산학협력 이론과 전략
-
Upload
hanbat-national-university -
Category
Technology
-
view
661 -
download
2
description
Transcript of 산학협력 이론과 전략
-
2011. 3. 28.
()
1
-
2
-
3
-
I I
- -> -> - -> (university-
industry linkages)
- (National Innovation System) :
- (Triple Helix) : , ,
- Mode 2 : ,
- 2 :
4
-
1-Teaching has been a main mission of universities since medieval period
-Scientific research institutionalised in academia in the 19th C (Humboltian model)
2-Around 1980s, economic contribution to society has emerged as the third mission of universities
-Entrepreneurial universities are characterised as high interaction with other spheres and high independency of state (Etzkowitz, 2003)
I I
-
, - Empirical studies do not support negative relationship between academic research and
patenting activities of the US universities (Thursby & Thrusby, 2000; Hicks & Hamilton, 1999)
- Academic Capitalism (Slaughter & Rhoades, 1997)
- Tragedy of the academic commons (Nelson, 2004)
- Commercialisation of higher education (Bok, 2003)
- Triple Helix & Entrepreneurial Universities (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000), Mode 2 (Gibbons et al., 1999)
- NIS (Freeman & Soete, 1982)
- Revised Social Contract (Guston & Kensington, 1994)
I I
-
Source: revised from Etzkowitz (2003), p.318.
East Asia
Latin America ?
I I
-
I I
: OECD (2002) , (, 2009)
8
-
I I
p To obtain additional fundingp To fulfil service mission (or third mission) of the universityp To broaden experience of students and facultyp To access new technology developed by firmsp To identify interesting, relevant research problemsp To enhance regional economic developmentp To increase employment opportunities for students
p To access research infrastructure of the Up To access expertisep To aid renewal and expansion of technologyp To gain access to students as potential employeesp To expand external contacts for the industrial labp To increase level of pre-competitive researchp To leverage internal research capabilities 9
-
I I
More likely to occur in some universities than in others due to
differences in p disciplines emphasised by the HEI
e.g. technological universities (MIT, RPI, Chalmers etc.)p academic culture of the HEI
i.e. different weight given to the various goals of the institution (cf. B. Clark on entrepreneurial universities)
p development strategy of the HEI e.g. new universities in Finland where research oriented
around regional needs (Oulu, Joensuu)p environment of the HEI
e.g. a thriving industrial sector in the region, a science park (e.g. Research Triangle Park, Cambridge)
10
-
I I
(Cosh et al. 2006, 2007)p (/)p (/)p , ()p , , ()
( , 2007)p p p p
11
-
- (Martin, 2003)- (Jeremy et al., 2008)
I I
12
-
I I
? (Kwon, 2010) ? (Kwon, 2010)
- - () . , SCI - -
- 165 (, , , ) -
13
-
I : ?I : ?Models Model 1 (NB)Domestic Patent
Model 2 (ZINB)Overseas Patent
Model 3 (ZINB)Tech. Transfer (TT)
Model 4 (Tobit)Revenues from TT
Gender .555***(.111) .614**(.205) .319(.222) 1.67e+07*(8.70e+06)Career -.052***(.012) .154***(.218) .121***(.026) 4.63e+06***(8.87e+05)Career^2 -.002***(.0004) -.005***(.001) -.004***(.001) -1.41e+5***(2.92e+04)Discipline- Engineering- Med. & Pharm.- Agri. and Mari.
