LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Guerrero, Maribel; Cunningham, James; Urbano, David (2015)
Publisher: Elsevier
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: N100, L100, N200
Throughout economic history, institutions have established the rules that shape human interaction. In this sense, political, socio-cultural, and economic issues respond to particular forces: managed economy or entrepreneurial economy. In the entrepreneurial economy, the dominant production factor is knowledge capital that is the source of competitive advantage, which is complemented by entrepreneurship capital, representing the capacity to engage in and generate entrepreneurial activity. Thus, an entrepreneurial economy generates scenarios in which its members can explore and exploit economic opportunities and knowledge to promote new entrepreneurial phenomena that have not been previously visualised. In this context, the entrepreneurial university serves as a conduit of spillovers contributing to economic and social development through its multiple missions of teaching, research, and entrepreneurial activities. In particular, the outcomes of its missions are associated with the determinants of production functions (e.g. human capital, knowledge capital, social capital, and entrepreneurship capital). All these themes are still considerate potentially in the research agenda in academic entrepreneurship literature. This paper modestly tries to contribute to a better understanding of the economic impact of entrepreneurial universities’ teaching, research, and entrepreneurial activities. Taking an endogenous growth perspective, the proposed conceptual model is tested using data collected from 2005-2007 for 147 universities located in 74 Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics-3 (NUTS-3) regions of the United Kingdom. The results of this exploratory analysis show the positive and significant economic impact of teaching, research, and entrepreneurial activities. Interestingly, the higher economic impact of the United Kingdom’s entrepreneurial universities (the Russell group) is explained by entrepreneurial spin-offs. However, our control group composed by the rest of the country’s universities, the highest economic impact is associated with knowledge transfer (knowledge capital).
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Acs, Z., Braunerhjelm, P., Audretsch, D., Carlsson, B., 2009. The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 32 15-30.
    • Aghion, P., Dewatripont, M., Hoxby, C., Mas-Colell, A., Sapir, A., 2010. The governance and performance of universities: Evidence from Europe and the US. Economic Policy 25(61), 7-59.
    • Aghion, P., Howitt, P., García-Peñalosa, C., 1998. Endogenous Growth Theory. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
    • Aldrich, H.E. (2012). The Emergence of Entrepreneurship as an Academic Field: A Personal Essay on Institutional Entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 41(7), 1240-1248.
    • Audretsch, D. B., Thurik, A. R., 2001. What's new about the new economy? Sources of growth in the managed and entrepreneurial economies. Industrial and corporate change 10(1), 267-315.
    • Audretsch, D., 2007. The Entrepreneurial Society. Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.S.
    • Audretsch, D., 2012. From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the entrepreneurial society.
    • Journal of Technology Transfer, 39 (3), 313-321.
    • Audretsch, D., Bönte, W., Keilbach, M., 2008. Entrepreneurship capital and its impact on knowledge diffusion and economic performance. Journal of Business Venturing 23, 687-698.
    • Audretsch, D., Keilbach, M., 2004b. Entrepreneurship capital and economic performance. Regional Studies 38(8), 949-959.
    • Audretsch, D., Lehmann, E.E., 2005. Do university policies make a difference? Research Policy 34(3), 343-347.
    • Audretsch, D.B., Keilbach, M., 2004a. Does entrepreneurship capital matter? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 28(5), 419-429.
    • Audretsch, D.B., Keilbach, M., 2008. Resolving the knowledge paradox: Knowledge-spillover entrepreneurship and economic growth. Research Policy 37(10), 1697-1705.
    • Audretsch, D.B., Lehmann, E.E., Warning, S., 2005. University spillovers and new firm location. Research Policy 34(7), 1113-1122.
    • Becker, G., 1993. Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education.
    • Berman, E.M., 1990. The economic impact of industry-funded university R&D. Research Policy 19, 349-355.
    • Bessette, R.W., 2003. Measuring the economic impact of university-based research. Journal of Technology Transfer 28(3-4), 355-361.
    • Bonnet, J., Van Auken, H. E., 2010. The Entrepreneurial society: How to fill the gap between knowledge and innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK, and Northampton, MA, USA.
    • Bramwell, A., Wolfe, D.A., 2008. Universities and regional economic development: The entrepreneurial University of Waterloo. Research Policy 37(8), 1175-1187.
    • Browne, M. W., Cudeck, R., 1993. Alternative ways of assessing model fit, in Bollen, K. A., Long, J. S. (Eds.), Testing Structural Equation Models. Sage, Newsbury Park, CA, pp. 136-162.
