ABSTRACT. Twenty years ago, the "Asian Tigers” accomplished exceptional economic growth which was deemed as Asian Miracle, and it radically changed their technological domains of industry. This story facilitated many researches which are interested in the study of transition process. However, some scholars commented that the “Asian Miracle” heavily relied on state intervention and was unsustainable. The underlying contesting forwarded the questions: 1) how did the system contained government-intervention transit, and 2) how did the government destabilize the inertia of centralized management to the network-driven mode? In sum, can government manage the sustainability transition? Reviewing the impressive economic growth and (socio-technical) regime transition, Science Park Policy (SPP), a policy that focused on the development of high-tech industries and “catch-up” strategies beginning in late 1970s, played an important role in Taiwan. Intuitionally, the program highlighted the role of government policy (the theory of developmental state). Innovation scholars, nevertheless, revised this theory with innovation system approach and then argued that the transition of the system was not only influenced by government policy but also determined by other factors such as firms, universities, and incubators. This implies that the government (policy) was just one of the actors in the network, and the transition was driven by the dynamics of network actually (Mahmood & Rufin, 2005). However, both of the two angels ignored whether a) the transition in Taiwan is sustainable, and b) the government plays a special role in the network. This article assumes that the network was levered by government policy. The research question therefore emerged: is Taiwanese transition in high-tech industry the sustainability transition? Furthermore, what niche does the Taiwanese government develop during the term of the sustainability transition? This article will reassess the Taiwan’s high-tech sectors transition with the approach of strategic niche management (SNM), mentioned in the emerging field of sustainability transition. The definition of sustainability transition is a long-term, multi-dimensional, and fundamental transformation process through which established socio-technical systems shift to more sustainable modes of production and consumption (Markard, et al., 2012). Beyond the sustainability transition, the concept of socio-technical system (regime), different from technical regime, is that scientific knowledge, engineering practices, and process technologies are socially embedded— i.e., they are seamlessly intertwined with the expectations and skills of technology users, with institutional structures, and with broader infrastructures (Kemp et al., 1998). The niche is the determinant in the process of sustainability transition, conceptualized as a protective space enable to make the radical innovation in the socio-technical system (Schot & Geels, 2008). The way for managing the niche innovation is called SNM, which aim to change the existing regime via shielding, nurturing and empowering a niche (in a socio-technical system). SNM needs to align individually systemic actors who own various resources to develop the niche innovation (Smith & Raven, 2012; Farla et al, 2012). In many cases of SNM failure, the institutional structure, which lacks actors with the similar goal and dynamic network, hinders the resource aligning in the transition pathway of system. Regarding to transition process in Taiwan’s socio-technical system of high-tech sector with the framework above, this article found a different mechanism from theoretical SNM which thought the stronger government acts with the network will lock in the systematic transition. Considering to the critical event that Taiwanese government created (designed) an institutional arrangement (presented in SPP) to cultivate few niches in the initiative stage, the novel paths of system transiting were explained. Some of those paths have fulfilled sustainability transition (took the sustainable consumption and change the regime), but the others have not. Comparing the diversity of institutional arrangement and its work in transition process between IC and Biotech industries in Taiwan, this article built a new theory of the role of government in SNM. With interviews and second-hand data and by qualitative method, this article reframed the transition path in two Taiwanese high-tech industries influenced by SPP. Taiwanese government constructs an institution for supporting the resource allocation through the SPP. This institution was divided into two resource-access functions. First, the formal rules based on government’s authority incorporate related national laws, government fiscal budget, etc. for collecting resource to support the network, in which actors are attracted by easier resource access. Second, the informal rules based on networking nested in the configuration of network incorporate semi-official institutes, firm-university relationship, guanxi, and so on for allocating resource to initiate actors to artificially complete the network, where actors are mobilized by exchanging resource access. The SPP framed the same formal rules for IC and Biotech sectors, but differently informal rules for the two. The informal rule in IC sector enabled actors to initiate major new entrants, and formed the development track of network with more friendly resource access. On the other hand, the informal rule in Biotech sector made actors initiate minor new entrants, and shaped the development track of network with finite resource access. Traditionally, both of two pathway finished the transition of network-driven innovation (Lee & von Tunzelmann, 2005; Dodgson, 2008). In the lens of sustainability transition, however, this article presented a different consequence from it: the IC industry has attained the sustainability transition by the path with efficient resource access in 30 years, while the Biotech industry, by the path with limitary resource access, has not yet reach the sustainability transition obviously. A robustness discussion presented continued. 1) Various differences in the industries between IC and Biotech may influence the result. We defend it by reviewing the systems of the two sectors. In both of the systems, the potential global market, R&D expenditure, primary investment, social support, and talents supply are all similar in Taiwan. That is to say, though industrial structures are not alike, their niches are comparable. The determinant of resource in the analysis of niche development is thus theoretical interpretability. 2) The endogenous effect between the two industries may influences the result. Though the two systems share many analogous actors like government agencies, ITRI, and universities, the network and dynamic of two industries are independent due to the systematic divergence. In conclusion, this article revisits system transition process in Taiwan, and argues that government is able to manage niche innovation by designing institution. But the government policy does not promise to speed up the sustainability transition. It may also lead to the unsustainable (or slowly sustainable) path. The result contributes to the mode of sustainability transition in the catch-up states all over the world.

ABSTRACT. This poster presents the process and preliminary findings of a collaboration between a Public Policy graduate student and the Public Policy subject librarian at the Georgia Institute of Technology. The project involved profiling research publications on climate change and sustainability-related research by Georgia Tech faculty and researchers over a five year period. Key concerns included: basic competency with the text-mining software VantagePoint, validating completeness of the dataset, cleaning the data, and visualizing results. This uniquely large and unwieldy topic domain may provide insight into strategies for structuring search terms and using text-mining tools for broad and dispersed topics. In addition, the project aims to illustrate the productivity of Georgia Tech’s research activities related to climate change and sustainability. This type of research profiling of large-scale topics may increase in prevalence as research universities continue investments in solving “grand challenges.” We also conclude that research librarians can serve as valuable partners in helping to: identify related subject headings, provide instruction on appropriate text-mining tools, and co-creating boolean search terms to encompass challenging topic domains such as climate change and sustainability.

ABSTRACT. Traditional models of data access revolve around novel, small-scale data collection or use of open datasets—often requiring government investment and curation. Today’s instrumented and connected world leads to a host of data collecting sensors, “smart devices,” transactional logs, and web platforms—almost all of which are developed and deployed by the private commercial sector. These data are diverse, plentiful, and often intimate since devices cohabitate with us, and information systems connect our social and perfunctory lives. The raw inferential power of this information has not been lost on tech companies, and data are often viewed as an asset. These private sector data are of rich interest to academics, and gaining access for observational or experimental study is an exception instead of a rule. Though the desire to study such data are widely discussed informally among academics, little work exists articulating the needs, sharing incentives, or access barriers. Using qualitative data from semi-structured interviews with both industry and academics, this study explores the unique privacy and ethical dilemmas presented when academics conduct research on private sector data, legal barriers to sharing, and new pressures on academic freedom via research product restrictions. This study also articulates the elements of successful cases of industry-academic partnerships, and the legal and structural arrangements that were made to overcome barriers to access and use. In conclusion, possible policy remedies and incentives are considered to encourage the responsible sharing of private sector data for research purposes.

