ABSTRACT

Industrial strategies designed to promote innovation in a set of priority technologies through university–industry collaboration essentially institutionalize a triple helix approach to economic development. Yet, treating universities as a generic resource leaves a question mark as to which institutions are most likely to be most useful. In addition, prior evidence of uneven regional distribution of research income in these technologies suggests that place-based interventions may merely lock in pre-existing inequalities. Therefore, by controlling for spatial and temporal variations among UK universities, this paper examines whether their ability to generate knowledge in these priority technologies is dependent upon their entrepreneurial or engaged nature, and strategic orientation. Using data from the UK Higher Education Business & Community Interaction (HE-BCI) survey, the analysis finds that entrepreneurial activities such as higher levels of licensing income, start-ups and patents are associated with higher levels of research income in these priority technologies. Furthermore, higher levels of income from engagement with businesses through collaboration and contract research are also associated with higher research income in these priority technologies, while strategic orientation has no effect.

摘要

旨在通过大学与产业合作促进一系列优先技术创新的产业战略，实质上将经济发展的三螺旋方法制度化。然而，将大学视为通用资源留下了一个问号，即哪些机构最有可能最有用。此外，这些技术中研究收入区域分布不均的先前证据表明，基于地点的干预可能只是锁定先前存在的不平等。因此，通过控制英国大学之间的空间和时间变化，本文研究了他们在这些优先技术中产生知识的能力是否取决于他们的创业或参与性质以及战略方向。使用来自英国高等教育业务的数据 & 社区互动 (HE-BCI) 调查显示，在这些优先技术方面，较高水平的许可收入、初创企业和专利等创业活动与较高水平的研究收入相关。此外，通过合作和合同研究与企业接触而获得的更高水平的收入也与这些优先技术的更高研究收入相关，而战略导向没有影响。