Abstract
This paper outlines China’s progress in developing endogenous capacity for knowledge diffusion and commercialization in the higher education sector. Despite a promising start in the 1980s and early 1990s, academic technology transfer has not kept pace with rapid growth of the country’s overall technological endeavors. But there is evidence of institutional evolution in that university-industry linkages are moving from more hierarchical and rigid forms established under the centrally planned economy into more flexible and market-based arrangements. After probing what underscores the stalling of universities’ new found mission, the paper offers layered policy suggestions on what can be done to overcome the conundrum.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Broadly, they refer to enterprises invested in and owned wholly by universities, operated and owned jointly with outside entities, or invested in partially by universities (Ma 2004; Zhang 2003). Their tradition dates back to the late 1950s, when they served as sites for student experiential learning, as generators of employment, and as a source of supplemental funding for universities.
Assessing the full range of activities of university technology transfer in China is not feasible at this time, given the lack of consistent data. For instance, experience in the West suggests that informal linkages through faculty consulting and collaboration are prevalent and that these frequently contribute to incremental innovations in processes, product designs and organizational software (Cambridge-MIT Institute 2005). However, reliable and systematic information on informal university-industry interaction is nonexistent in China. Inevitably, our analysis supplements statistical data with interviews and other secondary information. Semi-structured with open-ended questions, the interviews are intended to probe into the varying organizational structures and to illustrate the range of practices and perceptions. They help us understand the complex reasoning and historical legacies underlying university and firm decisions.
Jointly sponsored by the State Planning Commission, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Education (MOE) and provincial governments, the “211 Project” targeted a group of 211 institutions during the 9th Five-Year Plan period (1996–2000). On the heel of the “Project 211”, MOE launched the “985 Program” aimed to turn top universities into world-class research universities.
This may be signaling a gradual shift in UILs from affiliated spinoffs into more flexible institutional arrangements, such as joint R&D and publications, contract research, sharing research labs, licensing, and technology sales. To some observers, spinoffs in China are based on hierarchical mechanism rather than market mechanism since they retain substantial connections to universities (Euna et al. 2006). But as domestic firms gradually move upwards along the technology curve, their abilities to absorb new knowledge and conduct in-house R&D increase in tandem. As such, the advantage of affiliated enterprises in knowledge generation inevitably erodes.
For elite universities, major sources of R&D revenue include allocation by central ministries (e.g. MOE, MOST), grants from the National Natural Science Foundation, local government funding, enterprise contract funding, funds converted from other income (e.g. patent licensing, remitted profits from university-affiliated enterprises), and grants from overseas sources (see Wu 2007).
By official definitions, patents in China are divided into three groups: inventions, new utility models, and new exterior designs. Inventions “refer to new technical proposals [on] products, methods, or both.” New utility models “refer to new technical proposals on shape, structure of a product or the combination of both.” New exterior designs “refer to aesthetics and industry-applicable new designs for shape, design or color of a product, or their combination” (Sun 2000, p. 443). Inventions, and to a lesser degree new utility models, are the most fundamental and beneficial paths for technology development in the long run.
The survey includes firms in both manufacturing (about 80%) and business services. Among manufacturing firms, nearly half are S&T firms. The survey focuses on R&D roles of universities, but not their educational roles (Shanghai Chamber of Commerce 2006).
According to a survey of full and associate professors from more than 200 universities in 2000, faculty recruitment was the only item that more than half of the respondents (55%) considered their institutions had relatively more autonomy than in the past (cited in Yang et al. 2007). Autonomy in the other six areas was considered lacking: student recruitment (70% of respondents reported so), academic programs (66%), organizational structure (65%), allocation of funds (57%), promotion process (55%), salary determination and income allocation (53%), and recruitment of senior administrators and departmental heads (52%).
For example, the director of the Tsinghua incubator said that she was able to arrange meeting between a startup and a top official in the Bank of China, another Tsinghua alumni, to discuss collaboration, or to connect the startups with other high-profile organizations such as the Beijing Olympic Organizational Committee for possible service contracts (Zhou 2008, p. 131).