    • Chrisman, J.J., Hynes, T., Fraser, S., 1995. Faculty entrepreneurship and economic development: The case of the University of Calgary. Journal of Business Venturing 10(4), 267-281.
    • Clark, B.R., 1998. Creating Entrepreneurial Universities. Pergamon Press, Oxford, U.S.
    • Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Van de Velde, E., Vohora, A., 2005. Spinning out ventures: A typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions. Journal of Business Venturing 20, 183-216.
    • Coleman, J.S., 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology 94, 95-120.
    • Colombo, M., D'Adda, D., Piva, E., 2010. The contribution of university research to the growth of academic start-ups: An empirical analysis. Journal of Technology Transfer 35(1), 113-140.
    • Corona, L., Doutriaux, J., Mian, S., 2006. Building Knowledge Regions in North America: Emerging Technology Innovation Poles, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK, and Northampton, MA, USA.
    • Cunningham, J.A., Link, A.N., 2014. Fostering University-Industry R&D Collaborations in European Union Countries. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, DOI 10.1007/s11365-014-0317-4.
    • Cunningham, J.A., O'Reilly, P., O'Kane, C., Mangematin, V., 2014. The inhibiting factors that principal investigators experience in leading publicly funded research. Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(1), 93-110.
    • Daim, T.U., Ozdemir, D., 2012. Impact of US economic crises on university research and development investments. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, DOI 10.1007/s13132-012-0135-2 Di Gregorio, D., Shane, S., 2003. Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy 32, 209-227.
    • Drucker, J., Goldstein, H., 2007. Assessing the regional economic development impacts of universities: a review of current approaches. International Regional Science Review 30(1), 20-46.
    • Elliott, D.S., Levin, P.S.L., Meisel, J.B., 1988. Measuring the economic impact of institutions of higher education. Research in Higher Education 28(1), 17-33.
    • European Union 2014. Innovation Union Scoreboard 2014. Brussels: European Commission.
    • Feldman, M., Desrochers, P., 2003. Research universities and local economic development: Lessons from the history of Johns Hopkins University. Industry and Innovation 10(1), 5-24.
    • Fox, J., 1980. Effects analysis in structural equation models. Sociological Methods and Research 9, 3-28.
    • Ghatak, M., Morelli, M., Sjöström, T., 2007. Entrepreneurial talent, occupational choice and trickle up policies.
    • Journal of Economic Theory 137, 27-48.
    • Goldstein, H.A., 1990. Estimating the regional economic impact of universities: An application of input-output analysis. Planning for Higher Education 18(1), 51-64.
    • Goldstein, H.A., Renault, C.S., 2004. Contributions of universities to regional economic development: A quasi experimental approach. Regional Studies 38(7), 733-746.
    • Greene, W. H., 2003. Econometric Analysis. Prentice Hall, New York.
    • Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D., Wright, M., 2011. 30 years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy 40(8), 1045-1057.
    • Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., 2012. The development of an entrepreneurial university. Journal of Technology Transfer 37(1), 43-74.
    • Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., 2014. Academics' start-up intentions and knowledge filters: an individual perspective of the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics 43(1), 57-74.
    • Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., Cunnigham, J., Organ, D., 2014. Entrepreneurial universities: A case study comparison in two European regions. Journal of Technology Transfer 39(3), 415-434.
    • Hazelkorn, E., 2007. The impact of league tables and ranking on higher education decision making. Higher Education Management and Policy 19(2), 87-110.
    • Jacob, M., Lundqvist, M., Hellsmark, H., 2003. Entrepreneurial transformations in the Swedish university system: The case of Chalmers University of Technology. Research Policy 32(9), 1555-1569.
    • Jaffe, A.B., 1989. Real effects of academic research. The American Economic Review 79(5), 957-970.
    • Jarzabkowski, P., Wilson, D.C., 2002. Top teams and strategy in a UK university. Journal of Management Studies 39(3), 355-381.
    • Kirby, D.A, Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., 2011. The theoretical and empirical side of entrepreneurial universities: An institutional approach. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences 28, 302-316.
    • Kirby, D.A., 2002. Entrepreneurship. McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead, U.K.
    • Klofsten, M., Jones-Evans, D., 2000. Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe: The case of Sweden and Ireland. Small Business Economics 14(4), 299-310.
    • Lambert, R., 2003. Lambert review of business-industry collaboration. Final Report. HMSO.
    • Lendel, I., 2010. The impact of research universities on regional economies: The concept of university products.
    • Economic Development Quarterly 24(3), 210-230.