.796***(.068)-.903***(.095)-.280*(.113)
.410**(.152)-1.319***(.193)-1.118*(.474)
1.066***(.159)-.542*(.238).594**(.230)
5.12e+07***(6.35e+06)-1.71e+07*(7.46e+06)3.82e+07***(9.97e+06)
Location in C-area .402***(.057) -.188(.151) .270*(.128) 1.88e+07***(4.61e+06)Legal status .313***(.057) .195(.152) .190(.132) 1.54e+07***(4.65e+06)Papers published- domestic journal- SCI journal
.175***(.027)
.440***(.026)-.038(.087)
.200***(.047).205***(.052).060(.050)
6.50e+06**(2.32e+06)1.77e+07***(1.42e+06)
R&D funding- Cent. Govt- Loc. Govt- Industry- Overseas- Self funding
1.05e-09***(1.23e-10)1.43e-09**(4.72e-10)1.47e-09***(4.08e-10)4.42e-09(1.99e-09)
2.85e-09***(8.75e-10)
1.04e-09***(1.86e-10) 5.16e-10(3.77e-10)1.05e-09(8.86e-10)
9.77e-09***(2.58e-09)2.60e-09*(1.06e-09)
1.82e-09***(3.70e-10)2.49e-09***(7.06e-10)2.39e-09***(5.03e-10)8.20e-10(1.32e-09)1.95e-09(1.02e-09)
.029***(.003)
.095***(.015)
.046***(.007).205*(.081).033(.031)
TTO size - - - -Regional BERD - - - -Constant -4.140***(.131) -5.313***(.309) -5.217***(.333) -3.55e+08***(1.54+07)Ln-alpha/Sigma .869(.057)** 1.417(.064)*** 2.220(.075)*** 1.20e+08(3.66e+06)***
Log-likelihood -9504.671 -2237.899 -3528.872 -15174.95Wald/LR 2(d. of f.) 3594.73(14)*** 617.94(15)*** 792.48(15)*** 822.91(15)***
No of observations 35044 35044 35044 35044
Source: Kwon (2009). 14
-
I I
? ?
, , (Kwon, 2010)
Source: Elaborated by the author, based on the typology of the research suggested by Stokes (1997).
15
-
I - I -
16
-
17
-
generality (no of departments)
654321Co
unt
40
30
20
10
0
legal status
Public
Private
2529
38
18
54
912
333
location
JejuKyungnam/Busan/Ulsan
Kyungpook/Daegu
Chunnam/Kwangju
Chonbuk
Chungnam/Daejeon
Chungbuk
Kangwon
Kyunggi/Inchon
Seoul
no of
univ
30
20
10
0
legal status
Public
Private
14149
6
18
46
20
27
64543
the founding year
20001980
19601940
19201900
18801860
1840
size:
numb
ers of
stud
ents
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
legal statusPrivatePublic
* a university in science and engineering is defined as a university that has at least one academic in science and engineering with research funding from an internal or external body. According to this definition, 169 out of the 202 universities can be identified as Korean universities in science and engineering.
II II
18
-
, , , ,
II II
19
-
0.01
0.10
1.00
10.00
100.00
1000.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
PAPER
PATENTUND_GRD
POST_GRD
*Y axis represents mean values of papers, patents, undergraduates and postgraduates in log scale.Source: the author, data based on KRF survey (2007)
, , , ,
*1: Old big private in Seoul, 2: Big public regional, 3: Big private regional, 4: Medium & small private in Seoul, 5: Medium public regional / industrial, 6: Medium private regional, 7: Specialised in science & engineering, 8: Specialised in teachers' and ministers' training/on-line, 9: Small private regional, 10: Small private industrial
II II
20
-
, .
II II
21
-
/ /
, ,
II II
22
-
, ,
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
( ) ()
II II
23
-
II II
24
-
SCI (100 )SCI (100 )
SCI ,
II II
25
-
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3() ()
* Z-score
, , .
II II
26
-
/ ( ) / ( )
7,549 101,022 19,379 9,500 0 0 137,449 / 8,316 326 63,353 0 0 0 71,995
46,099 10,291 0 0 10,611 1,046 68,048
43,075 0 0 0 0 636 43,710
0 0 775 14,525 0 0 15,299
0 7,765 0 0 0 0 7,765
0 1,721 1,834 0 0 0 3,555
105,039 121,126 85,340 24,024 10,611 1,682 347,823
II II
27
-
( ) ( )
108,857 0 8,735 0 0 0 19,857 137,449
66,545 0 1,519 948 0 0 2,983 71,995
56,992 0 2,138 454 0 0 8,465 68,048
35,685 0 1,444 69 0 0 6,513 43,710
10,156 0 0 0 0 0 5,143 15,299
3,415 0 237 0 0 0 4,113 7,765
3,282 0 45 229 0 0 0 3,556
284,933 0 14,118 1,699 0 0 47,073 347,823
II II
28
-
/ ( ) / ( )
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
II II
29
-
/ ( ) / ( )
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
II II
30
-
( ) ( )
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
II II
31
-
II II
32
-
33
-
- (ex. )- (early catch-up) - (strategic intent) coherence- Post catch-up ,
III III
34
-
( )( )
- (species) - - ,
III III
35
-
( ) ( )
- - ,
III III
36
-
, ,
- (SCI )
- , - ,
III III
37
-
38