La comunidad científica ante los usos de la cienciaun análisis de la orientación de la actividad investigadora en el CSIC

  1. Merchán-Hernández, Carmen
  2. Valmaseda-Andia, Oihana
Journal:
Revista española de documentación científica

ISSN: 0210-0614,  1988-4621

Year of publication: 2018

Volume: 41

Issue: 4

Type: Article

DOI: 10.3989/REDC.2018.4.1536 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Revista española de documentación científica

Abstract

This paper analyses the orientation of the research activities in a scientific community, and its relationships with its socio-economic environment. For this purpose, the Pasteur´s quadrant of Stokes (1997) is used as theoretical background. This method identifies four ideal profiles of scientists based on whether they direct their research activity towards making scientific contributions aimed to the understanding of phenomena and facts or, on the other hand, to the practical use and/or application of knowledge outside the scientific sector. The empirical analysis is based on a survey of 1593 researchers from the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC). The results highlight the predominance of an scientists' profile that focus primarily their activity to the generation of scientific knowledge, without so much involvement in its practical application. Although most of them show a favorable attitude towards the knowledge transfer, in their daily work there is a predominance of activities which are aimed to the consolidation of their scientific career.

Bibliographic References

  • Azagra-Caro, J. M. (2007). What type of faculty member interacts with what type of firm? Some reasons for the delocalisation of university-industry interaction. Technovation, 27 (11), 704-715.
  • Azagra Caro, J.; Romero de Pablos, A. (2009). Los determinantes institucionales de las patentes del Consejo Superior de Investigaciones: una aproximación histórica y una dialéctica con la Economía. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 32 (2), 9-33.
  • Balaram, P. (2008), Science, invention and Pasteur?s quadrant. Current Science, 94 (8), 961-962.
  • Bekkers, R.; Bodas-Freitas, I.M. (2008). Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter?. Research Policy, 37 (10), 1837-1853.
  • Bellucci, A.; Pennacchio, L. (2016). University knowledge and firm innovation: evidence from European countries. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(4), 730-752.
  • Bjerregaard, T. (2010). Industry and academia in convergence: Micro-institutional dimensions of R&D collaboration. Technovation, 30 (2), 142-153.
  • Bonaccorsi, A.; Piccaluga, A. (1994). A theoretical framework for the evaluation of university-industry relationships. R&D Management, 24 (3), 229-247.
  • Brito Cruz, C.H. (2008). Políticas para C&T&I para o Brasil. http://www.ifi.unicamp.br/~brito
  • Castro-Martínez, E.; Olmos-Peñuela, J.; Fernandez-de- Lucio, I. (2016). La vinculación Ciencia-Sociedad: Estereotipos y Nuevos Enfoques. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 11 (2), 121-129.
  • Dasgupta, P.; David, P. (1994). Towards a new economics of science. Research Policy, 23 (5), 487–521.
  • D’Este, P.; Patel, P. (2007). University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry?. Research Policy, 36 (9), 1295-1313.
  • D’Este, P.; Perkmann, M. (2011). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. Journal Technology Transfer, 36 (3), 316-339.
  • Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy, 27 (8), 823-833.
  • 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 (2), 109–123.
  • Fernández Esquinas, M.; Pérez Yruela M.; Merchán Hernández C. (2006). El sistema de incentivos y recompensas en la ciencia pública española. En Sebastián, J.; Muñoz, E. (eds.). Radiografía de la investigación pública en España. Madrid, Biblioteca Nueva.
  • Foray, D.; Steinmueller, W.E. (2003). On the economics of R&D and technological collaborations: Insights and results from the project. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 12 (1), 77–91.
  • Fuentes, C. de; Dutrénit, G. (2012). Best channels of academia-industry interaction for long-term benefit. Research Policy, 41 (9), 1666–1682.
  • Geuna, A. (2001). The Changing Rationale for European University Research Funding: Are There Negative Unintended Consequences?. Journal of Economic Issues, 35 (3), 607-632.
  • Lee, Y. S. (1998). University-industry collaboration on technology transfer: Views from the ivory tower. Policy Studies Journal, 26 (1), 69-84.
  • Lee, Y.S. (2000). The Sustainability of University-Industry Research Collaboration: An Empirical Assessment. Journal of Technology Transfer, 25 (2), 111-133.
  • Leydesdorff, L.; Cooke, P.; Olazaran, M. (2002). Technology transfer in European regions: Introduction to the special issue. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 27 (1), 5–13.
  • Merchán-Hernández, C. (2012). Las relaciones de las empresas con las universidades: estrategias y dinámicas del proceso de cooperación a nivel regional. Arbor, 188 (753), 193-209.
  • Merchán-Hernandez, C.; Valmaseda-Andía, O.; Fernández-Esquinas, M.; (2015). Challenges of connecting science-industry in peripheral regions: researchers’ attitudes, organisational and institutional features as determinants. European Planning Studies, 23 (12), 2600-2620.
  • Merton, R.K. (1973). The Sociology of Science, Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Mowery, D. C.; Sampat, B. N. (2005). The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and university–industry technology transfer: A model for other OECD governments?, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 30 (1-2), 115–127.
  • Owen-Smith, J. (2003). From separate systems to a hybrid order: Accumulative advantage across public and private science at Research One universities. Research Policy, 32 (6), 1081-1104.
  • Perkmann, M.; Tartari, V.; Mckelvey, M.; Autio, E.; Broström, A.; D’Este, P.; Fini, R.; Geuna, A.; Grimaldi, R.; Hughes, A.; Krabel, S.; Kitson, M.; Llerena, P.; Lissoni, F.; Salter, A.; Sobrero, M. (2013). Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university-industry relations. Research Policy, 42 (2), 423-442.
  • Price, R.H.; Behrens, T. (2003). Working Pasteur?s quadrant: harnessing science and action for community change. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31 (3-4), 219-223.
  • Schartinger, D.; Rammer, C.; Fischer, M.M.; Frohlich, J. (2002). Knowledge interactions between universities and industry in Austria: sectoral patterns and determinants. Research Policy, 31 (3), 303-328.
  • Simmons, P. E.; Brunkhorst, H.; Lunetta, V.; Penick, J.; Peterson, J.; Pietrucha, B.; Staver, J. (2005). Developing a research agenda in science education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14 (2), 239-252.
  • Sousa, W.; Zamudio, M.P.; Souza, D. de. (2009). R&D Management and the Stokes Diagram: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 4 (4), 95-109.
  • Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur?s Quadrant: basic science and technological innovation. Washington: The Brookings Institution.
  • Tijssen, R. J. (2006). Universities and industrially relevant science: Towards measurement models and indicators of entrepreneurial orientation. Research Policy, 35 (10), 1569–1585.
  • Tsao, J. Y.; Boyack, K. W.; Coltrin, M. E.; Turnley, J. G.; Gauster, W. B. (2008). Galileo?s stream: a framework for understanding knowledge production. Research Policy, 37 (2), 330-352.
  • Valmaseda-Andia, O.; Albizu-Gallastegi, E.; Fernández- Esquinas, M.; Fernández-de-Lucio, I. (2015). La relación entre las empresas españolas y el CSIC: motivaciones, mecanismos y beneficios desde la perspectiva empresarial. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 38 (4): e109
Data source: Dialnet