Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T14:29:23.715Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Exploring the Role of University-Run Enterprises in Technology Transfer from Chinese Universities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2020

Xibao Li*
Affiliation:
Tsinghua University, China
Justin Tan
Affiliation:
York University, Canada
*
Corresponding author: Xibao Li ([email protected])

Abstract

Universities in China have increased their entrepreneurship significantly, yet a good understanding of the specific characteristics of university-based technology transfers remains missing. This study focuses on a special type of university spinoffs in China, University-Run Enterprises (UREs), and examines how URE eminence contributes to a university's technology transfer performance, using panel data covering 195 universities over the five years from 2002 to 2006. The findings reveal that URE eminence not only signifies a university's strong entrepreneurial culture, but also signals commercial values and quality of the university research. It moderates the contribution of university scientists from the supply side and that of sourcing firms from the demand side.

摘要

摘要

中国高校参与的技术商业化活动日益增多,然而,针对中国高校技术转移活动特点的研究仍显不足。本文以一种特殊类型的高校衍生企业—校办企业—为研究对象,使用2002-2006年195所高校的历史数据,分析了校办企业声望对所依托高校技术转移活动规模的影响。分析发现,校办企业声望不仅体现所在高校的创业文化,而且能够反映所在高校科研究成果的质量和商业价值。因此,可以从外部企业的需求和高校科学家的参与两方面影响总体技术转移活动的规模。

Аннотация

АННОТАЦИЯ

Университеты в Китае значительно расширили предпринимательскую деятельность, однако по-прежнему отсутствует глубокое понимание специфических особенностей, которые характерны для передачи технологий в университетах. В этом исследовании основное внимание уделяется особому виду университетских филиалов в Китае (университетских предприятий (УП)) и проводится анализ того, каким образом высокое положение УП способствует передаче технологий в университетах, на основании панельных данных, которые охватывают 195 университетов за пять лет, с 2002 по 2006 гг. Результаты показывают, что высокое положение УП не только свидетельствует о сильной культуре предпринимательства в университете, но также служит доказательством коммерческой ценности и качества университетских исследований. Эта структура регулирует предложение со стороны ученых из университетов и спрос со стороны заинтересованных компаний.

Resumen

RESUMEN

Las universidades en China han aumentado significativamente su capacidad emprendedora, pero aún un buen entendimiento de las características específicas de las transferencias de tecnología basadas en la universidad. Este estudio se focaliza en un tipo específico de spin-offs en China, las empresas universitarias (UREs por sus iniciales en inglés), y examina como el prestigio de las empresas universitarias contribuye al desempeño de transferencia de tecnología de la universidad, usando un panel de datos que cobija a 195 universidades durante los cinco años entre 2002 y 2006. Los resultados revelan que el prestigio de las empresas universitarias no solamente da cuenta de una fuerte cultura emprendedora universitaria, sino que también dan señales de los valores comerciales y la calidad de la investigación universitaria. Esto modera la contribución de los científicos universitarios desde el lado de la oferta y la de las empresas de abastecimiento por parte de la demanda.

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 The International Association for Chinese Management Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

