education," Post-Print hal-00856605, HAL.
    2. Roberts, Edward B., 1991. "The technological base of the new enterprise," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 283-298, August.
    3. Lach, Saul & Schankerman, Mark, 2003. "Incentives and Invention in Universities," CEPR Discussion Papers 3916, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. David B. Audretsch & Taylor Aldridge & Alexander Oettl, 2006. "The Knowledge Filter and Economic Growth: The Role of Scientist Entrepreneurship," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2006-11, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
    5. Andersson, Roland & Quigley, John M. & Wilhelmsson, Mats, 2009. "Urbanization, Productivity and Innovation: Evidence from Investment in Higher Education," Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy, Working Paper Series qt9b4885mq, Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy.
    6. Donald S. Siegel & Mike Wright & Andy Lockett, 2007. "The rise of entrepreneurial activity at universities: organizational and societal implications," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 489-504, August.
    7. Sharon Belenzon & Mark Schankerman, 2009. "University Knowledge Transfer: Private Ownership, Incentives, and Local Development Objectives," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(1), pages 111-144, 02.
    8. Lockett, Andy & Wright, Mike, 2005. "Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1043-1057, September.
    9. Djordje Djokovic & Vangelis Souitaris, 2008. "Spinouts from academic institutions: a literature review with suggestions for further research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 225-247, June.
    10. KruegerJR, Norris F. & Reilly, Michael D. & Carsrud, Alan L., 2000. "Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(5-6), pages 411-432.
    11. Gideon D. Markman & Donald S. Siegel & Mike Wright, 2008. "Research and Technology Commercialization," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 1401-1423, December.
    12. Roland Andersson & John M. Quigley & Mats Wilhelmson, 2004. "University decentralization as regional policy: the Swedish experiment," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 371-388, August.
    13. Franklin, Stephen J & Wright, Mike & Lockett, Andy, 2001. " Academic and Surrogate Entrepreneurs in University Spin-Out Companies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 127-41, January.
    14. Hsu, David H. & Roberts, Edward B. & Eesley, Charles E., 2007. "Entrepreneurs from technology-based universities: Evidence from MIT," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 768-788, June.
    15. Frank T. Rothaermel & Shanti D. Agung & Lin Jiang, 2007. "University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 691-791, August.
    16. Katz, Jerome A., 2003. "The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education: 1876-1999," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 283-300, March.
    17. O'Shea, Rory P. & Allen, Thomas J. & Chevalier, Arnaud & Roche, Frank, 2005. "Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 994-1009, September.
    18. Alain Fayolle & B. Gailly & N. Lassas-Clerc, 2006. "Assessing the Impact of Entrepreneurship Education Programmes: A New Methodology," Post-Print halshs-00133044, HAL.
    19. Jurgen Egeln & Sandra Gottschalk & Christian Rammer, 2004. "Location Decisions of Spin-offs from Public Research Institutions," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 207-223.
    20. Mcmullan, W. Ed & Long, Wayne A., 1987. "Entrepreneurship education in the nineties," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 261-275.
    21. Gideon D. Markman & Peter T. Gianiodis & Phillip H. Phan, 2009. "Supply-Side Innovation and Technology Commercialization," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 625-649, 06.
    22. Zucker, Lynne G & Darby, Michael R & Brewer, Marilynn B, 1998. "Intellectual Human Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 290-306, March.
    23. Souitaris, Vangelis & Zerbinati, Stefania & Al-Laham, Andreas, 2007. "Do entrepreneurship programmes raise entrepreneurial intention of science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 566-591, July.
    24. Powers, Joshua B. & McDougall, Patricia, 2005. "Policy orientation effects on performance with licensing to start-ups and small companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1028-1042, September.
    25. Zucker, Lynne G & Darby, Michael R & Armstrong, Jeff, 1998. "Geographically Localized Knowledge: Spillovers or Markets?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(1), pages 65-86, January.
    26. Bagozzi, Richard P. & Baumgartner, Johann & Yi, Youjae, 1989. "An investigation into the role of intentions as mediators of the attitude-behavior relationship," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 35-62, March.
    27. Friedman, Joseph & Silberman, Jonathan, 2003. " University Technology Transfer: Do Incentives, Management, and Location Matter?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 17-30, January.
    28. Di Gregorio, Dante & Shane, Scott, 2003. "Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 209-227, February.
    29. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2007. "University licensing," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 620-639, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa10p822. 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: (Gunther Maier)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.