HOME PAGE | |
№ 2015/1
1National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy
Development of innovation activities within knowledge triangle "government-university-industry"
Ekon. prognozuvannâ 2015; 1:76-88 | https://doi.org/10.15407/eip2015.01.076 |
ABSTRACT ▼
Article presents the methodological and analytical generalization of the modern practices of the institutional ensuring of the organic cooperation in frame of innovation cycle by the government, Universities and industries. The "Triple Helix" innovation mode is considered in order to undertake the international comparative analysis of Ukraine's competitiveness according to appropriate indicators. Author proposes to improve the Ukrainian current innovation policy through the creation and supporting the special institutional measures regarding to enhancing the interaction between the government, Universities and businesses.
The core of the proposed conceptual model is the Schumpeterian theory of economic development and its policy implications in the economically successful countries which have become such because they constantly generate new commercialized knowledge in the forms of process and product innovations. Therefore, dynamic and successful countries consider the transformation of institutions that promote the development of knowledge and innovation potential among the immediate reform measures. It concerns the reform of the institutions of education and science, infrastructure of transfer of innovative technologies, supporting of innovation in all areas of life, providing a major international integration of the country to the world educational, scientific and innovative ecosystem.
In order to realize such approach, the developed countries have transformed the forms and methods of innovation policy by building the new effective managerial and organizational conditions to activate the processes of generating and commercializing innovations through changing their innovation mode: from the "linear" model of innovation cycle to the "cooperative" one, i.e. to the "Triple Helix" mode. These methodological and practical transformations have changed radically the role and significance of the forms of interaction between institutions of science, education and business in the innovation process and have raised the role of Universities. This led to the formation of a new type of university – Entrepreneurial University.
It is important to create in Ukraine a special institutional background to build a "cooperative" model innovation cycle, to develop and adopt regulations that will promote processes of self-organization in the area of innovation cooperation of research institutions and universities on the one hand, and business and government agencies - on the other. In this context the problem of greater autonomy for universities becomes very urgent. Also, this autonomy can help ensure a greater diversification of the sources of funding (through commercial relations with businesses and government agencies under innovation cycle) and to become more flexible and mobile in answering the challenges of external market environment.
Keywords: University's innovation policy, "Triple Helix" concept, innovation cycle, innovation ecosystem "Government – University – Indu
JEL: I25, O25, O32, O38
Article in English (pp. 76 - 88) | Download | Downloads :883 |
Article in Ukrainian (pp. 76 - 88) | Download | Downloads :802 |
REFERENCES ▼
2. Europe 2020: A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth (2010). European Commission.
3. Bazhal, Yu. M. (2013). Conceptual framework and content strategy for economic growth of the European Union in the XXI century. Strategy of economic growth of the European Union. Kyiv: Pul'sary, 11-50 [in Ukrainian].
4. Nelson, R. (Ed.) (1993). National systems of innovation: A comparative study. Oxford University Press.
5. Regional Innovation Scoreboard (2014). European Union.
6. Science and Engineering Indicators. National Science Board (2014). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
7. Etzkowitz, H. (2008). The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action. Routledge. doi: doi.org/10.4324/9780203929605
8. Semynozhenko, V. (2013). Is it possible in Ukraine an innovative leap? Dzerkalo tyzhnia. Ukraina – Zerkalo Nedeli. Ukraine, 17 May [in Ukrainian].
9. Halan, N.I. (2010). Japanese universities in the "triple helix": example Tohoku. Nauka ta innovatsii – Science and Innovation, Vol. 6, 3, 55-65 [in Ukrainian].
10. Law of Ukraine on Higher Education (2014). Kyiv: Vydavnychyj Dim "In Yure" [in Ukrainian].
11. Audretsch, D., Leyden, D., Link., A. (2012). Universities as Research Partners in Publicly Supported Entrepreneurial Firms. WP 12-2, University of North Carolina at Greensboro. doi: doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2012.656523
12.Thorp, H., Goldstein, B. (2010). Engines of Innovation: The Entrepreneurial University in the Twenty-First Century. The University of North Karolina Press.
13. Sengupta, S. (2013). The Pentagon as Silicon Valley's Incubator, New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2013/08/23/technology/the-pentagon-as-start-up-incubator.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
14. Townsend, A.M. (2013). Smart Cities: Big Data, Civic Hackers, and the Quest for a New Utopia. W.W.Norton & Company, Inc.
15. Creative Knowledge Cities. Myths, Visions and Realities. Marina van Geenhuizen, Peter Nijkamp (Eds.) (2012). Edward Elgar Pbl.
16. Batty M. (2013). The New Science of Cities. MIT Press.
17. Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D. S. and Wright, M. (2011). 30 years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40, 1045-1057. doi: doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.04.005
18. Patents Awarded to U.S. Universities. National Science Foundation (2011), Retrieved from www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind93/chap5/doc/5e293.htm
19. Mowery, D.C., Nelson, R.R., Sampat, B.N. and Ziedonis, A.A. (2004). Ivory tower and industrial innovation: University-industry technology before and after the Bayh-Dole Act in the United States. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
20. Macdonald, S. (2009). Seducing the goose. Patenting by UK Universities. University of Sheffield. Retrieved from www.stuartmacdonald.org.uk/pdfs/goose.pdf
21. Azagra-Caro, J. (2010). Do public research organisations own most patents invented by their staff? Science and Public Policy, 38 (3), 237-250.
22. Geuna, A., Rossi, F. (2011). Changes to university IPR regulations in Europe and the impact on academic Patenting. Research Policy, 40, 1068-1076. doi: doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.05.008
23. Kodama, T. (2008). The role of intermediation and absorptive capacity in facilitating university–industry linkages – An empirical study of TAMA in Japan. Research Policy, 37, 1224-1240. doi: doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.014
24. Tijssen, R. (2012). R&D globalization processes and university–industry research cooperation: Measurement and indicators. CWTS Working Paper Series, CWTS-WP-2012-009. Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), Leiden University.
25. Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a triple helix of university-industry-government relation. Research Policy, 29, 109-123. doi: doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
26. Altmann, Andreas, Ebersberger, Bernd (Eds.). (2013). Universities in Change: Managing Higher Education Institutions in the Age of Globalization, Springer, 372 p.
27. Study on University-Business Cooperation in the US. Final report (EAC-2011-0469), LSE Enterprise, 2013.
28. Slaughter, S. and Larry, Leslie. (1997). Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies and the Entrepreneurial Universities. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press.
29. Godin, B., Gingras, Y. (2000). The place of universities in the system of knowledge production. Research Policy, 29, 273-278. doi: doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00065-7
30. Almeida, M.C., Mello, J.M.C. and Etzkowitz, H. (2012). Social innovation in a developing country: invention and diffusion of the Brazilian Cooperative Incubator'. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 6, 206-224. doi: doi.org/10.1504/IJTG.2012.048326
31. Kobzeva, L.V. (2013). The Entrepreneurial University: how to integrate the university into the economy in the new decade. Retrieved from innclub.info/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/kobzeva_56_obr_00_YTR.doc
32. Grudzinskij, A.O. (2004). Project-oriented university. Nizhnij Novgorod : Izd-vo Nizhegorodskogo gosudarstvennogo un-ta.
33. Salter, A.J., Martin, B.R. (2001). The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review. Research Policy, 30, 509-532. doi: doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00091-3
34. Mansfield, Ed. (1991). Academic Research and Industrial Innovations. Research Policy, 20, 1-12. doi: doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(91)90080-A
35. Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Research groups as 'quasi-firms': The invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32, 109. doi: doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00009-4
Events calendar
M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | ||||||
2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
30 |