References
Arocena, R., & Sutz, J. (2002). Innovation systems and developing countries. DRUID working paper 02-05, http://www.druid.dk/wp/pdf_files/02-05.pdf.
Bell, M., & Pavitt, K. (1997). Technological accumulation and industrial growth: contrasts between developed and developing countries. In D. Archibugi & J. Michie (Eds.), Technology, globalization and economic performance (pp. 83–137). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Braddock, R. (2003). The Asia-Pacific region. Higher Education Policy, 15, 291–311. http://www.palgrave-journals.com/hep/journal/v15/n3/full/8390219a.html.
Cambridge-MIT Institute. (2005). Measuring university-industry linkages. Available at www.cambridge-mit.org/downloads/InnovationBenchmarking8-17.pdf (retrieved 30 July 2006).
Cao, C. (2009). Chinese applaud dismissal of education minister. UPI Asia.com 3 November (retrieved on 18 January 2010 from http://www.upiasia.com/Society_Culture/2009/11/03/chinese_applaud_dismissal_of_education_minister/1510/).
Chen, K., & Kenney, M. (2007). Universities/research institutes and regional innovation systems: The cases of Beijing and Shenzhen. World Development, 35(6), 1056–1074.
Chongqing Statistical Bureau. (2008). Report on the first innovation survey of Chongqing’s manufacturing firms (chongqingshi diyici gongye qiye chuangxin tiaocha tongji gongbao). Policy & Management, 1, 4–27.
Cohen, W., Nelson, R., & Walsh, J. (2002). Links and impacts: The influence of public research on industrial R&D. Management Science, 48(1), 1–23.
D’Este, P., & Patel, P. (2005). University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors determining the variety of interactions with industry? Paper presented at the Triple Helix5 Conference on The Capitalization of Knowledge, May 18–21, Turin, Italy.
Euna, J., Lee, K., & Wu, G. (2006). Explaining the ‘University-run enterprises’ in China: A theoretical framework for university—Industry relationship in developing countries and its application to China. Research Policy, 35, 1329–1346.
Feller, I. (1999). The American University System as a Performer of Basic and Applied Research. In L. M. Branscomb, F. Kodama, & R. Florida (Eds.), Industrializing Knowledge: University-Industry Linkages in Japan and the United States (pp. 65–101). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gallagher, M., et al. (2009). OECD reviews of tertiary education: China. Retrieved on 25 September 2009 from www.oecd.org.
Gereffi, G. (1995). Global production systems and Third World development. In Global change, regional response: The new international context of development. Cambridge: University Press.
Guan, J., Yam, R., & Mok, C. (2005). Collaboration between Industry and Research Institutes/Universities on Industrial Innovation in Beijing. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 17(3), 339–353.
Han, D. (2008). Innovation and Achievement of China’s Large and Medium-Size Manufacturing Firms (zhongguo guimo yishang gongye qiye chuangxin yu jixiao). Chinese S&T Forum, 11, 42–46.
Henderson, R., Jaffe, A., & Trajtenberg, M. (1998). Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of University Patenting, 1965–1988. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(1), 119–127.
Hershberg, E., Nabeshima, K., & Yusuf, S. (2007). Opening the ivory tower to business: University—Industry linkages and the development of knowledge-intensive clusters in Asian Cities. World Development, 35(6), 931–940.
Liefner, I., & Schiller, D. (2008). Academic capabilities in developing countries—A conceptual framework with empirical illustrations from Thailand. Research Policy, 37(2), 276–293.
Link, A. N., & Siegel, D. S. (2007). Innovation, entrepreneurship, and technological change. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Liu, X., & Lundin, N. (2007). Toward a market-based open innovation system of China. Retrieved on 26 July 2011 from http://www.globelicsacademy.net/2007/papers/Xielin%20Liu%20Paper%201.pdf.
Ma, W. (2004) From Berkeley to Beida and Tsinghua: The Development and Governance of Public Research Universities in the US and China (cong Berkeley dao beida qinghua: zhong mei gongli yanjiuxing daxue jianshe yu yunxing). Beijing: Educational Science Press.
