Skip to main content
Log in

“The Triple-Helix collaboration: Why do researchers collaborate with industry and the government? What are the factors that influence the perceived barriers?”

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper addresses four questions: What is the extent of the collaboration between the natural sciences and engineering researchers in Canadian universities and government agencies and industry? What are the determinants of this collaboration? Which factors explain the barriers to collaboration between the university, industry and government? Are there similarities and differences between the factors that explain collaboration and the barriers to collaboration? Based on a survey of 1554 researchers funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), the results of the multivariate regressions indicate that various factors explain the decision of whether or not to collaborate with industry and the government. The results also differed according to the studied fields. Overall, the results show that the variables that relate to the researcher’s strategic positioning, to the set-up of strategic networks, to the costs related to the production of the transferred knowledge and transactions explain in large part the researcher’s collaboration. The results of the linear regression pointed to various factors that affect collaboration with researchers: research budget, university localization, radicalness of research, degree of risk-taking culture and researcher’s publications. Finally, the last part of the paper presents the results, and what they imply for future research and theory building.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahire, S. L., S. Devaraj (2001), An empirical comparison of statistical construct validation approaches, IEEE Transaction, 319–329.

  • Beaver, D., R. Rosen (1978), Studies in scientific collaboration. Part I, Scientometrics, 1: 65–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, D., R. Rosen (1979), Studies in scientific collaboration. Part II, Scientometrics, 1: 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, D., R. Rosen (1979), Studies in scientific collaboration. Part III, Scientometrics, 1: 231–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, D. (2001), Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): Past, present and future, Scientometrics, 52: 365–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenthal, D., M. Gluck, L. K. Seashore, M. A. Stoto, D. Wise (1986), University-industry research relationships in biotechnology: Implications for the university, Science, 232: 1361–1366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bush, G. P., L. H. Hattery (1956), Teamwork and creativity in research, Science Quarterly 1: 361–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, T. I. D., S. Slaughter (1999), Faculty and administrators’ attitudes toward potential conflicts of interest commitment, and equity in university-industry relationship, The Journal of Higher Education, 70.

  • Cohen, W., R. Florida, L. Randazzese, J. Walsh (1998), Industry and academy: Uneasy partners in the cause of technological advance. In: Noll, R. (Ed.), Challenges to Research Universities, The Brookings Institute Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crane, D. (1972), The Invisible College, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1951), Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests, Psychometrica, 16: 297–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geisler, E. (1995), Industry-university technology cooperation: A theory of inter-organizational relationships, technology analysis, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 7: 217–229.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J., A. N. Link, N. S. Vonortas (2000), Research partnerships, Research Policy, 29: 567–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrigan, K. R. (1988), Joint ventures and competitive strategy, Strategic Management Journal, 9: 141–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jewkes, J., D. Sawers, R. Stillerman (1959), The Sources of Invention, St. Martin’s Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. S., B. R. Martin (1997), What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26: 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelves, D. (Ed.) (1995), The Physicists: The History of a Scientific Community in Modern America, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kluge, N., C. Oehler (1986), Hochschulen und Technologietransfer. Bedingungen, Konfigurationen und Handlungsmuster. Gesamthochscule Kassel.

  • Konecny, E., C. P. Quinn, K. Sachs, D. T. Thompson (1995), Universities and Industrial Research, The Royal Chemical Society, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landry, R., N. Amara (1998), The impacts of transaction costs on the institutional structuration of collaborative academic research, Research Policy, 27: 901–913.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. S. (1996), Technology transfer and the research university: A search for the boundaries of university-industry collaboration, Research Policy, 25: 843–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. S. (1996), The sustainability of university-industry research collaboration: An empirical assessment, Journal of Technology Transfer, 25: 111–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meadows, A. J., J. G. O’Connor (1971), Bibliographic statistics as a guide to growth points in science, Science Studies, 1: 95–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meadows, A. J. (1974), Communication in Science, Butterworth, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melin, G. (2000), Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration on the individual level, Research Policy, 29: 31–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer-Krahmer, F. (1985), Innovation behaviour and regional indigenous potential, Regional Studies, 19: 523–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Science Board (1996), Science and Engineering Indicators, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, New-York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1980), The Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors, The Free Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1985), Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, The Free Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roessner, D., Y. Lee, P. Shapira, B. Bozeman (1996), Evaluation of Iowa State University’s Center for Advanced Technology Development. Unpublished Paper, School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology.

  • Rosenberg, N. (1992), Scientific instrumentation and university research, Research Policy, 21: 381–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SRI International (1997), The Impact on Industry of Interaction with Engineering Research Centers, Science and Technology Program, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, P. E., S. Gurmu, A. J. Sumell, G. Black (2005), Who’s patenting in the university? Evidence from survey of doctorate recipients, Forthcoming in the Economics of Innovation and New Technology.

  • Thorsteinsdottir, O. (2000), External research collaboration in two small science systems, Scientometrics, 49: 145–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wen, J., S. Kobayashi (2001), Exploring collaborative R&D network: Some new evidence in Japan, Research Policy, 30: 1309–1319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1975), Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implication, New York, The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1985), The Economic Institutions of Capitalism, New York, The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Omar Belkhodja.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Belkhodja, O., Landry, R. “The Triple-Helix collaboration: Why do researchers collaborate with industry and the government? What are the factors that influence the perceived barriers?”. Scientometrics 70, 301–332 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-0205-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-0205-6

Keywords

Navigation