ABSTRACT. Although knowledge is often defined as a resource that can provide a substantial competitive advantage to a firm, it is often the case that many for-profit firms choose to engage in open science through the publication of their research findings for use by the larger community. Research suggests, however, that such engagement is not done naïvely but with an intent to minimize the negative effects of spillover (Simeth & Raffo 2013) and is not simply a by-product of a firm’s existing knowledge discovery activities, but rather reflects a deliberate organizational strategy (Ding, 2011; Simeth & Lhuillery, 2015) for purposes that, while nonpecuniary in nature, never the less serve a benefit to the firm (Hicks, 1995). Two purposes for such engagement highlighted in the literature include the increasing interdependence with academic scientists (McMillan, Narin, & Deeds, 2000; Simeth & Raffo, 2013) and the recruitment and retention of highly skilled internal researchers (Liu & Stuart, 2014; Sauermann & Roach, 2014).

Industries have always been geographically clustered for multiple reasons, however, Audretsch and Feldman (1996), years ago noted that in industries where innovation plays a greater role this clustering is often related to dependence on knowledge spillover either from universities or the movement of skilled labor. Today we often find high-tech industries clustered on both the East and West coasts of the United States (Csomós & Tóth, 2016) near prominent universities and high quantities of skilled workers. Given that both these features have been suggested as reasons for-profit firms engage in open science, this study proposes that the closer a for-profit firm is located to a prominent university the more likely it will be to engage in open science through the publication of research findings.

This study analyzes the distance between 804 US high-tech firms and US universities housing the top 25 computer science/mathematics departments as determined by the CWTS Lieden University Rankings (www.leidenranking.com). Firms were determined based on a set of optimal Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes (Kile & Phillips, 2009). The publication records of each firm were acquired from SCOPUS for the years 2011-2015. It was found that 511 of the firms were affiliated on at least one paper during this time, meaning 64% of the firms in the study had published.

Distribution statistics for the dataset show that 79% of the firms located less than five kilometers from a prominent university published research findings. These percentages drop significantly, as distance increases. Between five and twenty-five kilometers, the percentage of firm’s publishing is 70% and at greater than 150 kilometers only 50% of firms had published research findings. Modeling using binary logistic regression predicts that firms located within five kilometers of a prominent university are1.6 times more likely to publish than firms beyond that distance and that firms located more than 150 kilometers from a prominent university are 0.4 times less likely publish than those within the five-kilometer radius.

When firms were plotted on a map, hot spots appear, as expected, on both the East and West coasts. Many firms that publish are located in California around San Francisco and in and between Los Angeles and San Diego. Most of these firms are in close proximity to one of the three University of California campuses (Los Angeles, San Diego, and Berkley) on the CWTS list or Stanford University. Seattle Washington is also a hot spot for firms who publish, which is in the same place as the University of Washington, also among CWTS’ top 25. On the East coast, there a number of firms who publish around Boston and down the coast to New York, Philadelphia, and Washington DC. Universities in the area on the list include MIT, Columbia, Rutgers, Princeton, and the University of Maryland. Smaller hot spot areas which engulf university areas include Minneapolis, Phoenix, and Atlanta. Hot spots for which there are few close universities include Chicago, which is more than 225 kilometers from both the University of Wisconsin and the University of Illinois; Indianapolis, which is 100 kilometers from Purdue University, Dallas, which is more than 300 kilometers from both the University of Texas at Austin and Texas A&M; and Miami, which is 540 kilometers from the University of Florida. Several spots stand out with high firm publication activity far from prominent universities, these include, Denver, where the closest prominent university is more than 900 kilometers away, in Minnesota and Salt Lake City where the closest prominent University is more than 800 kilometers away, in Arizona. Both of these places, however, are near major universities not on the CWTS list.

Although geography is known to correlate with a firm’s innovation potential (Audretsch & Feldman, 1996; Csomós & Tóth, 2016), the present study presents strong evidence for a geographical factor influencing a for-profit firm’s decision to engage in open science through the publication of their research findings. Additionally, it sets the stage for further research identifying the relationship between recruitment of internal researchers and university collaboration in both firm’s publishing and location decisions.

References Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1996). R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. The American Economic Review, 86(3), 630–640. Csomós, G., & Tóth, G. (2016). Exploring the position of cities in global corporate research and development: A bibliometric analysis by two different geographical approaches. Journal of Informetrics, 10(2), 516–532. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.004 Ding, W. W. (2011). The impact of founders’ professional-education background on the adoption of open science by for-profit biotechnology firms. Management Science, 52(2), 257–273. http://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1100.1278 Hicks, D. (1995). Published papers, tacit competencies and corporate management of the public/private character of knowledge. Industrial and Corporate Change, 4(2), 401–402. Kile, C., & Phillips, M. (2009). Using industry classification codes to sample high-technology firms: Analysis and recommendations. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 24(1), 35–58. http://doi.org/10.1177/0148558X0902400104 Liu, C. C., & Stuart, T. (2014). Positions and rewards: The allocation of resources within a science-based entrepreneurial firm. Research Policy, 43(7), 1134–1143. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.04.013 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. Sauermann, H., & Roach, M. (2014). Not all scientist pay to be scientists: PhDs’ preferences for publishing in industrial employment. Research Policy, 43, 32–47. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.07.006 Simeth, M., & Lhuillery, S. (2015). How do firms develop capabilities for scientific disclosure? Research Policy, 44(7), 1283–1295. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.04.005 Simeth, M., & Raffo, J. D. (2013). What makes companies pursue an open science strategy? Research Policy, 42(9), 1531–1543. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.007