Ministry of Education (MOE). (Various years). China University science and technology annual report. Beijing, China: Higher Education Press.
Ministry of Education (MOE) S&T Development Center. (2009). Report on intellectual properties of Chinese Universities 2008. Beijing: Higher Education Press.
Motohashi, K. (2006). China’s National Innovation System Reform and Growing Science Industry Linkage. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 14(2), 49–65.
Mowery, D., Nelson, R., Sampat, B., & Ziedonis, A. (2004). ‘Ivory Tower’ and industrial innovation: University-industry technology transfer before and after the Bayh-Dole Act. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
National Bureau of Statistics. (2008). Statistical report on the 2007 survey of innovation activities of manufacturing firms. Beijing: China Statistics Press.
O’Shea, R. P., Chugh, H., & Allen, T. J. (2008). Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: A conceptual framework. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(6), 653–666.
Poyago-Theotoky, J., Beath, J., & Siegel, D. S. (2002). Universities and fundamental research: Reflections on the growth of university-industry partnerships. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18(1), 10–21.
Shane, S. (2004). Academic entrepreneurship: University spinoffs and wealth creation. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
Shanghai Chamber of Commerce. (2006). The private economy in Shanghai. Shanghai: Shanghai University of Finance Press.
Shi, Y., Ma, M., Liu, X., & Xie, J. (2008). Indigenous innovation capabilities of manufacturing firms in Hunan Province (hunan gongye qiye zizhu chuangxin nengli yanjiu). Entrepreneurs, 9, 10–12.
Simon, D., & Cao, C. (2009). China’s emerging technological edge: Assessing the role of high-end talent. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Sun, Yifei. (2010). Foreign research and development in China: A sectoral approach. International Journal of Technology Management, 51(2/3/4), 342–363.
Vega-Jurado, J., Fernández-de-Lucio, I., & Huanca, R. (2008). University—Industry relations in Bolivia: Implications for university transformations in Latin America. Higher Education, 56(2), 205–220.
Walsh, K. (2007). China R&D: A high-tech field of dreams. Asia-Pacific Business Review, 13, 321–335.
Wu, W. (2007). Cultivating research universities and industrial linkages: The case of Shanghai, China. World Development, 35(6), 1075–1093.
Wu, W. (2010). Managing and Incentivizing research commercialization in Chinese Universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(2), 203–224.
Xue, L. (2004). University-market linkages in China: The case of university-affiliated enterprises. Paper presented at the symposium on University, Research Institute and Industry Relations in the U.S., Taiwan and Mainland China, Stanford Project on Regions of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Palo Alto, California, September 7–8.
Xue, L. (2006). Universities in China’s national innovation system. Paper prepared for the UNESCO Forum on Higher Education, Research and Knowledge, November 27–30.
Yang, R., Vidovich, L., & Currie, J. (2007). ‘Dancing in a Cage’: Changing autonomy in Chinese higher education. Higher Education, 54, 575–592.
Zhang, J. (2003). The development of high-tech enterprises in China’s Universities (zhongguo gaixiao gaoxin jishu chanye de fazhan yanjiu). Wuhan: Huazhong Science and Technology University Press
Zhou, Y. (2005). The making of an innovative region from a centrally planned economy: Institutional evolution in Zhongguancun Science Park in Beijing. Environment and Planning A, 37, 1113–1134.
Zhou, Y. (2008). Inside story of China’s high-tech industry: Making Silicon Valley in Beijing. Lanham, MA: Rowman & Littlefield.
Zhou, Y., Sun, Y., Wei, Y. H. D., & Lin, G. C. S. (2011). De-centering ‘spatial fix’—Patterns of territorialization and regional technological dynamism of ICT hubs in China. Journal of Economic Geography, 11(1), 119–150.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wu, W., Zhou, Y. The third mission stalled? Universities in China’s technological progress. J Technol Transf 37, 812–827 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-011-9233-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-011-9233-8