Transcript in3.dem.ist.utl.pt

S & T Policy
BENCHMARKING
INDUSTRY-SCIENCE RELATIONSHIPS
OCDE – March 2002
Anabela Piedade
Gilson Leal Roda
Nuno Jorge David
Master in Engineering Policy and Management of Technology
1
The Report Goals
• Analyses the changing role of industry-science
relationships (ISR) in national innovation systems.
• Proposes a conceptual framework for assessment of
ISR.
• Presents indicators on international differences in
ISR configuration and intensity.
• Identifies good practices for ISR improvement.
Master in Engineering Policy and Management of Technology
2
Conceptual framework for assessing Industry-Science Relationships
Master in Engineering Policy and Management of Technology
3
Formal mechanisms for Industry-Science Relationships: the tip of an iceberg
Joint labs
Government policy
Framework conditions
Support schemes
Spin-offs
Specific regulations
(e.g. IPRs)
Financial incentives to
co-operative research
(e.g. Framework
Programme in the EU)
Licensing
Education
policy
Labour market
policy
Public procurement
Financial policies
Regional and urban
planning policies
Competition policy
Co-operative Research
Centres (e.g. CRCs in
Australia)
i n cu b a to rs ,
s c ie n c e p a rk s ,
clu s te rs ,
in te rm e d ia rie s
Research contracts
Public seed capital funds
(e.g. I-Source in France)
Mobility of researchers
Publicly funded
intermediaries (e.g.
Fraunhofer in Germany)
Co-publications
Thematic research
networks (e.g. RNRT in
France)
Promotion of researchers'
mobility (e.g. TCS in the
United Kingdom)
Conferences, expos
& specialised media
Informal contacts within
professional networks
Flow of graduates to industry
Master in Engineering Policy and Management of Technology
4
Formal mechanisms for Industry-Science Relationships: Knowledge flows
Joint labs
Degree of codification
Spin-offs
Licensing
Scientific
papers
Research contracts
Conferences, expos
& specialised media
High
Infratechnologies
Mobility of researchers
Co-publications
Exclusive
patents
Prototypes
Know-how
& expertise
Low
Low
Appropriability
High
Informal contacts within
professional networks
Flow of graduates to industry
Master in Engineering Policy and Management of Technology
5
Availability of Benchmarking Indicators
Master in Engineering Policy and Management of Technology
6
Pilot Study on France and The United Kingdom – The Benchmarking Process
Master in Engineering Policy and Management of Technology
7
Comparative ISR indicators
Master in Engineering Policy and Management of Technology
8
ISR policy objectives and instruments in France and the United Kingdom
Master in Engineering Policy and Management of Technology
9
Pilot Study on France and The United Kingdom – Concluding Remarks
Developing a benchmarking culture
The ISR policy instruments together constitute a system; the efficiency of a
particular instrument needs to be considered within this broader framework. This
comparison between ISRs in France and the United Kingdom has shown that
different combinations of actions can be used to build integrated policy instruments.
In this context, it is important to promote a benchmarking culture among all
stakeholders.
Developing benchmarking indicators
The existing indicators in this area are particularly ill suited for meaningful
international comparisons. In addition, they are not sufficient to inform a policyoriented discussion; relevant information is often held by the research institutions
and there is a need to collect and aggregate such information in order to draw
clearer national pictures. Significant indicators should exploit data on patenting,
licensing, spin-offs, co-publications between industry and university, citation of
industry papers by academics, labour mobility and financial flows. Data from the
Community Innovation Surveys (CIS) can also provide useful indicators of
interactions between public research institutions and industry.
Master in Engineering Policy and Management of Technology
10
Questions for debate
•
What are the most important bottlenecks in ISRs: low demand from the
private sector, low quality or share of publicly funded industry-relevant
research, obstacles to researchers’ mobility, lack of entrepreneurship in the
research community?
•
Are more intensive ISRs always more effective? How far should
universities and public labs be allowed or pushed to develop their
commercialisation activities?
•
What safeguards should be in place to ensure that publicly funded research
institutions do not strengthen their linkages with industry at the expense of
their main missions (generation and diffusion of knowledge through free
research and education, mission-oriented research to serve public interest,
impartial scientific expertise)?
Master in Engineering Policy and Management of Technology
11