ABSTRACT. The Intellectual Property Right (IPR) system is one of the key institutions to incentivize innovation. However, it is not obvious whether a strong IPR regime always encourages innovation. This is because the relationship between strength of IPR regime and innovation depends on interaction of a variety of factors as well as the accompanying complex dynamics. Indeed, studies emphasizes different factors and conditions that define the relationship between the IPR regime and innovation. The consequence of the strong IPR regime depends on innovative firms’ organizational structure that governs the interaction between R&D division and IPR managing division (Sakakibara & Branstetter, 2001). The impact of IPR regime on innovation activity differs by industry (Moser, 2003) as the importance of IPR is heterogeneous across different industry (Cohen, Nelson, & Walsh, 2000). The weak IPR may drive innovation by promoting technological competitions and R&D investment accordingly (Qian, 2008) while firms strategically protect their intellectual property through knowledge internalization when they face with the weak IPR regime (Zhao, 2006). The complex dynamics and various factors that needs to be considered in understanding the relationship between IPR regime and innovation impose more difficulties particularly to the innovation policymakers in designing the proper IPR policy in the context of developing country. Since the developing countries often suffer from the limited infrastructure and resources for innovation activity, it become crucial for the policymakers to find the best mode of institutions to effectively promote innovation in their context. When it comes to the IPR system, it is critical issue to find how the strength of IPR regime will affect the innovation capability of indigenous innovators across different industrial sectors because the strong IPR regime can be disastrous for those who are in infant industries whereas it could be advantageous for innovators who are capable of catching the new opportunities generated from the strong IPR regime. Although the prior studies have put extensive effort to discuss how the organizational or strategic characteristics of innovators and general industrial characteristics relate to the impact of IPR regime on innovation in developed countries’ context, they are less informative in understanding how the strength of IPR regime influence on the innovation capability of the innovators in developing countries across different industries that have different level of absorptive capacity of innovators. Does the strong IPR regime differently affects the innovation capability of innovators by the industry level absorptive capacity in the developing country context? The present study aims at addressing this question by using the case of IPR reform in Korea in 1986. This IPR reform becomes a unique case to address the research question of the present study for the following reasons. First, the reform was particularly for strengthening IPR regime. By the reform, the patent length increased from 12 to 15 years. Also, patenting new substances such as pharmaceutical products and the protecting computer software through copy right were newly allowed. Second, the pharmaceutical industry was under developing stage whereas computer software related industry was in rapid growth in Korea from 1970s. Hence, the innovators in the two industries may have built different level of absorptive capacity. Third, this reform also took place when Korea was still a developing economy. For empirical analysis, we proxy for the innovation capability by the quality of produced patents. We analyze whether the quality of the patents improved differently for pharmaceuticals and computer-software related patents after the reform. We have obtained patents filed to US, Germany and UK patent office by Korean applicants during 1982-1991 period. Our analysis finds no empirical evidences that the Korean IPR reform enhanced the technological significance of the both of pharmaceutical and computer-software related patents. Instead, the reform seems to affect the patenting behavior of inventors in the two sectors, differently. Our findings contribute to the broad literature on the relationship between the IPR regime and innovation with implications for innovation policymakers in developing countries.

Reference: Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2000). Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why US manufacturing firms patent (or not). Retrieved from Moser, P. (2003). How do patent laws influence innovation? Evidence from nineteenth-century world fairs. Retrieved from Qian, Y. (2008). Impacts of Entry by Counterfeiters. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123(4), 1577-1609. Sakakibara, M., & Branstetter, L. (2001). Do Stronger Patents Induce More Innovation? Evidence from the 1988 Japanese Patent Law Reforms. RAND journal of economics, 77-100. Zhao, M. (2006). Conducting R&D in countries with weak intellectual property rights protection. Management Science, 52(8), 1185-1199.

ABSTRACT. Some scientists write literary fiction books in their spare time. If these books contain scientific knowledge, literary fiction becomes a mechanism of knowledge transfer. When this is the case, in the framework of the distinction of formal versus informal knowledge transfer, we conceptualize literary fiction as non-formal knowledge transfer. We model knowledge transfer as a function of the type of scientist (academic or non-academic) and the field of science. Academic scientists are those employed in academia and public research centers whereas non-academic scientists are those employed in other sectors with a scientific background. We also distinguish between direct knowledge transfer (the book includes the scientist’s research topics), indirect knowledge transfer (scientific authors talk about their research with cultural agents) and reverse knowledge transfer (cultural agents give scientists ideas for future research). Through mixed-methods research and a sample from Spain, we find that scientific authorship accounts for a considerable percentage of all literary fiction authorship. Academic scientists do not transfer knowledge directly so often as non-academic scientists, but the former engage into indirect and reverse transfer knowledge more often than the latter. Scientists from History and Philosophy stand out in direct knowledge transfer. We draw propositions about the role of the academic logic and scientific field on knowledge transfer via literary fiction. We advance some tentative conclusions regarding the consideration of scientific authorship of literary fiction as a valuable knowledge transfer mechanism.

ABSTRACT. Nobel Prize is commonly interpreted as indicator of nation’s scientific and technological performance and frequently encourages improving nation’s basic science performance. But literature review in this field shown in Table 1., there are still few articles that aim to figure out the role of Nobel Prize as the indicator of the performance of nation’s scientific community and its interplay with science, technology and innovation policy. Previous study is mainly still focus on the preference of Nobel Laureates and rarely to use bibliographic data of Laureates to evaluate his/her research works and its spillover process. Unless the selection process of Nobel Prize is behind-closed-doors (Källstrand 2012), (Akaike 2013) for 50 years after its decision statement, it is still meaningful to trace scientific behavior of Nobel Laureates as the cohort of star scientist (Zucker and Darby 1997).

In this research, I aim to figure out the following research question that is; how and why Nobel Laureates could be achieved outstanding result and how interacted with scientific community?

(Table 1. )

In doing so, employing qualitative approach to trace out the scale and presence of scientific community where Nobel Laureates resides. Firstly, to trace out the transition of scientific carrier of several Nobel Laureates (focus mainly on three scientific prizes; Nobel Prize in Physics, Nobel Prize in Chemistry and Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine), using bibliographic data of scientific paper by Web of Knowledge’s Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) from 1900 to 2016, and Scopus from 1996 to 2016. Visualizing the co-author/citation network of Laureates (using Name-matching/Visualization Software: Vantage Point), then taking snapshot of his/her behavior in certain period to identify the scientific source of his/her study and propagation of finding. It would indicate the process of the emergence of Nobel Laureates, how they interact with other scientists in same and/or another country in scientific community and “break point” of his/her research, in which emerges the strength and the major accomplishment of Laureates. In addition to stylize the fact, oral interview has been made with Japanese Nobel Prize Laureates; Prof. Makoto Kobayashi, Satoshi Omura, and Ryoji Noyori.

In addition, to ensure the role of science, technology and innovation policy for each country, Nobel Laureates’ funding data should be taking into the account of Laureate’s scientific performance. As many previous study (Latour 1987) suggests that superior scientist has a capability to find funding for encouraging their own research. Hence, we build dataset which involves (1) Laureates’ personal preference (includes age, field, and discipline), (2) Laureates’ scientific performance (number of patents and scientific papers published, the number of backward and forward citation of patents and scientific papers), and (3) Laureates’ funding performance (timing and the volume for each funding). By using these datasets, we aim to realize Laureates’ scientific performance in a nutshell.

ABSTRACT. The association between age and great scientific discoveries can shed light on the nature of creativity, the underlying mechanism of knowledge creation and scientific progress, and the design of research policy that support scientists . Not limited to the academic world, it can also provide implications of aging population, education policies and even the economic growth. Scientific and technological activities are suggested to increasingly depend on teamwork since the knowledge accumulates with the advancement of science and technology . Therefore, the age and team of great scientific discoveries, as well as the interaction between age and team deserve an in-depth exploration.

China has been the world’s second largest contributor to high-quality scientific articles in 2016 . The dramatic growth of China’s science has attracted the world’s attention, as well as the development of Chinese scientists who made great scientific contributions. Given the fluctuated political and economical reconstructing China has experienced, the age and team of Chinese scientists who have made great scientific discoveries may deviate from previous claims. To our knowledge, this study is a first try to depicted the whole landscape of the age and team of scientists who are awarded the national scientific awards recognised by China’s national science and technology awards system.

Based on the 8,744 award records of five national scientific awards from 1999 to 2015 , and the demographic information of scientists, we investigated the age and team of China’s great scientific discoveries on which the scientists obtained awards based. We took advantage of the information of scientific discoveries to find the year when scientists created their representative work of scientific discoveries and calculate their ages in that year. Utilising descriptive analysis and Poisson regression analysis, we found that:

1.The age distribution is a double-peak distribution, in which the first peak is in middle life(30s to 40s) and the second is at 60s. Moreover, we observed a shifting age distribution during the three periods with five-year time interval. With time passing by, the second age peak become weaker and even perish at the third episode.

