Institutionalizing University-Business Innovation Systems in an Innovation Economy



Abstract Views
160

Downloads
228

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Mar 26, 2023
Published May 11, 2023
10.24018/ejbmr.2023.8.3.1935

Abstract viewed = 160 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

The purpose, design and operation of universities and institutions of higher learning are being transformed. The transformations are requiring universities to lead the process of innovation. Collaboration with stakeholders is accelerated through innovation ecosystems that are functional in some universities. Innovation hubs are powerhouses of innovations at the apex of science and technological advancement. Traditional university designs have their strength in pure science but limit interdisciplinary integration and innovation. Government, private sector and philanthropists are key funders of innovation projects. Universities with a central role in the national and global innovation system exhibit varying impact, a few have exceedingly succeeded in this endeavor and innovation systems are avenues to have national and regional impact. A university is a place of discovery where academics, researchers, government, students, community and companies work together in an innovation ecosystem to develop solutions and products that have an impact on our society. Institutionalizing innovation laboratories is a winning strategy for powering science-led economies.
Keywords: Business Economy Innovation University

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Boon, W., & Edler, J. (2018). Demand, challenges, and innovation. Making sense of new trends in innovation policy. Science and Public Policy, 45(4), 435-447.
     Google Scholar
  2. Cao, Y., Zhao, L., & Chen, R. (2009). Institutional structure and incentives of technology transfer: Some new evidence from Chinese universities. Journal of technology management in China.
     Google Scholar
  3. Colyvas, J. A. (2007). From divergent meanings to common practices: The early institutionalization of technology transfer in the life sciences at Stanford University. Research Policy, 36(4), 456-476.
     Google Scholar
  4. Colyvas, J. A., & Powell, W. W. (2007). From vulnerable to venerated: The institutionalization of academic entrepreneurship in the life sciences. In The sociology of entrepreneurship. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
     Google Scholar
  5. Diaz, C. S. (2009, July). Teaching the techno-pitch: Taking student innovators beyond the elevator pitch. In 2009 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (pp. 1-7). IEEE.
     Google Scholar
  6. Edler, J. (2010). Demand-based innovation policy. In The theory and practice of innovation policy. Edward Elgar Publishing.
     Google Scholar
  7. Edler, Jakob, and Jan Fagerberg. "Innovation policy: what, why, and how." Oxford Review of Economic Policy 33.1 (2017): 2-23.
     Google Scholar
  8. 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.
     Google Scholar
  9. Fagerberg, J. (2017). Innovation policy: Rationales, lessons and challenges. Journal of Economic Surveys, 31(2), 497-512.
     Google Scholar
  10. Flanagan, K., & Uyarra, E. (2016). Four dangers in innovation policy studies–and how to avoid them. Industry and Innovation, 23(2), 177-188.
     Google Scholar
  11. Fritsch, M., & Slavtchev, V. (2007). Universities and innovation in space. Industry and innovation, 14(2), 201-218.
     Google Scholar
  12. Gulbranson, C. A., & Audretsch, D. B. (2008). Proof of concept centers: accelerating the commercialization of university innovation. The Journal of technology transfer, 33, 249-258.
     Google Scholar
  13. Hausman, N. (2012). University innovation, local economic growth, and entrepreneurship. US Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies Paper No. CES-WP-12-10.
     Google Scholar
  14. Henrekson, M., & Rosenberg, N. (2001). Designing efficient institutions for science-based entrepreneurship: Lesson from the US and Sweden. The journal of technology transfer, 26(3), 207-231.
     Google Scholar
  15. Hero, L. M., & Lindfors, E. (2019). Students’ learning experience in a multidisciplinary innovation project. Education+ Training, 61(4), 500-522.
     Google Scholar
  16. Huggins, R., & Cooke, P. (1997). The economic impact of Cardiff University: innovation, learning and job generation. GeoJournal, 41, 325-337.
     Google Scholar
  17. Hvide, H. K., & Jones, B. F. (2018). University innovation and the professor's privilege. American Economic Review, 108(7), 1860-1898.
     Google Scholar
  18. Jiménez, A., & Zheng, Y. (2021). Unpacking the multiple spaces of innovation hubs. The Information Society, 37(3), 163-176.
     Google Scholar
  19. Keinänen, M. M., & Kairisto-Mertanen, L. (2019). Researching learning environments and students’ innovation competences. Education+ Training.
     Google Scholar
  20. Keinänen, M., Ursin, J., & Nissinen, K. (2018). How to measure students’ innovation competences in higher education: Evaluation of an assessment tool in authentic learning environments. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58, 30-36.
     Google Scholar
  21. Kolympiris, C., & Klein, P. G. (2017). The effects of academic incubators on university innovation. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 11(2), 145-170.
     Google Scholar
  22. Kuhlmann, S. (2001). Future governance of innovation policy in Europe—three scenarios. Research policy, 30(6), 953-976.
     Google Scholar
  23. Mäkimattila, M., Junell, T., & Rantala, T. (2015). Developing collaboration structures for university-industry interaction and innovations. European Journal of Innovation Management, 18(4), 451-470.
     Google Scholar
  24. Lyytinen, K., & Rose, G. M. (2003). The disruptive nature of information technology innovations: the case of internet computing in systems development organizations. MIS quarterly, 557-596.
     Google Scholar
  25. Martín, P., Potočnik, K., & Fras, A. B. (2017). Determinants of students’ innovation in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 42(7), 1229-1243.
     Google Scholar
  26. Molin, M. J., & Selin, C. L. (2008). Institutionalizing innovation: Instances of change in the Danosh system of innovation. Paper presented at Prime-Latin America conference, Mexico City (MX), 24-26 Sep.
     Google Scholar
  27. Mohnen, P., & Röller, L. H. (2005). Complementarities in innovation policy. European economic review, 49(6), 1431-1450.
     Google Scholar
  28. Oughton, C., Landabaso, M., & Morgan, K. (2002). The regional innovation paradox: innovation policy and industrial policy. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(1), 97-110.
     Google Scholar
  29. Schuurman, D., & Tõnurist, P. (2016). Innovation in the public sector: Exploring the characteristics and potential of living labs and innovation labs. In OpenLivingLab Days 2016 (pp. 78-90).
     Google Scholar
  30. Smith, H. L. (2007). Universities, innovation, and territorial development: a review of the evidence. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 25(1), 98-114.
     Google Scholar
  31. Soete, L. (2007). From industrial to innovation policy. Journal of industry, competition and trade, 7, 273-284.
     Google Scholar
  32. Thune, T., & Gulbrandsen, M. (2011). Institutionalization of university-industry interaction: an empirical study of the impact of formal structures on collaboration patterns. Science and Public Policy, 38(2), 99-107.
     Google Scholar
  33. Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2005). One size fits all?: Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research policy, 34(8), 1203-1219.
     Google Scholar
  34. Vohra, N., Rathi, N., & Bhatnagar, D. (2015). Developing leadership skills among EMBA students: Innovations in design. Vikalpa, 40(1), 15-27.
     Google Scholar
  35. Zhu, C., & Engels, N. (2014). Organizational culture and instructional innovations in higher education: Perceptions and reactions of teachers and students. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 42(1), 136-158.
     Google Scholar