Determinants of industry–academy linkages and, their impact on firm performance: The case of Korea as a latecomer in knowledge industrialization☆

This paper utilizes the Korea Innovation Survey data to identify the determinants of industry-university and industry-government research institute (IUG) cooperation, and its impact on firm performance. First, we find that among the determinants of IUG cooperation, traditional firm characteristic variables of size and R&D intensity are not significant, while participation in national R&D project turns out be most significant and robust in both cooperation modes. This is in contrast to the results from the cases in European countries and reflects the significance of government policies in promoting IUG cooperation in latecomer economies. Second, with regard to the impact of IUG cooperation, we conspicuously find no significant impact on the innovation probability of firms when we control the possible endogeneity, such that already innovative firms would participate more at such cooperation modes. This implies that the IUG cooperation cannot guarantee the success of a firm in technological innovation. Rather, it may have an influence on the selection or direction of the research projects of a firm. When we limited the analysis to innovative firms, we do find a positive impact of the IUG cooperation on patents generated from new product innovation but find none in terms of volume of sales or labor productivity. These results seem to reflect the still transitional nature of the national innovation system (NIS) and knowledge industrialization in Korea.

[1]  P. David,et al.  Toward a new economics of science , 1994 .

[2]  Pierre Mohnen,et al.  Série Scientifique Scientific Series What Type of Enterprise Forges Close Links with Universities and Government Labs? Evidence from Cis 2 What Type of Enterprise Forges Close Links with Universities and Government Labs? Evidence from Cis 2 , 2022 .

[3]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  A Triple Helix of University—Industry—Government Relations , 1998, Scientometrics.

[4]  M. Carree,et al.  Cooperative R&D and Firm Performance , 2004 .

[5]  J. P. Lester,et al.  The utilization of public policy analysis: A conceptual framework☆☆☆ , 1990 .

[6]  Patrick Waelbroeck,et al.  Assessing spillovers from universities to firms: evidence from French firm-level data , 2003 .

[7]  F. Malerba,et al.  Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation , 2000 .

[8]  Paula E. Stephan,et al.  Company-Scientist Locational Links: The Case of Biotechnology , 1996 .

[9]  Marie C. Thursby,et al.  Disclosure and licensing of University inventions: 'The best we can do with the s**t we get to work with' , 2003 .

[10]  Keun Lee,et al.  Explaining the “University-run enterprises” in China: A theoretical framework for university–industry relationship in developing countries and its application to China☆ , 2006 .

[11]  Eliezer Geisler,et al.  Industry–university technology cooperation: a theory of inter-organizational relationships , 1995 .

[12]  Bengt-Åke Lundvall,et al.  National Systems of Innovation: towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning London: Pint , 1995 .

[13]  Albert N. Link,et al.  Opening the ivory tower's door: An analysis of the determinants of the formation of U.S. university spin-off companies , 2005 .

[14]  Reinhilde Veugelers,et al.  Complementarity in the Innovation Strategy: Internal R&D, External Technology Acquisition, and Cooperation in R&D , 2002 .

[15]  M. Hitt,et al.  The new competitive landscape , 1995 .

[16]  Shaker A. Zahra,et al.  The effects of business-university alliances on innovative output and financial performance: a study of publicly traded biotechnology companies , 2002 .

[17]  Rosemarie H. Ziedonis,et al.  The patent paradox revisited: an empirical study of patenting in the U , 2001 .

[18]  A. Geuna,et al.  Factors affecting university-industry R&D projects: The importance of searching, screening and signalling , 2006 .

[19]  B. Tether.  Who co-operates for innovation, and why: An empirical analysis , 2002 .

[20]  Christopher F. Baum.  An Introduction to Modern Econometrics Using Stata , 2006 .

[21]  Alok K. Chakrabarti,et al.  FIRM SIZE AND TECHNOLOGY CENTRALITY IN INDUSTRY-UNIVERSITY INTERACTIONS , 2002 .

[22]  Richard Florida,et al.  Industrializing Knowledge: University-Industry Linkages in Japan and the United States , 1999 .

[23]  Jack H. Knott,et al.  If Dissemination Is the Solution, What Is the Problem ? , 1980 .

[24]  J. Heckman.  Sample selection bias as a specification error , 1979 .

[25]  Richard T. Harrison,et al.  Innovation and cooperation in the small firm sector: Evidence from ‘Northern Britain’ , 2006 .

[26]  Akira Goto,et al.  Business groups in a market economy , 1982 .

[27]  K. Pavitt.  Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change : Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory : Research Policy , 1984 .

[28]  Morton I. Kamien,et al.  Market Structure and Innovation: A Survey , 1975 .

[29]  Petri Rouvinen,et al.  Characteristics of product and process innovators: some evidence from the Finnish innovation survey , 2002 .

[30]  U. Schmoch,et al.  Science-based technologies: university-industry interactions in four fields , 1998 .

[31]  Nabil Amara,et al.  Determinants of knowledge transfer: evidence from Canadian university researchers in natural sciences and engineering , 2007 .

[32]  George J. Stigler,et al.  The Organization of Industry , 1969 .

[33]  R. Veugelers,et al.  R&D Cooperation between Firms and Universities: Some Empirical Evidence from Belgian Manufacturing , 2003 .

[34]  Michael Gibbons,et al.  The roles of science in technological innovation , 1993 .

[35]  M. Santoro.  Success breeds success , 2000 .

[36]  Jennifer W. Spencer,et al.  How Relevant is University-Based Scientific Research to Private High-Technology Firms? A United States–Japan Comparison , 2001 .

[37]  Maryann P. Feldman,et al.  R&D spillovers and recipient firm size , 1994 .

[38]  Keun Lee,et al.  Emerging digital technology as a window of opportunity and technological leapfrogging: catch-up in digital TV by the Korean firms , 2005, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[39]  A. Jaffe.  Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms&Apos; Patents, Profits and Market Value , 1986 .

[40]  H. Etzkowitz,et al.  The Future of the University and the University of the Future: Evolution of Ivory Tower to Entrepreneurial Paradigm , 2000 .

[41]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and , 2000 .

[42]  Linsu Kim,et al.  National system of industrial innovation : dynamics of capability building in Korea , 1991 .

[43]  Stephen Roper,et al.  The Determinants of Innovation: R & D, Technology Transfer and Networking Effects , 1999 .

[44]  Paula E. Stephan,et al.  The Economics of Science and Innovation , 2000 .

[45]  Keun Lee,et al.  Technological Regimes, Catching-Up and Leapfrogging: Findings from the Korean Industries , 2001 .

[46]  G. Richardson,et al.  The Organisation of Industry , 1972 .

[47]  E. Penrose.  The theory of the growth of the firm twenty-five years after , 1960 .

[48]  N. Leff,et al.  Industrial Organization and Entrepreneurship in the Developing Countries: The Economic Groups , 1978, Economic Development and Cultural Change.

[49]  M. Fischer,et al.  Knowledge interactions between universities and industry in Austria: sectoral patterns and determinants , 2002 .

[50]  M. Carree,et al.  Heterogeneity in R&D cooperation strategies , 2004 .

[51]  Kyoo-Ho Park,et al.  Linking the technological regime to the technological catch-up: analyzing Korea and Taiwan using the US patent data , 2006 .

[52]  John Bessant,et al.  Small firms, R&D, technology and innovation in the UK: a literature review , 1998 .

[53]  Sea-Jin Chang,et al.  Economic Performance of Group-Affiliated Companies in Korea: Intragroup Resource Sharing and Internal Business Transactions , 2000 .

[54]  B. Looy,et al.  Interorganizational collaboration and innovation: Toward a portfolio approach , 2005 .

[55]  D. Mowery,et al.  The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and University–Industry Technology Transfer: A Model for Other OECD Governments? , 2004 .