Abstract
This study analyses international research collaboration for eight science-based technologies in the Netherlands for the period 1988–2004. It is found that the share of international research collaborations in research collaboration is high, but not rising during the period investigated. This result suggests that the process of internationalization has reached an end. It is also found that collaboration between academic and non-academic organizations is less likely to take place at the international level than collaboration between academic organizations. This suggests that collaborating within national research systems helps academia, firms and governmental organizations to overcome differences in norms, values and incentives. Nonetheless, international collaboration between academic and non-academic organizations is also frequently occurring. Some consider these collaborations as undesirable, insofar academic research funded domestically is ‘leaking’ to foreign firms in such research collaborations. Such unwanted knowledge spillovers has lead some to plea for a ‘technology-nationalism’ in science policy instead of a ‘techno-globalization’. An analysis of the ‘balance of trade’ in international collaborations between Dutch academia and foreign firms and between Dutch firms and foreign academia shows that fears for unwanted knowledge spillovers are unfounded.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
-
Based on the so-called OST-INPI/FhG-ISI technology classification.
-
Tested by t-tests on differences in shares.
-
Note that in case of information technology there seems to be a rather strange sudden drop of the share of international collaboration in 1995. We were not able to find another explanation than the relative low number of total collaborations in information technology, which make sudden shocks more likely to occur.
-
The difference between probit and logit models lies in the underlying specification of function G. In logit models G is a logistic function and in probit models G is a standard normal cumulative distribution function (Wooldridge 2003).
-
The fluctuations in the beginning of the period may be partly due to the smaller amount of observations in these years as compared to the more recent period.
References
Archibugi, D., & Iammarino, S. (1999). The policy implications of the globalisation of innovation. Research Policy, 28, 317–336.
Archibugi, D., & Michie, J. (1997). Technological globalization or national systems of innovation. Futures, 29(2), 121–137.
Breschi, S., & Lissoni, F. (2003). Mobility and social networks: Localised knowledge spillovers revisited. CESPRI Working Paper 142, Bocconi University Milan.
Caloghirou, Y., Tsakanikas, A., & Vonortas, N. S. (2001). University-industry cooperation in the context of the European framework programmes. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 153–161.
Cantwell, J. (1995). The globalisation of technology: What remains of the product cycle model? Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(1), 155–174.
Carlsson, B. (2006). Internationalization of innovation systems: A survey of the literature. Research Policy, 35(1), 56–67.
Chung, S. (2002). Catching up through international linkages: Science, technology and the Korean experience. Science and Public Policy, 29(6), 431–437.
Cockburn, I. M., & Henderson, R. M. (1998). Absorptive capacity, coauthoring behavior, and the organization of research in drug discovery. Journal of Industrial Economics, 46, 157–182.
Dasgupta, P., & David, P. A. (1994). Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy, 23, 487–521.
Edler, J. (Forthcoming). Creative internationalization: Widening the perspectives on analysis and policy regarding international R&D activities. Journal of Technology Transfer, in press.
Edler, J., & Boekholt, P. (2001). Benchmarking national public policies to exploit international science and industrial research: A synopsis of current developments. Science and Public Policy, 28(4), 313–321.
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, 109–123.
Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29, 313–330.
Frenken, K. (2002). A new indicator of European integration and an application to collaboration in scientific research. Economic Systems Research, 14(4), 345–361.
Frenken, K., Hoekman, J., & van Oort, F. (2007). Towards a European research area. Rotterdam/The Hague: NAi Publishers/RPB, www.rpb.nl.
Frenken, K., Hölzl, W., & de Vor, F. (2005). The citation impact of research collaborations: The case of European biotechnology and applied microbiology (1988–2002). Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 22, 9–30.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.
Glänzel, W. (2001). National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations. Scientometrics, 51, 69–115.
Godin, B. (1995). Research and the practice of publication in industries. Research Policy, 25, 587–606.
Godin, B., & Gingras, Y. (2000). The place of universities in the system of knowledge production. Research Policy, 29(2), 273–278.
Hagedoorn, J. (2002). Inter-firm R&D partnerships: an overview of major trends and patterns since 1960. Research Policy, 31, 477–492.
Hagedoorn, J., Link, A. N., & Vonortas, N. S. (2000). Research partnerships. Research Policy, 4–5, 567–586.