accepted by Senior Editor Can Huang

References

REFERENCES

Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. 1994. R&D spillovers and recipient firm size. Review of Economics and Statistics, 76(2): 336340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agrawal, A., & Henderson, R. 2002. Putting patents in context: Exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Management Science, 48(1): 4460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Argyres, N. S., & Liebeskind, J. P. 1998. Privatizing the intellectual commons: Universities and the commercialization of biotechnology. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 35(4): 427454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Audretsch, D. B., & Stephan, P. 1996. Company-scientist locational links: The case of biotechnology. American Economic Review, 86(3): 641652.Google Scholar
Audretsch, D. B., Lehmann, E. E., & Warning, S. 2005. University spillovers and new firm location. Research Policy, 34(7): 11131122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balconi, M., Brusoni, S., & Orsenigo, L. 2010. In defense of the linear model: An essay. Research Policy, 39(1): 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, K., D'Este, P., & Neely, A. 2011. Gaining from interactions with universities: Multiple methods for nurturing absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 40(1): 3040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonardo, D., Paleari, S., & Vismara, S. 2010. Valuing university-based firms: The effects of academic affiliation on IPO performance. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 34(4): 755776.Google Scholar
Bowen, H. P. 2012. Testing moderating hypotheses in limited dependent variable and other nonlinear models: Secondary versus total interactions. Journal of Management, 38(3): 860889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bramwell, A., & Wolfe, D. A. 2008. Universities and regional economic development: The entrepreneurial University of Waterloo. Research Policy, 37(8): 11751187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breschi, S., & Catalini, C. 2010. Tracing the links between science and technology: An exploratory analysis of scientists' and inventors' networks. Research Policy, 39(1): 1426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broström, A. 2010. Working with distant researchers – Distance and content in university-industry interaction. Research Policy, 39(10): 13111320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buenstorf, G. 2009. Is commercialization good or bad for science? Individual-level evidence from the Max Planck Society. Research Policy, 38(2): 281292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldera, A., & Debande, O. 2010. Performance of Spanish universities in technology transfer: An empirical analysis. Research Policy, 39(9): 11601173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. 2013. Regression analysis of count data. 2nd Edition. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, Y.-C., Yang, P. Y., & Chen, M.-H. 2009. The determinants of academic research commercial performance: Towards an organizational ambidexterity perspective. Research Policy, 38(6): 936946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapple, W., Lockett, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. 2005. Assessing the relative performance of U.K. University technology transfer offices: Parametric and non-parametric evidence. Research Policy, 34(3): 369384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, A., Patton, D., & Kenney, M. 2016. University technology transfer in China: A literature review and taxonomy. Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(5): 891929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, W. M., & Klepper, S. 1996. A reprise of size and R&D. The Economic Journal, 106(437): 925951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 128152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. 2002. Links and impacts: The Influence of public research on industrial R&D. Management Science, 48(1): 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crespi, G., D'Este, P., Fontana, R., & Geuna, A. 2011. The impact of academic patenting on university research and its transfer. Research Policy, 40(1): 5568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, T. J., Brown, R. L., & Bamford, C. E. 1998. Differences in large and small firm responses to environmental context: Strategic implications from a comparative analysis of business formations. Strategic Management Journal, 19(8): 709728.3.0.CO;2-9>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Debackere, K., & Veugelers, R. 2005. The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links. Research Policy, 34(3): 321342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Di Gregorio, D., & Shane, S. 2003. Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy, 32(2): 209227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etzkowitz, H. 2003. Research groups as ‘quasi-firms’: The invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32(1): 109121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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(2): 313330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eun, J.-H., Lee, K., & Wu, G. 2006. Explaining the ‘University-run enterprises’ in China: A theoretical framework for university–industry relationship in developing countries and its application to China. Research Policy, 35(9): 13291346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M., & Desrochers, P. 2003. Research universities and local economic development: Lessons from the history of Johns Hopkins University. Industry and Innovation, 10(1): 524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M., Feller, I., Bercovitz, J., & Burton, R. 2002. Equity and the technology transfer strategies of American research universities. Management Science, 48(1): 105121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, J., & Silberman, J. 2003. University technology transfer: Do incentives, management, and location matter? Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(1): 1730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldfarb, B., & Henrekson, M. 2003. Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property. Research Policy, 32(4): 639658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gu, S. 1999. China's industrial technology: Market reform and organizational change. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Harmon, B., Ardishvili, A., Cardozo, R., Elder, T., Leuthold, J., Parshall, J., Raghian, M., & Smith, D. 1997. Mapping the university technology transfer process. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(6): 423434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, J., Hall, B. H., & Griliches, Z. 1984. Economic models for count data with an application to the patents R and D relationship. Econometrica, 52(4): 909938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, R., Jaffe, A., & Trajtenberg, M. 1998. Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of university patenting 1965–1988. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(1): 119127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hong, W., & Su, Y.-S. 2013. The effect of institutional proximity in non-local university–industry collaborations: An analysis based on Chinese patent data. Research Policy, 42(2): 454464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, M., Lundqvist, M., & Hellsmark, H. 2003. Entrepreneurial transformations in the Swedish University system: The case of Chalmers University of Technology. Research Policy, 32(9): 15551568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaffe, A., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. 1993. Geographical localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3): 577598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Just, R. E., & Huffman, W. E. 2009. The economics of universities in a new age of funding options. Research Policy, 38(7): 11021116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kafouros, M., Wang, C., Piperopoulos, P., & Zhang, M. 2015. Academic collaborations and firm innovation performance in China: The role of region-specific institutions. Research Policy, 44(3): 803817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenney, M., & Goe, W. R. 2004. The role of social embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship: A comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford. Research Policy, 33(5): 691707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroll, H., & Liefner, I. 2008. Spin-off enterprises as a means of technology commercialization in a transforming economy: Evidence from three universities in China. Technovation, 28(5): 298313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laursen, K., & Salter, A. 2004. Searching high and low: What types of firms use universities as a source of innovation? Research Policy, 33(8): 12011215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laursen, K., & Salter, A. 2006. Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2): 131150.Google Scholar