2.The average age at which scientists produced their representative work remained steady.

3.Female scientists write the representative articles younger than their male colleagues. The average age of male scientists is 41.4, 3 years older than that of female scientists. Furthermore, the average age of female is younger than that of male in all six disciplines . The outstanding performance come earlier on average in Information Science than that in other fields.

4. Taking the awarded order into account, scientists who are at the top of the list of winners are older than those who are listed behind when they created their representative work.

5. The team consists of three to six scientists and remained stable during the last two decades. The team size of scientists of Mathematics and Physics, and Information Sciences is smaller than that of other disciplines.

6. There is a U-shaped relationship between the age at which scientists got the highest degree and the age at which they made great scientific contributions. This relationship also exists between the team size and the age. Besides, scientists who held overseas highest degrees are older than their peers when they made great scientific discoveries.

Appendix:

Figures, tables and description of data source, data cleaning process and regression results are shown in the attached file.

ABSTRACT. Research universities around the world are increasingly establishing long-term institutional research footprints overseas through the creation of research centres, facilities and partnerships outside of their home countries. Examples include research centres opened by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), the University of Cambridge, and the Technical University of Munich at the CREATE campus in Singapore; Georgia Tech’s R&D facilities in Metz, France; and the Fudan-Yale Biomedical Research Center in China. We argue that such international university research ventures (IURV) are a distinct kind of formal institutional knowledge-producing arrangements which have emerged recently at the intersection of two trends: expanding international research collaborations (Katz and Martin 1997, Wagner and Leydesdorff 2005) and the globalization of higher education (Altbach and Knight 2007), each responding to the growing complexity of science and institutional pressures from funders and policymakers (Youtie et al. 2006). IURVs vary in form and function, while their scope often includes not only research but also an expanding mix of knowledge exchange and developmental objectives, suggesting growing IURV impact not only on global knowledge production but also on human capital, innovation, economic competitiveness, security, and international development.

Previous studies of institutionalized forms of international research collaboration have focused either on multinational firm R&D (Kuemmerle 1999; Von Zedtwitz and Gassmann 2002), public research institutions (Jonkers and Cruz-Castro 2010), or research activities at international branch campuses (Kinser and Lane 2016; Guimon 2016). With the exception of some notable IURV case studies (Pfotenhauer et al., 2016, Hird and Pfotenhauer 2016), there has been limited comprehensive analysis of IURVs and their roles in global cross-border knowledge flows. To fill this gap in knowledge, we have undertaken an exploratory study of the scale and scope of global IURV activity. Data on IURV locations, years of operation, partnerships, research areas, missions, activities, and organizational forms was collected by mining the websites of participating universities, their partners, and IURVs themselves. Additional information was gained from government reports and news sources.

The study consisted of two phases. The initial effort targeted IURV activities of the 108 top U.S. research universities as defined by the “Carnegie Doctoral/Research Universities – Very High Research Activity” classification, 2010 edition. The second phase surveyed the 40 top non-U.S. research universities based on Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2016, plus an additional 40 top non-US and non-European research universities from the same rankings stratified by region to ensure broader regional coverage. The resulting combined and stratified sample includes 111 North American universities, 33 Asian universities (including a Middle Eastern subsample of 8), 24 European, 8 Latin American, 8 African universities, and 4 universities from Oceania (all located in Australia). The full scale of IURV phenomenon in the world is not fully captured by our combined sample: in the process of data collection, we found evidence of at least 120 additional universities that established IURVs. Our study focuses primarily on IURVs created by top global and regional research universities, not all IURVs ever created.

Our results confirm that IURVs are, indeed, a worldwide phenomenon. We found 392 IURVs set up in 84 countries by 99 universities. While many IURVs are located in emerging economies, with China (125 IURVs), India (24) and Singapore (22) as clear leaders, the full geographical distribution is more dispersed: we found IURVs established in some of the most and the least developed and research-active countries in the world. On a regional level, Asia is the biggest receiver of IURVs (264 IURVs – more than two-thirds of the total worldwide amount). It is followed by Africa (48 IURVs), Europe (40), Latin America (27), North America (U.S. and Canada combined, with 9 total), and Oceania (4).

Top European research universities show relatively strong engagement with IURVs, with 87% of the European part of the sample establishing at least one, compared to roughly 50% of North American and Asian peers in the sample. Top IURV-creating institutions are the University of Oxford with 30 IURVs, MIT (24), and the Chinese University of Hong Kong (21). Top IURV sending countries (apart from the U.S. which is overrepresented in the combined sample and produced 183 IURVs in total) are the United Kingdom with 8 sampled universities creating 72 IURVs, followed by Hong Kong with 40 IURVs established by 4 universities. Other countries exporting a significant number of IURVs are Japan, Netherlands, Canada, Germany, Russia, and Australia.

Regarding cross-regional IURV circulation, North America exports IURVs to Asia (117 IURVs), Africa, Europe (28 each), and Latin America (22). European universities send IURVs to Asia (75 out of the total of 114 IURVs) and Africa (20), with smaller representation in other regions. Asia focuses on within-region IURV collaboration: 67 out of the total of 75 IURVs established by Asian universities are hosted by other Asian countries. Most Australian IURVs are also hosted in Asia. In contrast, universities in Africa and Latin America tend to be on the receiving end of joint research ventures, exporting little to none.

IURVs are a relatively recent phenomenon. While the earliest IURV in the sample has been in operation since 1954, a significant growth in IURV entry started at the turn of the current century and continues to the present, with a peak of 39 new entries in 2012. IURV expansion seems to slow down after this peak, suggesting either an exhaustion of resources or interest for IURV creation from host countries or saturation of organizational capacity of top research universities to manage IURV activities abroad. Nevertheless, most of the recorded IURVs are still currently active; only 22 of them ceased operations or became independent.

Based on the analysis of the geographical distribution of IURVs, their partnerships, activities, and research specialization, we identified three primary motivations behind IURV location decisions made by universities: 1) opportunities for high-quality research; 2) host country policies for capacity building in science and technology; and 3) international development programs. Profit-seeking motivations and path dependency in previous relationships between countries may also play a role in these decisions. The relatively high relevance of the second and the third motivation may explain some of the regional and country-level differences in characteristics of IURVs, reflecting different approaches of the hosting countries to national science and technology priorities and strategy, as well as the role IURVs play in it. In particular, in China a majority of IURVs are created in partnerships with universities, reflecting government efforts to improve the research capacity of domestic universities (Zhang et al. 2013). For Hong Kong, IURVs are a response to institutional pressure to formalize collaborations with mainland China and expand to Chinese market. In Singapore, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, and Malaysia IURVs are part of their strategies in building global education hubs (Knight 2014). Finally, in Pakistan and most of the African countries including Kenya, Ethiopia, and Tanzania, IURVs predominantly work in the international development context.

Drawing on the mapping of the global landscape of IURVs and our detailed probing of IURV characteristics, partnerships, objectives, and operational arrangements, the paper concludes by considering the significance of IURVs and potential trajectories and emerging regional locations for future development.