Katz, J.S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1–18.
Laudel, G. (2001). Collaboration, creativity and rewards: Why and how scientists collaborate. International Journal of Technology Management, 22(7/8), 762–781.
Levy, R., Roux, P., & Wolff, S. (forthcoming). An analysis of science-industry collaborative patterns in a large European university. Journal of Technology Transfer, in press.
Long, J. S., & Freese, J. (2003). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata. Stata Press.
Lundberg, J., Tomson, G., Lundkvist, I., Skar, J., & Brommels, M. (2006). Collaboration uncovered: Exploring the adequacy of measuring university-industry collaboration through co-authorship and co-funding. Scientometrics, 69(3), 575–589.
Meyer, M. (2000). Does Science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature. Research Policy, 29, 409–434.
Meyer, M., Sinilainen, T., & Timm Utecht, J. (2003). Towards hybrid triple helix indicators: A study of university-related patents and a survey of academic inventors. Scientometrics, 58(2), 321–350.
Mowery, D. C. (1998). The changing structure of the US national innovation system: Implications of international conflict and cooperation in R&D policy. Research Policy, 27, 639–654.
Narin, F., Hamiltion, K., & Olivastro, D. (1997). The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science. Research Policy, 26, 317–330.
Narin, F., Stevens, K., & Whitlow, E. S. (1991). Scientific cooperation in Europe and the citation of multinationally authored papers. Scientometrics, 21(3), 313–323.
Niosi, J., & Bellon, B. (1994). The global interdependence of national innovation systems: Evidence, limits and implications. Technology in Society, 16(2), 173–197.
Ostry, S., & Nelson, R. (1995). Techno-nationalism and techno-globalism: Conflict and cooperation. Washington DC: Brookings Institution.
Pavitt, K. (1984). Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13, 343–373.
Ponds, R., Van Oort, F. G., & Frenken, K. (2007). The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration. Papers in Regional Science, 86(3), 423–443.
Powell, W. W., Koput, L., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 116–145.
Price, D. D., & Beaver, D. J. (1966). Collaboration in an invisible college. American Psychologist, 21(11), 1011–1018.
Rallet, A., & Torre, A. (1999). Is geographical proximity necessary in the innovation networks in the era of global economy? Geojournal, 49(4), 373–380.
Singh, J. (2005). Collaborative networks as determinants of knowledge diffusion patterns. Management Science, 51(5), 756–770.
Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.
Stichweh, R. (1996). Science in the system of world society. Social Science Information, 35, 327–340.
Stuart, T. (2000). Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: A study of growth and innovation rates in a high-technology industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 668–698.
Sung, T. K., & Carlsson, B. (2003). The evolution of a technological system: The case of CNC machine tools in Korea. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 13(4), 435–460.
Van Looy, B., Zimmerman, E., Veugelers, R., Verbeek, E., Mello, J., & Debackere, K. (2003). Do science-technology interactions pay off when developing technology? Scientometrics, 57(3), 355–367.
Wagner, C. (2001). The elusive partnership: Science and foreign policy. Science and Public Policy, 29(6), 409–417.
Wagner, C. (2005). Six case studies of international collaboration in science. Scientometrics, 62(1), 3–26.
Wagner, C., Brahmakalum, I., Jackson, B., Yoda, T., & Wong, A. (2001). Science and technology collaboration: Building capacity in developing countries? Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
Wagner-Doebler, R. (2001). Continuity and discontinuity of collaboration behaviour since, 1800 – From a bibliometric point of view. Scientometrics, 52, 503–517.
Weingart, P. (1997). From ‘‘finalization’’ to ‘‘mode 2’’: Old wine in new bottles? Social Science Information, 36(4), 591–613.
Wooldridge, J. M. (2003). Introductory econometrics – A modern approach (2nd ed.). Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western.
Zitt, M., & Bassecoulard, E. (2004). Internationalization in science in the prism of bibliometric indicators. In H. Moed, W. Glänzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Acknowledgements
The author gratefully acknowledges comments on earlier versions of this paper from Koen Frenken, Jarno Hoekman, Frank van Oort, Otto Raspe and two anonymous referees.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ponds, R. The limits to internationalization of scientific research collaboration. J Technol Transf 34, 76–94 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-008-9083-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-008-9083-1