Abstract
Although universities have played an important role in knowledge creation, it is also of concern to see how universities perform in knowledge utilization. In the present article, an effective approach is proposed to evaluate and compare university performance in knowledge utilization for patented inventions. Growth trajectories of the cumulative patent citations to scientific publications produced by individual universities are analyzed by using latent growth modeling. Moreover, we examine how the utilization of scientific knowledge created in 1995 and 2005 is affected by research impact and university–industry collaboration among the universities in Europe, North America, and East Asia. The results indicate that not all top 300 research universities in the world perform well in knowledge utilization for patented inventions. Some policy implications are discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aiken, L., & West, S. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Aksnes, D. W. (2006). Citation rates and perceptions of scientific contribution. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(2), 169–185.
Alexander, F. K. (2000). The changing face of accountability: Monitoring and assessing institutional performance in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 71(4), 411–431.
Bainbridge, W. S., & Roco, M. C. (Eds.). (2006). Managing nano-bio-info-cogno innovations: Converging technologies in society. Berlin: Springer.
Blomkvist, K., Kappen, P., & Zander, I. (2014). Superstar inventors—Towards a people-centric perspective on the geography of technological renewal in the multinational corporation. Research Policy, 43(4), 669–682.
Bollen, K. A., & Curran, P. J. (2006). Latent curve models: A structural equation perspective. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Calero, C., van Leeuwen, T. N., & Tijssen, R. J. W. (2007). Research cooperation within the bio-pharmaceutical industry: Network analyses of co-publications within and between firms. Scientometrics, 71(1), 87–99.
Caloghirou, Y., Constantelou, A., & Vonortas, N. S. (2001). Knowledge flows in European industry: Mechanisms and policy implications. London: Routledge.
Commission, European. (1995). Green paper on innovation. Bruxelles: European Commission.
Ding, C. G., & Jane, T. D. (2012). Using SAS PROC CALIS to fit level-1 error covariance structures of latent growth models. Behavior Research Methods, 44(3), 765–787.
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The triple helix university–industry–government relations: A laboratory for knowledge-based economic development. EASST Review, 14(4), 14–19.
Etzkowitz, H., & Webster, A. (1998). Entrepreneurial science: The second academic revolution. In H. Etzkowitz, A. Webster, & P. Healey (Eds.), Capitalizing knowledge: New intersections of industry and academia (pp. 21–46). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Gittelman, M., & Kogut, B. (2003). Does good science lead to valuable knowledge? Biotechnology firms and the evolutionary logit of citation patterns. Management Science, 49(4), 366–382.
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (1992). Some facts and figures on highly cited papers in the sciences, 1981–1985. Scientometrics, 25(3), 373–380.
Hagedoorn, J., & Cloodt, M. (2003). Measuring innovative performance: Is there an advantage in using multiple indicators? Research Policy, 32(8), 1365–1379.
Henderson, R., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (1998). Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965–1988. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(1), 119–127.
Hicks, D., Breitzman, A., Hamilton, K., & Narin, F. (2000). Research excellence and patented innovation. Science and Public Policy, 27(5), 310–320.
Hicks, D., Breitzman, T., Olivastro, D., & Hamilton, K. (2001). The changing composition of innovative activity in the U.S.: A portrait based on patent analysis. Research Policy, 30(4), 681–703.
Hou, C., & Gu, S. (1993). National Systems supporting technical advance in industry: The case of Taiwan. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), National innovation systems: A comparative analysis (pp. 76–114). New York: Oxford University Press.
Huang, M. H., Chang, H. W., & Chen, D. Z. (2006). Research evaluation of research-oriented universities in Taiwan from 1993 to 2003. Scientometrics, 67(3), 419–435.
Jencks, C., & Reisman, D. (1968). The academic revolution. New York: Doubleday.
Lemley, M. A., & Sampat, B. (2012). Examiner characteristics and patent office outcomes. Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(3), 817–827.
Littell, R. C., Milliken, G. A., Stroup, W. W., Wolfinger, R. D., & Schabenberger, O. (2006). SAS for mixed models (2nd ed.). Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
Lundvall, B. Å. (1992). Introduction. In B. Å. Lundvall (Ed.), National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning (pp. 1–17). London: Pinter.
McMillan, G. S., Narin, F., & Deeds, D. L. (2000). An analysis of the critical role of public science in innovation: The case of biotechnology. Research Policy, 29(1), 1–8.
Meyer, M. (2001). Patent citation analysis in a novel field of technology. Scientometrics, 51(2), 163–183.
Meyer, M. (2006). Measuring science-technology interaction in the knowledge-driven economy: The case of a small economy. Scientometrics, 66(2), 425–439.
Narin, F., Hamilton, K., & Olivastro, D. (1997). The increasing linkage between US technology and public science. Research Policy, 26(3), 317–330.
Nelson, R. R., & Rosenberg, N. (1993). Technical innovation and national systems—Introduction. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), National innovation systems: A comparative analysis (pp. 3–28). New York: Oxford University Press.
Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Roach, M., & Cohen, W. M. (2013). Lens or prism? Patent citations as a measure of knowledge flows from public research. Management Science, 59(2), 504–525.
Roco, M. C., & Bainbridge, W. S. (2002). Converging technologies for improving human performance: Integrating from the nanoscale. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 4(4), 281–295.
Rosenberg, N., & Nelson, R. R. (1994). American universities and technical advance in industry. Research Policy, 23(3), 323–348.
Schmoch, U. (1997). Indicators and the relations between science and technology. Scientometrics, 38(1), 103–116.
Sorenson, O., & Fleming, L. (2004). Science and the diffusion of knowledge. Research Policy, 33(10), 1615–1634.
Tijssen, R. J. W. (2001). Global and domestic utilization of industrial relevant science: Patent citation analysis of science–technology interactions and knowledge flows. Research Policy, 30(1), 35–54.
Tijssen, R. J. W., Buter, R. K., & van Leeuwan, T. N. (2000). Technological relevance of science: An assessment of citation linkages between patents and research papers. Scientometrics, 47(2), 389–412.
Van Raan, A. F. J. (2004). Measuring science. In H. F. Moed, W. Glanzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems (pp. 19–50). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Wade, R. (1990). Governing the market: Economy theory and the role of government in East Asian industrialization. Princeton: Princeton University.
White, M. J., & White, K. G. (1977). Citation analysis of psychology journals. American Psychologist, 32(5), 301–305.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to the reviewer for the constructive comments and suggestions. This research was partially supported by grant MOST 103-2410-H-009-024 from the Ministry of Science and Technology in Taiwan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hung, WC., Ding, C.G., Wang, HJ. et al. Evaluating and comparing the university performance in knowledge utilization for patented inventions. Scientometrics 102, 1269–1286 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1470-9
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1470-9