IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpio/0204003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The public and private spheres of knowledge within the field of space communications

Author

Listed:
  • emmanuel HASSAN

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to examine the modalities of the organization of R&D activities between the main institutional sectors (higher-education, government, industry) within the field of space communications in the Triad countries. The analysis of these modalities is complex since the delimitations of the public and private spheres of R&D activities are liable to change depending on whether the funding, the production or the utilization of knowledge is considered. To that end, we show that the principle of an institutional diversity associated with the organisation of R&D activities between these sectors can in fact be questioned. Indeed, the specific logics and pratices of the main institutional sectors become rather interlinked. Implications of this “institutional overlapping” on the dynamic of R&D activities in the field are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • emmanuel HASSAN, 2002. "The public and private spheres of knowledge within the field of space communications," Industrial Organization 0204003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpio:0204003
    Note: Type of Document - Acrobat PDF; prepared on IBM PC ; to print on HP/PostScript/Franciscan monk; pages: 33 ; figures: included
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/io/papers/0204/0204003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Diana Hicks & Sylvan Katz, 1997. "A National Research Network Viewed from an Industrial Perspective," Revue d'Économie Industrielle, Programme National Persée, vol. 79(1), pages 129-142.
    2. Adam B. Jaffe & Josh Lerner, 1999. "Privatizing R&D: Patent Policy and the Commercialization of National Laboratory Technologies," NBER Working Papers 7064, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Gambardella, Alfonso, 1992. "Competitive advantages from in-house scientific research: The US pharmaceutical industry in the 1980s," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 391-407, October.
    4. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67, pages 297-297.
    5. Gibbons, Michael & Johnston, Ron, 1974. "The roles of science in technological innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 220-242, November.
    6. Bozeman, Barry, 2000. "Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 627-655, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Malo, Stéphane, 2009. "The contribution of (not so) public research to commercial innovations in the field of combinatorial chemistry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 957-970, July.
    2. Leten, Bart & Kelchtermans, Stijn & Belderbos, Ren, 2010. "Internal Basic Research, External Basic Research and the Technological Performance of Pharmaceutical Firms," Working Papers 2010/12, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    3. Leten, Bart & Landoni, Paolo & Van Looy, Bart, 2014. "Science or graduates: How do firms benefit from the proximity of universities?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1398-1412.
    4. Rotolo, Daniele & Camerani, Roberto & Grassano, Nicola & Martin, Ben R., 2022. "Why do firms publish? A systematic literature review and a conceptual framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    5. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Veugelers, Reinhilde, 1997. "Internal R & D expenditures and external technology sourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 303-315, October.
    7. Ioanna Kastelli & Aggelos Tsakanikas & Yannis Caloghirou, 2018. "Technology transfer as a mechanism for dynamic transformation in the food sector," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 882-900, August.
    8. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Wang, Jian, 2019. "Scientific novelty and technological impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1362-1372.
    9. O’Kane, Conor & Mangematin, Vincent & Geoghegan, Will & Fitzgerald, Ciara, 2015. "University technology transfer offices: The search for identity to build legitimacy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 421-437.
    10. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 275-314, Elsevier.
    11. 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).
    12. Choi, Jin-Uk & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2022. "The differential effects of basic research on firm R&D productivity: The conditioning role of technological diversification," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    13. Quintas, Paul & Guy, Ken, 1995. "Collaborative, pre-competitive R&D and the firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 325-348, May.
    14. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & Aldo Geuna & Federica Rossi, 2011. "University–Industry Interactions: The Unresolved Puzzle," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 11, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Becker, Wolfgang & Dietz, Jurgen, 2004. "R&D cooperation and innovation activities of firms--evidence for the German manufacturing industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 209-223, March.
    16. Añón Higón, Dolores, 2016. "In-house versus external basic research and first-to-market innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 816-829.
    17. Dolores Añón Higón, 2016. "In-house versus External Basic Research and First-to-market Innovations," Working Papers 1601, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    18. McLeish, Caitriona & Nightingale, Paul, 2007. "Biosecurity, bioterrorism and the governance of science: The increasing convergence of science and security policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1635-1654, December.
    19. Archibugi, Daniele & Filippetti, Andrea, 2018. "The retreat of public research and its adverse consequences on innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 97-111.
    20. Waverly W. Ding, 2011. "The Impact of Founders' Professional-Education Background on the Adoption of Open Science by For-Profit Biotechnology Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(2), pages 257-273, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    space communications; knowledge production; division of labor; allocation of resources; knowledge diffusion;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights
    • H5 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies
    • L63 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Microelectronics; Computers; Communications Equipment

    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:wpa:wuwpio:0204003. 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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.