Acknowledgements The research reported here is based upon work supported by the U.S. Army Research Laboratory and the U.S. Army Research Office through the Department of Defense Minerva Research Initiative under grant #W911-NF-15-1-0322. Additional research assistance in data collection was performed by Yin Li, Jon Schmid, and Olufunke Adebola.

References

Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007). The internationalization of higher education: Motivations and realities. Journal of studies in international education, 11(3-4), 290-305.

Guimon, J. (2016). Universities as multinational enterprises? The multinational university analyzed through the eclectic paradigm. Multinational Business Review, 24(3), 216–228. https://doi.org/10.1108/MBR-07-2016-0025

Hird, Mackenzie D., and Sebastian M. Pfotenhauer. (2016) How complex international partnerships shape domestic research clusters: Difference-in-difference network formation and research re-orientation in the MIT Portugal Program. Research Policy. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.10.008

Jonkers, K. and L. Cruz-Castro (2010), The Internationalisation of Public Sector Research through International Joint Laboratories, Science and Public Policy, 37 (8), 559–70.

Katz, J.S. and B.R. Martin (1997), What is research collaboration, Research Policy 26(1), 1–18.

Kinser, K., & Lane, J. E. (2016). International Branch Campuses: Evolution of a Phenomenon. International Higher Education, (85), 3-5.

Knight, J. (2014). International education hubs: Collaboration for competitiveness and sustainability. New Directions for Higher Education, 2014(168), 83-96.

Kuemmerle, W. (1999). The drivers of foreign direct investment into research and development: an empirical investigation. Journal of international business studies, 30(1), 1-24.

Pfotenhauer, S. M., Wood, D., Roos, D., & Newman, D. (2016). Architecting complex international science, technology and innovation partnerships (CISTIPs): A study of four global MIT collaborations. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 104, 38-56.

Wagner, C.S., Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science, Research Policy, 34, 1608–1618. Von Zedtwitz, M., & Gassmann, O. (2002). Market versus technology drive in R&D internationalization: four different patterns of managing research and development. Research policy, 31(4), 569-588.

Youtie, Jan, Libaers, Dirk, Bozeman, Barry. (2006). Institutionalization of university research centers: the case of the National Cooperative Program in Infertility Research. Technovation, 26(9), 1055-1063. Zhang, H., Patton, D., & Kenney, M. (2013). Building global-class universities: Assessing the impact of the 985 Project. Research Policy, 42(3), 765-775.

ABSTRACT. A successful management of an innovation system can drive the growth of both companies and national economies. At the national level, governments develop instruments and policies to foster science and technology as well the innovative activities of private sector. Many developing countries face challenges of technological upgrading. To this end, they employ strategies for catching-up with the countries at the technological frontier. Transition post-Soviet countries, too, are among those that face significant barriers to upgrading their science and technology. These countries, however, differ from other developing world by their common historical experiences and production system heritage together with a shared set of difficulties brought by the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Years of operating under a central planning system and the corresponding lack of economic incentives for innovativeness left deep marks on business behavior, with companies being slow and rigid in dealing with market challenges. It took time for firms to alter their mindsets and develop an understanding of how capitalist markets operate and how to generate higher economic returns under a new post-Soviet system. Inability of the early transition period to provide satisfactory work opportunities for highly skilled workers and scientists coupled with high demand for relatively cheap highly skilled specialists in developed countries led to a substantial brain drain. Armenia’s transition, which began in the 1990s, started with an ethnic conflict that ended in 1995. After 1995, the country embarked on its post-war recovery process by developing economic and social policies, which came into effect mostly after 2000. Macroeconomic data confirm that the main transformation processes were in effect after 2000, and the majority of innovation policies were developed in the 2000s (UNECE, 2014). After the war (1991-1995), Armenia faced a problem common to all transition countries: how to integrate into the world economy with an “old fashioned” production system, poor technology and a lack of financial resources for education and science. However, Armenia inherited some advantages from its “soviet” past: high-quality human capital, well developed laboratories and universities for natural sciences, and a diaspora that was eager to invest in the country’s economy. This study aims to deepen our understanding of National Innovation System (NIS) characteristics in transition countries and, in particular, discuss the conditions in which Armenian NIS is transforming. We review the key historical path dependencies that are particularly important to explain the interplay between the development level of the NIS and the economic development of Armenia. Several stylized research questions are addressed in this context: How can transition countries exploit current opportunities and resolve the weaknesses of the inherited state planning system to construct an effective NIS? What are the major drivers of the change in Armenian NIS? What opportunities do firms have for learning and innovation in Armenia? To answer these questions, we start with a discussion of the NIS approach in transition countries from evolutionary perspective. We point out how the initial transition reforms and common historical path dependencies steer the development of NIS in transition countries and continue to affect them. We further our analysis by introducing the determinants and actors in Armenia’s NIS by highlighting the macroeconomic environment, past industrial development and the challenges that Armenia faced during the transformation of its Regional Innovation System as a republic within USSR into a small country’s National Innovation System. We also discuss the innovation governance system in Armenia, which is seen as an integral part of the NIS. In section 4 we discuss learning and networks as an important aspect of the NIS approach. They play a crucial role in explaining innovation and economic development in transition countries too. Finally, in section 5, the major research questions are reviewed and some suggestions are put forward with the possible avenues of analyzing firm’s innovation in Armenia.

ABSTRACT. It is often mentioned that Chile has a very low investment in Research and Development (R&D), which only reaches a 0.39% of the GDP and has maintained the same level for about ten years. Other than placing the country in the very last place of the OECD ranking in R&D investment, the null increase in the 2017 budget for R&D and management issues in CONICYT (the main funding agency for S&T in Chile) led to a series of protest both by scientists and government officials. This scenario seemed to show a major crisis in Chilean science. In the meantime, Chilean President Michelle Bachelet sent to the congress a law to create a Ministry of Science and Technology, which was long awaited by most of the scientific community. If the electoral year does not cause mayor distractions in the congress, the new Ministry could start its functions in 2018. Nevertheless, it was not clear whether all the complaints were about funding or there was something else behind the numerous claims of a crisis. We asked near 300 researchers in nine cities through the country three questions: What are the main barriers to perform research in Chile? What do researchers propose to overcome those barriers? What do researchers expect from the future Ministry of Science and Technology? We organized a workshop were researchers from all fields were invited. We separated them in focus groups to capture the perceptions of the participants. We used content analysis defining emerging categories for each question. The analysis showed several issues not considered by the authorities, and emerging conflicts between researchers. The main concerns were the difficulties associated to investigate outside the capital, Santiago. Also, a growing claim to support women in science, requests for a more open and transparent process of evaluation and assignment of funding. Other relevant issues were: requests to support multidisciplinary research, requests to revise metrics for the social sciences and humanities, and concerns about the working conditions for junior researchers. As for the Ministry of Science and Technology, most of the researchers support its formation, but were concerned with the influence of politics and economic criteria over the policies the ministry could create. The lack of knowledge of how the public administration works, even at levels near the researchers such as evaluations of funding proposals, was evident during the discussions. At the same time, researchers recognized they had to create a stronger relationship with the society. The description of the research environment in Chile has many similarities with some showed at international level, especially regarding contracts and women`s participation, but also highlights some particular characteristics of the country's traditionalist view of science.