Lee, Y. S. 1996. Technology transfer and the research university: A search for the boundaries of university-industry collaboration. Research Policy, 25(6): 843863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, X., & Mitchell, R. K. 2009. The pace and stability of small enterprise innovation in highly dynamic economies: A China-based template. Journal of Small Business Management, 47(3): 370397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lissoni, F. 2010. Academic inventors as brokers. Research Policy, 39(7): 843857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, X., & White, S. 2001. Comparing innovation systems: A framework and application to China's transitional context. Research Policy, 30(7): 10911114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, X. B., & Perry, E. J. 1997. Danwei: The changing Chinese workplace in historical and comparative perspective. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Luo, X. R., Koput, K. W., & Powell, W. W. 2009. Intellectual capital or signal? The effects of scientists on alliance formation in knowledge-intensive industries. Research Policy, 38(8): 13131325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfield, E. 1995. Academic research underlying industrial innovations: Sources, characteristics, and financing. Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(1): 5565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfield, E., & Lee, J.-Y. 1996. The modem university: Contributor to industrial innovation and recipient of industrial R & D support. Research Policy, 25(7): 10471058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P. T., Phan, P. H., & Balkin, D. B. 2004. Entrepreneurship from the ivory tower: Do incentive systems matter? Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4): 353364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markman, G. D., Phan, P. H., Balkin, D. B., & Gianiodis, P. T. 2005. Entrepreneurship university-based technology transfer. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2): 241263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Education of China. 2006. Statistics on Science & Technology Activities in Chinese Universities. Beijing, China: Chinese Higher Education Press.Google Scholar
Motohashi, K., & Yun, X. 2007. China's innovation system reform and growing industry and science linkages. Research Policy, 36(8): 12511260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Science Board. 2008. Science and Engineering Indicators 2008. Volume 2: Appendix Tables. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
Nerkar, A., & Shane, S. 2003. When do start-ups that exploit patented academic knowledge survive? International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21(9): 13911410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nerkar, A., & Shane, S. 2007. Determinants of invention commercialization: An empirical examination of academically sourced inventions. Strategic Management Journal, 28(11): 11551166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Kane, C., Mangematin, V., Geoghegan, W., & Fitzgerald, C. 2015. University technology transfer offices: The search for identity to build legitimacy. Research Policy, 44(2): 421437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. 2001. To patent or not: Faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2): 99114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen-Smith, J., Riccaboni, M., Pammolli, F., & Powell, W. W. 2002. A Comparison of U.S. and European university-industry relations in the life sciences. Management Science, 48(1):2443.Google Scholar
Powers, J. B., & McDougall, P. P. 2005. University start-up formation and technology licensing with firms that go public: A resource-based view of academic entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(3): 291311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, P., Bosma, N., Autio, E., Hunt, S., De Bono, N., Servais, I., Lopez-Garcia, P., & Chin, N. 2005. Global entrepreneurship monitor: Data collection design and implementation 1998–2003. Small Business Economics, 24(3): 205231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., & Jiang, L. 2007. University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4): 691791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saxenian, A. 1994. Regional advantage: Culture and competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schmiemann, M., & Durvy, J.-N. 2003. New approaches to technology transfer from publicly funded research. Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(1): 915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segarra-Blasco, A., & Arauzo-Carod, J.-M. 2008. Sources of innovation and industry-university interaction: Evidence from Spanish firms. Research Policy, 37(8): 12831295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shane, S. 2002. Executive forum: University technology transfer to entrepreneurial companies. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(6): 537552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., & Link, A. N. 2003. Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1): 2748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sine, W. D., Haveman, H. A., & Tolbert, P. A. 2005. Risky business: Entrepreneurship in the new independent power sector. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(2): 200232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sine, W. D., Shane, S., & Di Gregorio, D. 2003. The halo effect and technology licensing: The influence of institutional prestige on the licensing of university inventions. Management Science, 49(4): 478496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soh, P.-H., & Subramanian, A. M. 2014. When do firms benefit from university–industry R&D collaborations? The implications of firm R&D focus on scientific research and technological recombination. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(6): 807821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steffensen, M., Rogers, E., & Speakman, K. 1999. Spin-offs from research centers at a research university. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(1): 93111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stuart, T. E., Ozdemir, S. Z., & Ding, W. W. 2007. Vertical alliance networks: The case of university–biotechnology –pharmaceutical alliance chains. Research Policy, 36(4): 477498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Subramaniam, M., & Youndt, M. A. 2005. The influence of intellectual capital of the types of innovative capabilities. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3): 450463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thursby, J. G., & Kemp, S. 2002. Growth and productive efficiency of university intellectual property licensing. Research Policy, 31(1): 109124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. 2002. Who is selling the ivory tower? Sources of growth in university licensing. Management Science, 48(1): 90104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. 2004. Are faculty critical? Their role in university-industry licensing. Contemporary Economic Policy, 22(2): 162178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veugelers, R., & Cassiman, B. 2005. R&D cooperation between firms and universities. Some empirical evidence from Belgian manufacturing. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 23(5–6): 355379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiersema, M. F., & Bowen, H. P. 2009. The use of limited dependent variable techniques in strategy research: Issues and methods. Strategic Management Journal, 30(6): 679692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wooldridge, J. M. 2010. Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. 2 ndEdition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Lockett, A., & Knockaert, M. 2008. University-industry linkages: Evidence from mid-range universities in Europe. Research Policy, 37: 12051223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, W. 2010. Managing and incentivizing research commercialization in Chinese universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(2): 203224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xue, L. 2006. Universities in China's national innovation system. Paper Prepared for the UNESCO Forum on Higher Education, Research and Knowledge. November 27–30.Google Scholar
Xue, L., & Forbes, N. 2006. Will China become a science and technology superpower by 2020? An assessment based on a national innovation system framework. Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 1(4): 111126.Google Scholar
Zou, Y., & Zhao, W. 2014. Anatomy of Tsinghua university science park in China: Institutional evolution and assessment. Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(5): 663674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar