Industry, University and Government Partnerships for the Sustainable Development of Knowledge-Based Society

The world has recognized the role and significance of innovation for the economic and social development and national prosperity. The primary players involved in synergizing the innovative capabilities and outcomes for establishing a knowledge-based ecosystem are industries, universities, and government. The partnerships between industry, university and government create opportunities to translate the fundamental research into value-driven products and services. The mechanism of these partnerships has evolved over time—from statist and Laissez faire to the modern triple helix model, where the roles of industries, universities and government are balanced but interdependent and supportive of each other. The key drivers of knowledge-intensive development include institutional and cultural settings, legislations or regulations, support programs, and the promotional structures and mechanisms. Besides introducing the triple helix model and the drivers of knowledge ecosystem, this chapter will present the objectives, motivations, and the organization of chapters in this book.

United States of America is of a special interest in academic studies due to its size, population, resources, and the development quotient. The country has organically advanced in the paradigm of research and innovation through advanced, diverse and strong IUGPs, which resulted in the creation of knowledge-intensive business opportunities and jobs. This chapter provides a comprehensive account on the development of IUGPs in the US. First, we explore the history of the IUGPs in the US—how it evolved and who supported it? Second, we discuss the legislation around the IUGPs, such as the Bayh-Dole Act which is one of the widely credited acts for improving university-industry collaboration and technology transfer in the US national innovation system. Third, we take account of the intermediary structures in the US which support the translation of research results into commercialized products/services, such as the Industry-University Cooperative Research Centers (IUCRCs), Engineering Research Centers (ERC), research parks, and industrial innovation centers. Finally, we review the national policies that encourage the collaboration between universities, industries, and government, such as the public procurement of integrated circuit chips, research and experimentation tax credit program, and small business innovation research program.

The innovation system and IUGP settings of Norway are of special interest because the country has transformed its oil and gas-based growth to knowledge-based development. Norwegian example is most suitable for the small-sized wealthy nations with abundant hydrocarbon resources which are committed to transform their natural capital to knowledge capital. This chapter provides a detailed account on the past and present of innovation system and IUGP initiatives that helped Norway in developing its knowledge ecosystem. We explore the cultural and institutional settings in Norway to find the needs and motivations to transform the Norwegian hydrocarbon economy to knowledge-based economy. The role of the state government has been remarkable in establishing the sector-based public research institutes and a collaborative framework between the research institutes, higher education institutes, and industry. In addition, the enactment of concession laws and the law on the right to inventions made by employees motivated the knowledge-based workforce to innovate and commercialize. At the same time, the establishment of science parks and business parks helped the young entrepreneurs and SMEs to increase their competence level and to compete at the national and international levels. Also, the decentralized public procurement helped in stimulating the domestic market for innovation. Lastly, the public-private partnership programs created further opportunities for technology transfer and commercialization.

Singapore is a rapidly developing country with a diverse population sitting on one of the most strategic locations in the world—Strait of Malacca, which transports more than 50% of world’s commercial goods. Over the past fifty years, the country has transformed itself from a technology user to a technology developer. The main source of human and financial capital in the country is the foreign talent and direct investment. The government has established various agencies and institutions, such as Agency for Science, Technology and Research, to propel domestic innovation in collaboration with MNCs. Most importantly, the government has maintained a liberal immigration policy to attract the overseas talent. Moreover, the IP Act and Competition Act balance each other to promote competition between low-tech and high-tech enterprises but at the same time these regulations ensure a level playing field for all actors in the innovation system of Singapore. Similar to other innovation-driven countries, Singapore has also developed public research institutions, clusters, and science parks. In parallel to the institutional and infrastructure development, there has been an equal emphasis on training and development of human capital. On other hand, a host of public-private partnership programs, such as Technopreneurship21 and GET-UP, ensures collaboration between industries, universities and government at all levels.