ABSTRACT. A recognized administrative burden in the research grant administration is one of the significant science and innovation policy challenges (Bozeman and Jung, forthcoming). This study explores the interplay of federal research policy and research universities by examining the development of organizational structures for government-sponsored research administration at 115 research universities in the U.S., and a more in-depth case study with semi-structured interviews with research administrators and researchers at selected universities. The growth of the government-sponsored research since the World War II has formulated a sort of principal-agent relationship where the universities and researchers are required to comply with a set of rules and regulations of government and funding agencies for the research grant management procedures, research integrity, and so on (Guston, 2000; Price, 1954; Beasley, 1982). Funding agencies such as the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health have the rules and regulations regarding the research grant administration, and universities have developed their organizational structures to cope with these grant rules and regulations. While all research-intensive universities have certain organizational structures for research administration, there seem to be variations of organizational structures including the situations of university-wide research administration offices and the departmental research administration.

In the interplay of the federal research policy and universities for government-sponsored research, universities have developed organizational structures for research administration. In general, theoretical approaches about the causes of organizational changes consider the factors such as managers’ actions and other environmental and resource aspects (Fernandez and Rainey, 2006). However, to what extent and how are the changes in organizational structures the direct response to the environment, and what is the influence of the individual actors on these organizational structures? From the perspective of the ecology of the organization, organizations change their activities in response to environmental factors in order to acquire and maintain resources for organizational survival (Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978). On one hand, the organizational structures and designs of university-wide and departmental research administration offices can be the direct response to federal research policies and requirements for grant administration as a part of their adaptation to the environment. On the other hand, the actions and strategies of university leaders may shape the organizational structures and operation of research administration. Universities face same sets of rules and regulations by funding agencies, but the organizational structures and operation of research administration are not identical among the universities. The university-wide office of research administrations and sponsored-research are generally governed by the provost for research, and the leaders such as provosts may take more active roles in developing the research administration system at some universities. University governance and roles of the university president, for example, vary among universities, including the president as an entrepreneur in the market metaphor of university governance, and the president pursues the organizational objects that are determined by the trustees in the administration model (Cohen and March 1974).

The first part of this study investigates the situations of research administration at the 115 doctoral universities (highest research activity) in the Carnegie Basic Classification 2015 through the data available in the individual universities’ websites such as the existence and supervision of the sponsored research offices and the amount and ratio of government-sponsored research grant at the university. The examination of these data from 115 research universities provides an overview of the current situations of research administration at research-intensive universities. Further, the second part of this study is a more in-depth case study of one or more selected research-intensive universities with the data from semi-structured interviews with research administrators and experienced researchers. For the selected universities, four research administrators or more and five research faculty or more will be interviewed. The study addresses following questions- to what extent the organizational structures reflect the situations and changes in the rules and regulations of research funding agencies? To what extent the individuals such as the university president and vice provost for research shape the organizational structures and operations of research administration at the research universities? Do research universities have variation in the task decisions, divisions and coordination for research administration? If so, how and why? In so doing, the planned study sheds light on the administration issue of sponsored research at research universities which potentially has a significant impact on the sponsored research system and outcomes. The in-depth case study will provide insights on how and why the organization structures for research administration have developed to the present situations at research universities.

References: Beasley, K. L. (1982). The administration of sponsored programs (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bozeman, B. and Jung, J. (in press) Bureaucratization in Academic Research Policy: What Causes It? , Annals of Science Policy. Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. (1974). Leadership and ambiguity: The american college president. New York: McGraw-Hill. Fernandez, S., & Rainey, H. G. (2006). Managing successful organizational change in the public sector. Public Administration Review, 66(2), 168-176. Guston, D. H. (2000). Between politics and science: Assuring the integrity and productivity of research. New York;Cambridge, U.K;: Cambridge University Press. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G.R. (1978). The external control of organizations. New York: Harper & Row. Price, D. K., & American Council of Learned Societies. (1954). Government and science: Their dynamic relation in american democracy. New York: New York University Press.

ABSTRACT. In this paper, we analyse the motives and barriers for researchers to engage in the triple of publishing, patenting and standardization. We conducted a survey of 129 researchers at the Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing, one of Germanys largest federal research institutes. The resulting dataset allows us to study not only their motives and barriers but also the impact of those motives and barriers on the extent to which the respective activities are undertaken. We find that publishing constitutes a baseline activity. Patenting however is rather driven by commercialization motives, while standardization is fostered by intrinsic motivation. With respect to the barriers, we find that they are mostly inherent to the activity itself or the system in which it is performed.

ABSTRACT. In this research, I developed an analytical technique that can measure whether the direction of scientific research of a country as a whole is diverging from global trends with the objective of conducting policy evaluation to obtain suggestions about basic strategies and resource allocation priority setting plan formulation in science, technology and innovation policy. This study focuses on overviews that can grasp emergent phenomena as a measurement technique for building a policy evaluation information structure that facilitates situation awareness in order to identify the required future policy actions. This analytical technique developed in the fields of bibliometrics is a modified bibliometric count method based on a data sampling method that increases the recall rate of information retrieval, which enables the analysis of emergent phenomena based on time-series changes to two types of metrics, namely, a disciplinary overview metric and a trend divergence metric. In addition, by exchanging opinions with stakeholders related to the analytical subject in science, technology and innovation policy through deliberation, the designed technique is proposed as a package that integrates methodologies for determining interpretive hypotheses for policy evaluation. The results of the technique developed in this study, in the application to three disciplines —Engineering, Chemistry and Interdisciplinary Advanced Science —reveal that this technique with its overview of research trends in natural science makes it possible to surpass the bias of the indexer effects of particular databases. Finally, results obtained using the developed analytical and data-sampling method enabled policy-oriented deliberation information infrastructure for engagement between multi-stakeholders based on the output of research activities. The evaluation methods for research trends analysis developed functions as a tool for situation awareness in science, technology and innovation policy to avoid the pitfalls of rational ignorance and to provide an opportunity for multi-stakeholders to engage in policy deliberation.

