Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

University knowledge and firm innovation: evidence from European countries

  • Published:
The Journal of Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In recent decades, firms have intensified the exploration of external sources of knowledge to enhance their innovation capabilities. This paper presents an empirical analysis of the factors that affect the importance of academic knowledge for firms’ innovation activities. An integrated approach that simultaneously considers country- and firm-level factors is adopted. Regarding the former factors, the analysis shows that the entrepreneurial orientation of university and the quality of academic research increase the importance of knowledge transfers from universities to firms. This suggests that the environmental and institutional context contributes to cross-national disparities in university-industry interactions and the effectiveness of knowledge transfer. In regard to the latter factors, the results indicate that firms oriented toward open search strategies and radical innovations are more likely to draw knowledge from universities. Furthermore, firms belonging to high technology sectors and firms with high absorptive capacity place greater value on the various links with universities. With respect to firm size, the estimates show an inverted U-shaped relation with the importance of universities as a source of knowledge.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Due to the criteria used to select observations and missing values for some variables, the final sample only includes 14 of the 16 countries available. Norway and Ireland do not have any observations that meet the above mentioned criteria.

  2. For Patents and GERD business-university the source of data is Eurostat and 2006 is the reference year.

  3. Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) is a British company specialized in education and study abroad. The company releases annual university rankings to compare the world's top universities. Today, the rankings are known as the QS World University Rankings and are considered as one of the three most influential university rankings in the world, along with the Times Higher Education World University Rankings and the Academic Ranking of World Universities.

  4. With ordinal dependent variables, the assumptions of ordinary least square estimator are violated (normality and homoscedasticity of error term) which can lead to incorrect inferences. Ordered logit and ordered probit models provide consistent estimates. For more details, see Greene (2008).

References

  • Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1994). R&D spillovers and recipient firm size. Review of Economics and Statistics, 76(2), 336–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altomonte, C., Aquilante, T., Békés, G., & Ottaviano, G. I. (2013). Internationalization and innovation of firms: Evidence and policy. Economic Policy, 28(76), 663–700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., Leyden, D. P., & Link, A. N. (2013). Regional appropriation of university-based knowledge and technology for economic development. University of North Carolina Working Paper.

  • Azagra-Caro, J. M. (2007). What type of faculty member interacts with what type of firm? Some reasons for the delocalization of university-industry interaction. Technovation, 27(11), 704–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bekkers, R., & Bodas Freitas, I. M. (2008). Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter? Research Policy, 37(10), 1837–1853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belderbos, R., Carree, M., & Lokshin, B. (2004). Cooperative R&D and firm performance. Research Policy, 33(10), 1477–1492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitz, J., & Feldmann, M. (2006). Entrepreneurial universities and technology transfer: A conceptual framework for understanding knowledge-based economic development. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(1), 175–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergmam, E. M. (2010). Knowledge links between European universities and firms: A review. Paper in Regional Science, 89(2), 311–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: A review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29(4–5), 627–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bratti, M., & Felice, G. (2011). Are exporters more likely to introduce product innovations? The World Economy, 35(11), 1559–1598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caldera, A., & Debande, O. (2010). Performance of Spanish universities in technology transfer: An empirical analysis. Research Policy, 39(9), 1160–1173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organisational pathways of transformation. Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2002). Links and impacts: The influence of public research on industrial R&D. Management Science, 48(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, J. A., & Link, A. N. (2014). Fostering university-industry R&D collaborations in European Union countries. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11365-014-0317-4