Qatar is entirely different from the benchmark countries in terms of its geography, climate, size, mix of population, culture and thus, economic conditions. It is located on the tiny branch out of the Arabian Peninsula in the eastern side of the Arabian Gulf. It is smaller than the size of state of Connecticut with around only 12,000 km² of pretty flat and sandy land. The country is considered quite young as it gained its independence in 1971, with small and homogenous native population (i.e., estimated to be around 300,000) as a minority among its quite internationalized total population of around 2.75 million as of 2018. It is almost entirely economically dependent on its abundant oil and gas reserves (i.e., third largest natural gas reserves in the world). The leadership of the country has taken many steps in the past two decades to attempt to transform the hydrocarbon-based economy to knowledge-based economy. The most prominent step among these is the introduction of Qatar National Vision 2030, which sets out the roadmap of economic transformation and human development in Qatar while protecting its physical, natural and cultural environment. In addition, Qatar Foundation (QF), an initiative of the Royal Family, has been phenomenal in Qatar’s effort to develop a knowledge ecosystem. At the same time, enacting the law of ‘Protection of Intellectual Property and Copyright’, ‘Establishing Free Zone’, and ‘Patents Law’ has clearly demonstrated the intentions and determination of the leadership towards a knowledge-based sustainable development. Furthermore, under the umbrella of QF, Qatar is home to eight international branch campuses which help the country in exploiting its local talent on one hand and attracting the foreign talent on the other. Moreover, Qatar has two national universities and three national research institutions operating in proximity of the international branch campuses, science park, and incubation center. The location of knowledge-intensive institutions in close vicinity in the Education City, which is home to the QF and its member institutes and branch campuses, allow these institutions to collaborate and compete at the same time. Other notable institutions playing key roles in the national innovation system are Qatar Development Bank (QDB), Qatar National Research Fund (QNRF), Qatar Science and Technology Park (QSTP), and the recently established Qatar Research Development Innovation (QRDI) council which offer various necessary funding and support programs to lift the innovational and technological quotient of the country to international standards.

In the first part of this chapter a qualitative comparison of the IUGP enablers is performed between US, Norway, Singapore, and Qatar, which were discussed in detail in Chaps. 2–5. The qualitative comparison reveals that the IUGP history in the US, as one might expect, is the longest in comparison to the other countries. At the same time, Qatar is still at an engagement level in terms of its IUGPs and overall innovation system. In the second part of this chapter, to further explore the specific areas where Qatar has a room to improve (in comparison to the other three countries), a comprehensive quantitative comparison of Global Innovation Index (GII) and its indicators is performed between the four countries (Cornell University, INSEAD, WIPO, 2017). The comparison highlights that Qatar can enhance its innovation system and IUGP settings through improvements in regulatory environment, research and development, market sophistication (such as credit and investment), knowledge-based workforce, knowledge creation, and creative outputs (such as creative goods and services and online creativity).

Qatar’s vision for innovation-driven knowledge economy and sustainable development has been the key motivation for its leadership to strategize and invest in the knowledge ecosystem. Although the outlook of knowledge infrastructure in Qatar, including national and international universities, research and incubation centers, science park, and technology transfer offices, resembles that of the United States, Singapore, and Norway, the country is yet to achieve the same level of excellence in terms of the outcomes. The primary reason for the lack of outputs is that the concept of economic transformation is still new for Qatar and its citizens, and since the overall system is at an infancy stage, some crucial elements of Industry-University-Government partnerships are missing at the execution level. We have already discussed the areas of concern for Qatar in the previous chapter in the light of the Global Innovation Index (Chap. 6), which include regulatory environment, research and development, market and business sophistication, and creativity. In order to learn the reasons behind these shortcomings–albeit the country’s commitment to transform to a knowledge-based economy–we conducted interviews and survey with the experts that have firsthand experience of working in the R&D and Industry-University-Government settings in Qatar. In the first part of this chapter, we present the findings of the interviews and survey while in the second part, we propose recommendations to make the knowledge ecosystem in Qatar more effective and efficient.