ABSTRACT. While much has been written on the Schumpeterian distinction between product and process innovation, relatively little is done on the empirical assessment of various consequences of such different types of innovation in the not-formally-developed country. A majority of literature is focused on European countries showing diverse employment effects of types of innovation. Further, some of the studies are related with “paradox” of R&D, which is represented by concerns on outcomes of R&D investment and other innovation activities, and long-term economic downturn. This paper examines the effects of product and process innovation on the labor demand with the panel regression analysis of South Korean manufacturing industry (1996-2015). It has been a few decades ago after the Korean system of innovation was discussed to have been changed from “imitation to innovation” (Kim 1997), which was led by the government and large firms (Chaebols). Korean firms had made success in “reverse engineering” for developing advanced products until late 90’s. After recovering economic crisis in 1997, South Korea is standing between developed and developing state with the dramatic expansion of the R&D budget since 2002. Ranking the top in Bloomberg Index straight from 2014 to 2017 and in terms of the share of GDP spent on R&D (4.15%) yet suffering from high youth unemployment rates, innovation disparity between small and medium entrepreneurs (SME) and large firms, and so-called “Korean Paradox”, South Korea provides a great example of how innovation activities lead to more or less demand for labor and discussing the changing role of government in innovation system of developing country. Our empirical analysis, which is based on annual R&D Activity Survey on manufacturing sector composed with 20 sub-industries reveals that entire manufacturing industry has invested almost 70% of total expenditure on process innovation. Process oriented R&D increases the profits of the manufacturing firms, which are in turn inversely correlated with labor demands. In addition, investment in product innovation shows a similar effect, contrary to some of the previous studies finding the opposite effect of product and process innovation. We also examine the innovation activities and labor demand by firm size, finding that SMEs tending to invest more on process innovation have increased their demand for labor, while labor demand has declined in large firms generally turning to increase product innovation share since 2011. In detail, the SMEs’ average working time and wage have been increased; however, the growth rates of time and wage are smaller than large firms’ respectively, and the majority of increased labor in SMEs are in irregular labor. Lastly, this research considers the employment effect with an economic condition, foreign investment. Large firms have increased foreign direct investments (FDI) until 2013; however, SMEs have decreased the FDI since 2008 and not concentrated on it. The FDI of two groups have increased each of profits, and large firms gain more than SMEs, which is inversely correlated with labor demand. One of the critical implications of this study is concerned with the roles of government in mediating the effects of technological innovation. The developmental-state thinking pervasive in the South Korean R&D has long dictated the government to play a role of a “system administrator,” but now with rapid technological innovation and the proliferation of innovation agents, it is increasingly called upon to become a “system coordinator.

ABSTRACT. Emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are changing the earth’s climate, potentially imposing a significant global cost that will fall disproportionately on the poor. South Africa is a contributor to greenhouse gas emission and is particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change to health, livelihoods, water and food, with disproportionate impact on the poor, especially women and children. The impact that climate change exerts on South Africa is already evident in the marked temperature and rainfall variations and rising sea levels. Industry and households need to adapt to these changes by reducing their negative impact on the environment. The country suffers from a number of developmental challenges that should be addressed in a manner that ensures environmental sustainability and builds resilience to the effects of climate change, particularly in poorer communities. In order to support the development of a more sustainable society and the transition to a low-carbon economy, investments have to be made in skills, technology and institutional capacity. The key to reconciling the continued development of mineral endowments, with the goal of building a low-carbon economy, is a reduction in scope 2 emissions. The South African National Development Plan 2013 proposes a number of manners in which most industrial sectors would be able to achieve this: • Introducing more energy-efficient and less carbon-intensive industrial processes within the sector. • Increasing the contribution of renewable energy to electricity generation. • Reducing the carbon footprint of existing and planned coal-powered power stations through retrofitting, clean coal technologies and investigating the financial and environmental feasibility of carbon capture and storage technologies. Manufacturing industries have responded to the ever growing environmental concerns by showing greater interest in sustainable production and adoption corporate social responsibility initiatives. The results presented here examine how innovative manufacturing enterprises have embarked on eco-innovative initiatives and how they contribute to sustainable manufacturing. The results represented in this study were obtained from data extracted from the data set of the South African Business Innovation Survey 2010- 2012 (BIS2010-2012). The BIS2010-2012 was based on the guidelines of the OECD OSLO Manual (OECD, 2005) and more specifically, the methodological specifications for round four of the Community Innovation Survey (CIS 4). The survey design was also informed by the structure of the Business Register of Statistics South Africa, from which a random stratified sample was drawn. The results presented here are not intended to represent the entire population, but only the realized sample of 328 manufacturing enterprises that responded to the survey. The generated statistics are thus purely descriptive. Firms were asked about their contribution to environmental sustainability through questions on their eco-innovation contribution. About 43.9% of innovation active enterprises reported reducing energy use per unit output, of which 20.4% were enterprises in the Food Products, Beverages and Tobacco sector. Almost 40% of innovation active enterprises reported a reduction in the CO2 footprint due to innovative products. The Food Products, Beverages and Tobacco sector again shows the highest number of enterprises reporting this (20.7%) followed by 17.2% of innovative enterprises in the Refined Petroleum sector and 14.9% in the Basic metals, fabricated metal products, machinery and equipment sector. The Basic metals, fabricated metal products, machinery and equipment sector had the highest percentage of innovation active enterprises (17.5%) reporting on material gains through innovative products. A reduction in soil, water, noise and air pollution was also reported by 26.3% of innovation active enterprises in this sector and 22.1% reported recycling of waste, water or materials as a direct result of innovation implementation. The aftersales benefits of innovation implementation are also important for environmental sustainability. Energy saving innovations affecting the customer/end user was reported by 32.3% of manufacturing enterprises. This was most prominent in the Basic metals, fabricated metal products, machinery and equipment sector (23.6%). Improved recycling of products after use, was reported by 27.8% on innovation active enterprises of which the Food Products, Beverages and Tobacco sector enterprises was most prominent (24.1%). Manufacturing enterprises also introduced some of their innovations as a response to voluntary codes or agreements for environmental good practice in the various sectors (29.6%), existing environmental regulations or taxes on pollution (19.7%) or regulations or taxes to be introduces in future (16.6%). The availability of government grants, subsidies or other financial incentives also play a role in the decision to introduce eco- innovations, but only 8% of innovation active enterprises reported this. The market demand from customers is also a driver of the implementation of eco-innovations (26%). The results show that most innovative manufacturing enterprises did not report eco-innovation. The Food Products, Beverages and Tobacco sector, the Refined Petroleum sector and the Basic metals, fabricated metal products, machinery and equipment sector have the highest share of enterprises indicating involvement in eco-innovation activities. There is a definite eco-innovation gap that suggests a lot of untapped potential to improve eco-innovation performance in the South African manufacturing sector. The policies and strategies that the South African government has put in place is an indication of the efforts to contribute towards sustainable development.

ABSTRACT. Turnover has been discussed extensively in private sectors, while fewer studies focus on turnover in public sector and STEM field. Why do people quit? What are the main factors? Is there any difference of turnover among work disciplinary? This paper attempts to answer these questions and contribute to previous studies in three aspects.

Firstly, most of previous studies have focused on turnover intention instead of turnover behavior. Although there is correlation between turnover intention and turnover behavior, turnover intention only accounts for 9% to 25% of actual turnover (Cho & Lewis 2012), which suggests that turnover intention may not be a good proxy for actual turnover. Using longitudinal data from 2006 to 2010, this study attempts to reveal the actual turnover behavior of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) personnel. Secondly, this paper examines how collaboration cosmopolitanism affects turnover behavior. Collaboration cosmopolitanism (Bozeman & Corley, 2004) pertains to the geographic and social distance across STEM personnel in their work-related collaborations. Based on science and technology human capital theory, a higher level of collaboration cosmopolitanism means a higher level of human capital and social networks for individuals. Thus, a higher level of collaboration cosmopolitanism is hypothesized to improve the possibility for employees’ turnover behavior. Thirdly, this paper will focus on democratic background and work disciplinary in relation to turnover behavior. Women, minorities and people who work in less popular disciplinary are supposed to have less opportunities to change jobs. Moreover, previous studies about research collaboration largely focus on university faculty, however, this study expands the scope to STEM personnel working in public sector. Thus, the relevance for non-STEM workplaces is likely increased beyond that of studies of faculty.