    • Lucas, R. Jr., 1988. On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics 22(1), 3-42.
    • Mangematin, V., O'Reilly, P, Cunningham, J., 2014. PIs as boundary spanners, science and market shapers.
    • Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(1),1-10.
    • Martin, F., 1998. The economic impact of Canadian university R&D. Research Policy 27(7), 677-687.
    • McCormack, J., Propper, C., Smith, S., 2014. Herding cats? Management and university performance. The Economic Journal. DOI: 10.1111/ecoj.12105.
    • Mueller, P., 2007. Exploiting entrepreneurial opportunities: The impact of entrepreneurship on growth. Small Business Economy 28, 355-362.
    • Mustar, P., Wright, M., 2010. Convergence or path dependency in policies to foster the creation of university spin-off firms? A comparison of France and the United Kingdom. The Journal of Technology Transfer 35(1), 42-65.
    • North, D. C., 2005. Institutions and the process of economic change. Management International 9(3), 1-7.
    • North, D.C., 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
    • O'Shea, R.P., Allen, T.J., Morse, K.P., O'Gorman, C., Roche, F., 2007. Delineating the anatomy of an entrepreneurial university: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology experience. R & D Management 37(1), 1-16.
    • OECD 2012. Science, Technology and Industry Outlook 2012. Paris: OECD.
    • Passhe, 2005. The Role of Public Regional Universities in Community and Economic Development (downloaded on 21 October 2008 from http://www.PASSHE.edu).
    • Porter, M., 2007. Colleges and Universities and Regional Economic Development: A Strategic Perspective.
    • Powers, J., McDougall, P.P., 2005. University start-up formation and technological licensing with firms that go public: A resource-based view of academic entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing 20, 291- 311.
    • Roessner, D., Bond, J., Okubo, S., Planting, M., 2013. The economic impact of licensed commercialized inventions originating in university research. Research Policy 42(1), 23-34.
    • Romer, P., 1986. Increasing returns and long-run growth. The Journal of Political Economy 94(5), 1002-1037.
    • Sala-i-Martin, X., 2002. Apuntes de Crecimiento Económico. A. Bosch, Barcelona.
    • Salter, A.J., Martin, B.R. 2001. The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review?.
    • Research Policy 30, 509-532.
    • Schulte, P., 2004. The entrepreneurial university: A strategy for institutional development. Higher Education in Europe 29(2), 187-191.
    • Schumacker, R. E., Lomax, R. G., 2004. A Beginner's Guide to Structural Equation Modeling, Second edition.
    • Shane, S., 2005. Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation. Edward Elgar Publishing, Massachusetts, U.S.
    • Shook, C., Ketchen, D., Hult, T., Kacmar, M., 2004. An assessment of the use of structural equation modelling in strategic management research. Strategic Management Journal 25(4), 397-404.
    • Siegel, D.S., Waldman, D., Link, A., 2003. Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy 32(1), 27- 48.
    • Simha, O., 2005. The economic impact of eight research universities on the Boston region. Tertiary Education and Management 11, 269-278.
    • Sobel, M., 1982. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models, in Leinhardt, S. (Ed.), Sociological Methodology, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 290-312.
    • Solow, R., 1956. A contribution to the economic growth theory. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 70(1), 65- 94.
    • Steiger, J. H., 1990. Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach.
    • Multivariate Behavioural Research 25, 173-180.
    • Subotzky, G. 1999. Alternatives to the entrepreneurial university: New modes of knowledge production in community service programs. Higher Education, 38(4), 401-440.
    • Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S., 1996. Using Multivariate Statistics. Harper Collins, New York.
    • Thursby, J. G., Thursby, M. C., 2002. Who is selling the ivory tower? Sources of growth in university licensing. Management Science 48(1), 90-104.
    • Ullman, J. B., 2001. Structural equation modeling, in Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S. (Eds.), Using Multivariate Statistics, Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, MA, pp. 653-771.
    • Urbano, D., Guerrero, M., 2013. Entrepreneurial universities: Socio-economic impacts of academic entrepreneurship in a European region. Economic Development Quarterly 27(1), 41-56.
    • Vogel, R., Keen, W., 2010. Public higher education and New York State's economy. Economic Development Quarterly 24(4), 384-393.
    • Vohora, A., Wright, M., Lockett, A., 2004. Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy 33, 147-174.
    • Wernerfelt, B., 1995. The resource-based view of the firm: Ten years after. Strategic Management Journal 16(3), 171-174.
  • No related research data.
  • Discovered through pilot similarity algorithms. Send us your feedback.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article