Output measures of cooperative research: The case of the Pulp and Paper Research Institute of Canada

Abstract

Applying various quantitative techniques, this paper attempts to describe and analyze the scientific output of a cooperative industrial research institute (Pulp and Paper Research Institute of Canada, PAPRICAN) by comparing its impact on the employment patterns of McGill graduate students who have done their thesis research under the auspices of the industrial laboratory with graduate students from the same departments who have not worked at PAPRICAN; and a comparison of the publication practices of three groups: PAPRICAN staff not associated with the university (McGill), the PAPRICAN staff who also hold academic appointments at McGill, and the faculty of the Chemistry Department at McGill who do not hold staff positions at PAPRICAN.

It is found that the academic association with PAPRICAN during graduate research has a significant impact on the number of students who go on to careers in industry. However, close examination of those who remain in Canada indicates that the impact is increasingly felt in only the Pulp and Paper industry. Different “macro” standards are applied to this “micro” example, and policy implications are discussed.

The publication record is again compared to various “macro” standards so as to judge various qualities of the scientific output of the different groups. The PAPRICAN staff performs as would be expected of industrial researchers and the McGill faculty show normal characteristics for an academic group. However, those who hold positions in both the industrial institute and the academic sector, reveal the special role they play in linking the “science” of the second with the “technology” of the first.