For the analysis, we take advantage of the 2006 and 2010 National Survey of College Graduates (NSCG) in the United States using structural equation modeling (SEM) method. The sample of this study focuses on employees who answered the surveys both in 2006 and 2010, which contains 3,356 respondents. Preliminary results support the relationship between collaboration cosmopolitanism and turnover behavior.

Funding for this study comes from National Science Foundation-sponsored project "Collaboration Cosmopolitanism and Scientific and Technical Human Capital” (1537879, PI: Barry Bozeman)

ABSTRACT. In developing countries such as South Africa the maternal and under-five infant mortality is increasing at an alarming rate. Goal four described in The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) focuses on increasing both maternal and under-five survival rates. Further to this goal 2 in the Sustainable development goals (SDG) is aimed at ending hunger, achieving food security, improved nutrition and promoting sustainable agriculture.

The poor, particularly in rural areas, tend to subsist on a diet of staple crops such as rice, wheat and maize, which are low in these micronutrients. Most of the rural poor, cannot afford or efficiently cultivate enough fruits, vegetables or meat products that are necessary to obtain healthy levels of these nutrients. As such, increasing the micronutrient levels in staple crops can help prevent and reduce the micronutrient deficiencies. This could be achieved by the process of biofortification in staple crops to ensure elevated levels micronutrients specifically Vitamin A (VA). Biofortification is the process by which the nutritional quality of food crops is improved during plant growth rather than through manual means of the crops by agricultural processes, conventional plant breeding, or modern biotechnology. Biofortification may have advantages over other health interventions and may therefore present a way to provide nutrients to the rural poor with limited or no access to commercially fortified foods. Specifically targeted communities may utilize products from biofortification as an alternative to instances where supplementation and conventional fortification activities may be difficult to implement. As such, biofortification is seen as an upcoming strategy for dealing with deficiencies of micronutrients such as VA which affects millions worldwide.

Insufficient amounts of VA in the body results in a Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) which can lead to, a higher incidence of blindness, a weaker immune system, stunted growth and impaired cognitive development. VAD is the leading cause of preventable childhood blindness and plays critical role in child mortality and morbidity often increased by secondary infections. It is estimated that approximately 250 million children under the age of 5 globally and 63 % of children in early childhood development stages are affected in South Africa making it a global health problem. Approximately 250,000 to 500,000 malnourished children in the developing world go blind each year from a deficiency of vitamin A, approximately half of whom die within a year of becoming blind. It is further stated that it is likely that in vitamin A deficient areas a substantial proportion of pregnant women is VA deficient. These statistics are prevalent for children under the age of 5 and pregnant mothers in developing countries.

Studies in maize biofortification have shown a 10X increase in the amount of pro Vitamin A production in the crops that have been biofortified, which could favourably impact the state of the global health problem in maize dependent communities in the developing world. Similarly a trial in Mozambique, showed that eating sweet potatoes biofortified with beta-carotene reduced the incidence of vitamin A deficiency in children by 24%.

Further to this our study attempted to identify putative markers that play a key role in the regulation pathway of carotenoid biosynthetic genes to be used as key targets for biofortification in crops.

Methods This study investigated the carotenoid biosynthetic pathway responsible for carotenoid production in the plant Arabisopsis thaliana which is used as a model for plant research. A literature review identified all known genes with a direct involvement in β carotene production as well as the abiotic stress factors such as drought and cold, affecting the genes. A co-expression analysis of genes was done to determine the relationship between existing genes and to identify new genes in the pathway. A correlation analysis of the genes against and abiotic stresses was performed to determine which abiotic stresses negatively affect the production of Vitamin A. Furthermore a systems biological approach was used to identify key environmental conditions under which pro vitamin A production in crops were affected.

Results Findings from the study identified 32 genes responsible for vitamin A production in plants. The co-expression analysis identified a number of new genes implicated directly in the production of Vitamin A. Expression profiling revealed that vitamin A producing genes were negatively affected in the plant when exposed to two abiotic factors drought and cold. These two factors showed a 7-9 fold decrease in the plants ability to produce Vitamin A in comparison to normal growth conditions.

Future prospects and recommendations This approach may have advantages over other health interventions such as providing foods fortified after processing, or providing supplements. Although these approaches have proven successful when dealing with the urban poor, they tend to require access to effective markets and healthcare systems which often just do not exist in rural areas. Biofortification is also fairly cost effective after an initial large research investment. By implementing the finding of this study the development of seeds encompassing the alterations could be produced and distributed at a fraction of the cost of fortifying foods after growth. This will in turn decrease processing charges and will decrease the necessity for oral supplementation of Vitamin A which is comparatively much more expensive and requires continued financing over time, which may be jeopardized by fluctuating political interest.

In Future findings from our study could be implemented using biotechnology and plant breeding programs in other crops specifically maize and sorghum in Africa. By doing this, production and conversion of vitamins will increase and therefore the global problem of vitamin deficiencies such as VAD may be addressed. This will also directly contribute to achieving both the MDG 4 and SDG 2.

ABSTRACT. Literature maintains that geographical proximity has strong impacts on enhancing interactive learning and innovation in the clusters (Howells, 2002). However, what is less clear is how do interactions occur in the networks to develop linkage between actors and how do cluster effects enhance the collaborations in emerging high-tech sectors? To explore the associations that regional cluster brought to enhance the formation of R&D networks in the emerging high-tech sector, this paper examines the R&D collaboration network of biotechnology industry in Taiwan between 1998 and 2015. Combining more than 50 interviews and applying social network analysis on a longitudinal dataset gathered from financial reports of the 30 biopharmaceutical and 25 medical device firms who have initiated public offering (IPO), this paper aims to explore the R&D collaboration networks between the actors in the innovation system to understand whether cluster effects would enhance the R&D collaborations in the high-tech science-based sectors. Comparing the networks of the firms in this group, a shift from relative sparseness in 2000 to connectedness in 2012 can be readily observed. The networks have been held together essentially by leading domestic research institutes (e.g. Academia Sinica and National Taiwan University) and the institutional intermediaries (e.g Industrial Technology Research of Taiwan and Development Center for Biotechnology). The finding of this paper suggest that while the nascent sector stays in a small size, geographical proximity is not the most important factor to determinate the networking establishments between the actors in the innovation system. In contrast, the fit of specialties and the mutual complementary of the business is the key factor to drive the formation of collaboration networks and alliances in the biotechnology sector- a science-based sector. One size does not fit all. Evidence from Biotechnology innovation network in Taiwan are provided in this paper.To further enhance the collaboration network in a nascent science-based sector, cluster effects through policy intervention attempting to stimulate the collaboration networks between the actors may not be the mostly efficient enhancement. Instead, the strength of local knowledge base and the mutual complementary between the actors would be most important enhancements to strengthen the local collaboration networks and the knowledge transfer in the networks. Instead of repeating the policy model used to successfully establish the ICT sector in 1980s, future technology policy to promote emerging sectors needs to focus on building the capabilities of the local sector, taking into account the distinct structural features of local innovation context, rather than copying policy models from the successful experiences from other sectors or from other countries.