  • D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2011). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 316–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Este, P., & Patel, P. (2007). University-Industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry? Research Policy, 36(9), 1295–1313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Escribano, A., Fosfuri, A., & Tribó, J. A. (2009). Managing external knowledge flows: The moderating role of absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 38(1), 96–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H. (1983). Entrepreneurial scientists and entrepreneurial universities in American academic science. Minerva, 21, 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29(2), 313–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feller, I. (1990). Universities as engines of R&D-based economic growth: They think they can. Research Policy, 19(4), 335–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fontana, R., Geuna, A., & Matt, M. (2006). Factors affecting university-industry R&D projects: The importance of searching, screening and signaling. Research Policy, 35(2), 309–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, J., & Silberman, J. (2003). University technology transfer: Do incentives, management, and location Matter? Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(1), 17–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geuna, A., & Muscio, A. (2009). The governance of university knowledge transfer: A critical review of the literature. Minerva: A review of Science, Learning and Policy, 47(1), 423–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W. H. (2008). Econometric analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z. (1998). R&D and productivity: The econometric evidence. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2010). The development of an entrepreneurial university. Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(1), 43–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, K. F., & Yu, C. M. (2011). The effect of competitive and non-competitive R&D collaboration on firm innovation. Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(4), 383–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A. (1989). Real effects of academic research. American Economic Review, 79(5), 957–970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katila, R., & Ahuja, G. (2002). Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behaviour and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1183–1194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinknecht, A., & Reijnen, J. O. (1992). Why do firms cooperate on R&D? An empirical study. Research Policy, 21(4), 347–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klevorick, A. K., Levin, R. C., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1995). On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities. Research Policy, 24(2), 185–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kodama, F. (1995). Emerging patterns of innovation: Sources of Japan’s technological edge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landry, R., Saihi, M., Amara, N., & Ouimet, M. (2010). Evidence on how academics manage their portfolio of knowledge transfer activities. Research Policy, 39(10), 1387–1403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane, P. J., Salk, J. E., & Lyles, M. A. (2001). Absorptive capacity, learning, and performance in international joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 22(12), 1139–1161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2004). Searching high and low: What type of firms use universities as a source of innovation? Research Policy, 33(8), 1201–1215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. S. (2000). The sustainability of university-industry research collaboration: An empirical assessment. Journal of Technology Transfer, 25(2), 111–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer, M., Nell, P., & Garber, L. (2009). A national systems view of university entrepreneurialism: Inferences from comparison of the German and US experience. Research Policy, 38(2), 268–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., & Bozeman, D. (2007). An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 641–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mairesse, J., & Mohnen, P. (2010). Using innovation surveys for econometric analysis. NBER Working Paper No. 15857.

  • Mansfield, E. (1991). Academic research and industrial innovation. Research Policy, 20(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E. (1995). Academic research underlying industrial innovations: Sources, characteristics, and financing. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(1), 55–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E., & Lee, J. Y. (1996). The modern university: Contributor to industrial innovation and recipient of industrial R&D support. Research Policy, 25(7), 1047–1058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinelli, A., Meyer, M., & von Tunzelmann, N. (2008). Becoming an entrepreneurial university? A case study of knowledge exchange relationships and faculty attitudes in a medium-sized, research-oriented university. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), 259–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathieu, A. (2011). University-industry interactions and knowledge transfer mechanisms: A critical survey. CEB Working Paper 11/015.

  • Mavi, R. K. (2014). Indicators of entrepreneurial university: Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5(2), 370–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer-Krahmer, F., & Schmoch, U. (1998). Science-based technologies: University-industry interactions in four fields. Research Policy, 27(8), 835–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monjon, S., & Waelbroeck, P. (2003). Assessing spillovers from universities to firms: Evidence from French firm-level Data. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21(9), 1255–1270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (1996). Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 77–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, P. (2006). Exploring the knowledge filter: How entrepreneurial and university-industry relationships drive economic growth. Research Policy, 35(10), 1499–1508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narin, F., Hamilton, K., & Olivastro, D. (1997). The increasing linkage between US technology and public science. Research Policy, 26(3), 317–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nieto, M. J., & Santamaría, L. (2007). The importance of diverse collaborative networks for the novelty of product innovation. Technovation, 27, 367–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owen-Smith, J., Riccaboni, M., Pammolli, F., & Powell, W. W. (2002). A comparison of US and European university-industry relations in the life sciences. Management Science, 48(1), 24–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payumo, J. G., Arasu, P., Fauzi, A. M., Siregar, I. Z., & Noviana, D. (2013). An entrepreneurial, research-based university model focused on intellectual property management for economic development in emerging economies: The case of Bogor Agricultural University. World Patent Information, 36, 22–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petruzzelli, A. M. (2011). The impact of technological relatedness, prior ties, and geographical distance on university-industry collaborations: A joint-patent analysis. Technovation, 31(7), 309–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenkopf, L., & Nerkar, A. (2001). Beyond local search: Boundary-spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry. Strategic Management Journal, 22(4), 287–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., & Jiang, L. (2007). Entrepreneurial activities at universities: Past research, current state, and future directions. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 691–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santoro, M. D., & Bierly, P. E. (2006). Facilitators of knowledge transfer in university-industry collaborations: A knowledge-based perspective. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 53(4), 495–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schartinger, D., Schibany, A., & Gassler, H. (2001). Interactive relations between universities and firms: Empirical evidence for Austria. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(3), 255–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shan, W., Walker, G., & Kogut, B. (1994). Interfirm cooperation and startup innovation in the biotechnology industry. Strategic Management Journal, 15(5), 387–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Link, A. N. (2003a). Commercial knowledge transfers from universities to firms: Improving the effectiveness of university–industry collaboration. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14(1), 111–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D., Waldman, D., & Link, A. N. (2003b). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srholec, M. (2014). Understanding the diversity of cooperation on innovation across countries: Multilevel evidence from Europe. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 1, 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, T. E., Ozdemir, S. Z., & Ding, W. W. (2007). Vertical alliance networks: The case of university-biotechnology-pharmaceutical alliance chains. Research Policy, 36(4), 477–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subramaniam, M., & Youndt, M. A. (2005). The influence of intellectual capital on the types of innovative capabilities. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 450–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tijssen, R. J. (2006). Universities and industrially relevant science: Towards measurement models and indicators of entrepreneurial orientation. Research Policy, 35(10), 1569–1585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Looy, B., Landoni, P., Callaert, J., van Pottelsberghe, B., Spasalis, E., & Bedackere, K. (2011). Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs. Research Policy, 40(4), 553–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Oort, F. G., Burger, M. J., Knoben, J., & Raspe, O. (2012). Multilevel approaches and the firm-agglomeration ambiguity in economic growth studies. Journal of Economic Surveys, 23(3), 468–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Wijk, R., Jansen, J. J., & Lyles, M. A. (2008). Inter- and intra-organizational knowledge transfer: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its antecedents and consequences. Journal of Management Studies, 45(4), 830–853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veugelers, R., & Cassiman, B. (2005). R&D cooperation between firms and universities. Some empirical evidence from Belgian manufacturing. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 23(5–6), 355–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veugelers, R., & Del Rey, E. (2014). The contribution of universities to innovation, (regional) growth and employment. EENEE Analytical Report No: European Expert Network on Economics of Education. 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, E. (1998). Economics of product development by users: The impact of sticky local information. Management Science, 44(5), 629–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E., & Sapienza, H. J. (2001). Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6–7), 587–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the participants at the International Conference on Technology Transfer, Urbino, Italy and at The Christmas Workshop, Hohenheim, Germany. We are grateful for comments and suggestions from Francesco Venturini (discussant). We thank Lisa Tarzia for the revision of the paper. Andrea Bellucci acknowledges the support from the FP7 Marie Curie Actions of the European Commission, via the Intra European Fellowship (Grant Agreement Number PIEF-GA-2012-331728). Luca Pennacchio (l.pennacchio@unina.it) acknowledges the support of REPOS project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IAW, Institute for Applied Economic Research at the University of Tubingen, Ob dem Himmelreich 1, 72074, Tubingen, Germany

    A. Bellucci

  2. Department of Economics and Statistics, University of Naples Federico II, Via Cintia, 45 - Monte S. Angelo, 80126, Naples, Italy

    L. Pennacchio

Authors
  1. A. Bellucci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. Pennacchio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. Pennacchio.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bellucci, A., Pennacchio, L. University knowledge and firm innovation: evidence from European countries. J Technol Transf 41, 730–752 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9408-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9408-9

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation