R&D Internationalization, R&D Collaboration and Public Knowledge Institutions in Small Economies Evidence from Finland and the Netherlands

This paper investigates domestic and foreign innovating firms’ determinants of R&D collaboration with domestic universities and public knowledge institutes in Finland and the Netherlands. We put particular emphasis on the impact of incoming academic spillovers on the probability to co-operate with these public R&D institutes. Based on data from Community Innovation Surveys we find that foreign firms in the Netherlands are less likely to co-operate with domestic public knowledge institutions than domestic firms, while in Finland no significant difference can be detected. Another result is that incoming knowledge spillovers are an important determinant for R&D collaboration with domestic public knowledge institutions in both countries. In case of foreign firms in Finland, incoming knowledge spillovers affect the probability to co-operate with public knowledge institutions more positively as compared with domestic firms. For the Netherlands no substantial difference could be found in this respect. Further, innovating firms in Finland that require academic or basic knowledge do not co-operate significantly more with public knowledge institutions than those that need applied knowledge. At the same time they are willing to share knowledge with public R&D partners. In the Netherlands innovating firms that require relatively more basic than applied knowledge, increase the probability of co-operation with Dutch universities and public knowledge institutions but there is reluctance to share proprietary knowledge with public R&D partners. For both countries no significant difference between foreign and domestic firms with regard to academic knowledge requirements could be found. This raises the issue whether Finnish innovation policies with a strong focus on R&D co-operation provide incentives for strategic behaviour by domestic public partners to put more emphasis on applied research.

[1]  E. Mansfield,et al.  The modern university: contributor to industrial innovation and recipient of industrial R&D support , 1996 .

[2]  K. Pavitt,et al.  Large Firms in the Production of the World's Technology: An Important Case of “Non-Globalisation” , 1991 .

[3]  U. Secretariat World Investment Report 2005—Transnational Corporations and the Internationalization of R&D , 2006 .

[4]  D. Jane Bower,et al.  Successful joint ventures in Science Parks , 1993 .

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

[6]  J. Fagerberg,et al.  The Oxford handbook of innovation , 2006 .

[7]  Paul Israel,et al.  The Sources of Innovation , 1990 .

[8]  J. Dunning The Eclectic Paradigm of International Production: A Restatement and Some Possible Extensions , 1988 .

[9]  Edwin Mansfield,et al.  Academic research and industrial innovation , 1991 .

[10]  Reinhilde Veugelers,et al.  R&D Cooperation and Spillovers: Some Empirical Evidence , 1998 .

[11]  Paul Almeida,et al.  Knowledge sourcing by foreign multinationals: Patent citation analysis in the U.S. semiconductor industry , 1996 .

[12]  James D. Adams,et al.  Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth , 1990, Journal of Political Economy.

[13]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES, WHAT ARE THEY? , 2000 .

[14]  J. Dunning The Eclectic Paradigm of International Production: A Restatement and Some Possible Extensions: The Selected Essays of John H. Dunning, Volume I , 2002 .

[15]  R. Veugelers,et al.  R&D Cooperation and Spillovers: Some Empirical Evidence , 1998 .

[16]  Jeffrey L. Furman,et al.  The Determinants of National Innovative Capacity , 2000 .

[17]  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 .

[18]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science , 1997 .

[19]  C. L. Bas,et al.  'Location versus home country advantages' in R&D activities: some further results on multinationals' locational strategies , 2002 .

[20]  Aris Spanos,et al.  Statistical Foundations of Econometric Modelling , 1986 .

[21]  R. Hjerppe,et al.  Technology Policy and Knowledge-based Growth in Small Countries , 2004 .

[22]  Reinhilde Veugelers,et al.  Multinational Knowledge Spillovers with Centralized Versus Decentralized R&D: A Game Theoretic Approach , 2002 .

[23]  H. Leibenstein,et al.  Inside the Firm. , 1989 .

[24]  Irwin Feller,et al.  Universities as engines of R&D-based economic growth: They think they can , 1990 .

[25]  A. Kokko,et al.  The Economics of Foreign Direct Investment Incentives , 2003 .

[26]  Manuel Castells,et al.  The Information Society and the Welfare State , 2002 .

[27]  A. Jaffe Real Effects of Academic Research , 1989 .

[28]  G. Hayward Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change , 1998 .

[29]  Francesco Daveri,et al.  Not Only Nokia: What Finland Tells Us About New Economy Growth , 2004 .

[30]  J. Birkinshaw,et al.  INNOVATION IN MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS: CONTROL AND COMMUNICATION PATTERNS IN INTERNATIONAL R&D OPERATIONS , 1998 .

[31]  Alfred Kleinknecht,et al.  Innovation and Firm Performance. Econometric Explorations of Survey Data , 2002 .

[32]  John Cantwell,et al.  Multinational Corporations and European Regional Systems of Innovation , 2003 .

[33]  Edwin Mansfield,et al.  Basic Research and Productivity Increase in Manufacturing , 1980 .

[34]  S. Iammarino,et al.  Innovation Policy in a Global Economy: The policy implications of the globalisation of innovation , 1999 .

[35]  John P. Walsh,et al.  Special Issue on University Entrepreneurship and Technology Transfer: Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[36]  A. Salter,et al.  Searching high and low: what types of firms use universities as a source of innovation? , 2004 .

[37]  P. Patel,et al.  Patterns of internationalisation of corporate technology: location vs. home country advantages. , 1999 .

[38]  O. Gassmann,et al.  Market versus technology drive in R&D internationalization: four different patterns of managing research and development , 2002 .

[39]  David C. Mowery,et al.  Universities in National Innovation Systems , 2006 .

[40]  S. Gopalakrishnan,et al.  The Institutionalization of Knowledge Transfer Activities within Industry-University Collaborative Ventures , 2000 .

[41]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D , 1989 .

[42]  P. Mohnen,et al.  Innovativity: A comparison across seven European countries , 2006 .

[43]  James D. Adams,et al.  Comparative Localization of Academic and Industrial Spillovers , 2001 .

[44]  Daniele Archibugi,et al.  The policy implications of the globalisation of innovation , 1999 .

[45]  Mark Mau,et al.  The Information Society and the Welfare State: The Finnish Model , 2004 .

[46]  E. Mansfield Academic research and industrial innovation: An update of empirical findings 1 This paper was based , 1998 .

[47]  M. Trajtenberg,et al.  Universities as a Source of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis of University Patenting, 19651988 , 1995, Review of Economics and Statistics.

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

[49]  John Bessant,et al.  Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological, Market, and Organizational Change, 2nd Edition , 2001 .

[50]  J. Hagedoorn Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Nterorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences , 1993 .

[51]  J. Dunning Multinational enterprises and the globalization of innovatory capacity , 1994 .

[52]  A. Leiponen Why Do Firms Not Collaborate? The Role of Competencies and Technological Regimes , 2002 .