Regional triple helix intensity and TTO’s features on TTO’s efficiency

Abstract

Abstract: In this paper, China's regional triple helix intensity is measured with the factor analysis method. Based on stochastic frontier analysis, China's TTO efficiency is examined with panel data of input and output, the features of National Technology Transfer Model Organizations (TTO) in universities directly under the Ministry of Education, and the regional triple helix intensity. The results show the overall efficiency of China's TTO is low, and that regional triple helix intensity plays a significant role in TTO's efficiency, especially in the improvement of technology transfer contract amount, and that income distribution mechanism, technology transfer mode, personnel factors of TTO have close relationship with the TTO's efficiency. Based on these results, the relevant policy suggestions are finally given in the paper.

Key words: triple helix, technology transfer organization (TTO), technology transfer, efficiency

CLC Number:

G311

Li Xiaoli, Yu Xiang. Regional triple helix intensity and TTO’s features on TTO’s efficiency[J]. Science Research Management, 2014, 35(9): 115-122.

References

[1] Florida R, Kenney M.Venture capital financed innovation and technological change theUnited States[J].Research Policy, 1988, 17(3):119-137. [2] Zucker L, Darby M, Brewer M.Intellectual human capital and the birth of US biotechnology enterprises[J].American Economic Review, 1998, 88(1):290-306. [3] Di Gregorio D, Shane S.Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?[J].Research Policy, 2003, 32(2):209-227. [4] Cockburn I, Henderson R.Absorptive capacity, coauthoring behavior, and the organization of research in drug discovery[J].Journal of Industrial Economics, 1998, 46(2):157-182. [5] Cohen W M, Levinthal D A.Absorptive capacity:A new perspective on learning and innovation[J].Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990, 35(1):128-152. [6] Etzkowitz H, Goktepe H D.Maybe they can? University technology transfer offices as regional growth engines[J].International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialization, 2010, 9(1):166-181. [7] Caldera A, Debande O.Performance of Spanish universities in technology transfer:An empirical analysis[J].Research Policy, 2010, 39(9):1160-1173. [8] Etzkowitz H, Leydesdorff L.The triple helix of university-industry-government relations:A laboratory for knowledge-based economic development[J].EASST Review 1995, 14(1):14-19. [9] Etzkowitz H, Leydesdorff L.The dynamics of innovation:from national systems and‘model 2'to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations[J].Research Policy, 2000, 29(2):109-123. [10] Louis G.Building state economics by promoting university-industry technology transfer[R].National Governors Association, Washington D.C., 2000:1-31. [11] Markman G, Gianiodis P, Phan P.An agency theoretic study of the relationship between knowledge agents and university technology transfer offices[R].Rensselaer Polytechnic Working Paper, Troy, New York, 2006. [12] Friedman J, Silberman J.University technology transfer:Do incentives, management, and location matter?[J].Journal of Technology Transfer, 2003, 28(1):17-30. [13] Anderson T R, Daim T U, Lavoie F.Measuring the efficiency of university technology transfer[J].Technovation, 2007, 27(5):306-318. [14] Bercovitz J, Feller I, Burton R.Organizational structure as determinants of academic patent and licensing behavior:An exploratory study of Duke, Johns Hopkins, andPennsylvania State Universities[J].Journal of Technology Transfer, 2001, 26(1-2):21-35. [15] Debackere K, Veugelers R.The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links[J].Research Policy, 2005, 34(3):321-342. [16] Aigner D J, Lovell C A K, Schmidt P.Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models[J].Journal of Econometrics, 1977, 16(1):21-37. [17] Meeusen W, Broeck J V.Efficiency estimation from Cobb-Douglas production functions with composed error[J].International Economic Review, 1977, 18(2):435-444. [18] Battese G E, Corra G S.Estimation of a production frontier model with application to the pastoral zone of eastern Australia[J].Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1977, 21(3):169-179. [19] Battese G E, Coelli T J.A model for technical inefficiency effects in a stochastic frontier production function for panel data[J].Empirical Economics, 1995, 20(2):325-332. [20] Siegel D S, Waldman D, Link A.Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices:An exploratory study[J].Research Policy, 2003, 32(1):27-48. [21] Chapple W, Lockett A, Siegel D S.Wright M.Assessing the relative performance of U.K.university technology transfer offices:parametric and non-parametric evidence[J].Research Policy, 2005, 34(3):369-384. [22] 廖述梅, 徐升华.我国校企技术转移效率及影响因素分析[J].科学学与科学技术管理, 2009, 30(11):52-56. [23] Di Gregorio D, Shane S.Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?[J].Research Policy, 2003, 32(2):209-227. [24] Jensen R, Thursby M.Proofs and prototypes for sale:The licensing of university inventions[J].American Economic Review, 2001, 91(01), 240-259. [25] Hsu D, Bernstein T.Managing the university technology licensing process:Findings from case studies[J].Journal of the Association of University Technology Managers, 1997, 9(9):1-33. [26] 卢兵, 廖貅武, 岳亮.组织的知识转移分析[J].科研管理, 2007, 28(6):22-30. [27] 原长弘, 赵文红, 周林海.政府支持、市场不确定性对校企知识转移效率的影响[J].科研管理, 2012, 33(10):106-113. [28] Kodama T.The role of intermediation and absorptive capacity in facilitating university-industry linkages:an empirical study of TAMA in Japan[J].Research Policy, 2008, 37(8):1224-1240. [29] 董洁, 黄付杰.中国科技成果转化效率及其影响因素研究—基于随机前沿函数的实证分析[J].软科学, 2012, 26(10):15-20.