XML

Seoul Journal of Economics - Vol. 22 , No. 4

[ Article ]
Seoul Journal of Economics - Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 529-550
Abbreviation: SJE
ISSN: 1225-0279 (Print)
Print publication date 30 Nov 2009
Received 27 Feb 2009 Revised 19 Nov 2009

University-Industry Collaboration in the Automotive, Biotechnology, and Electronics Firms in Malaysia
Rajah Rasiah ; Chandran Govindaraju VGR
Corresponding Author, Professor, Technology and Innovation Management, Department of Administrative Studies and Politics, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Tel: +03-7967-3606, Fax: +03-7967-3719 (rajah@um.edu.my)
Lecturer, Department of Economics, University Technology MARA Johor, Malaysia, Tel: +07-9352055, Fax: +07-935-2277 (vgrchan@gmail.com)

JEL Classification: O32, L25, L62, L63


Abstract

This paper seeks to examine existing explanations of drivers of university-industry collaboration. The Probit regression results support prevailing theory on the importance of R&D intensity, partner diversity and access to wider channels of information matter for university-industry collaboration. However, categorizing size as a dichotomous dummy variable of SME and large firms showed an inverse relationship, while actual employment size was not statistically significant. Size was inversely correlated with university- industry collaboration. Separate Probit estimations for the specific industries of automotive, biotechnology and electronics indicate the following as the important drivers. First, R&D intensity, importance of university as a source of knowledge and age were important in automotive firms. Second, R&D intensity, channels of R&D information and R&D partner diversity were important in biotechnology firms. Third, the channels of R&D information and R&D partner diversity were important in electronics firms. Size was statistically significant in automotive and electronics firms but the coefficients were negative when a dummy was used and not statistically significant when the actual employment was used. Closer examination showed higher university-industry collaboration means among medium size firms.


Keywords: University-industry collaboration, R&D, Automotives, Biotechnology, Electronics, Malaysia

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the International Development Research Council (IDRC) for their generous grant that was used to pay Pemm Consult to gather the firm-level data used in the paper. Although the actual survey was conducted in 2007, the data is for 2006.


References
1. Ahn, S. “A New Program in Cooperative Research between Academia and Industry in Korea, Involving Centers of Excellence.” Technovation 15 (No. 4 1995): 241-57.
2. Arundel, A., and Geuna, A. “Proximity and the Use of Public Science by Innovative European Firms” Economics of Innovation and New Technology 36 (No. 6 2004): 559-80.
3. Baranano, A. M. “The Spanish Innovation Firm and the ESPRIT, RACE and EUREKA Programmes: An Organizational Approach.” Technovation 15 (No. 6 1995): 339-50.
4. Bayona, C., Garcia, T., and Huerta, E. “Firms’ Motivations for Cooperative R&D: An Empirical Analysis of Spanish Firms.” Research Policy 30 (No. 8 2001): 1289-1307.
5. Beise, M., and Stahl H. “Public Research and Industrial Innovation in Germany” Research Policy 28 (No. 4 1999): 397-422.
6. Best, M. The New Competitive Advantage: The Renewal of American Industry. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
7. Chen, E. Y. “The Evolution of University-Industry Technology Transfer in Hong Kong.” Technovation 14 (No. 7 1994): 449-59.
8. Coase, R. “The Institutional Structure of Production.” American Economic Review 82 (No. 4 1992): 713-19.
9. Cohen, W. M., and Levinthal, D. A. “Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation.” Administrative Science Quarterly 35 (No. 1 1990): 128-52.
10. Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., and Walsh, J. “Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D.” Management Science 48 (No. 1 2002): 1-23.
11. Colombo, M., and Gerrone, P. “Technological Cooperative Agreements and Firm's R&D Intensity. A Note on Causality Relations.” Research Policy 25 (No. 6 1996): 923-32.
12. Drejer, I., and Jorgensen, B. H. “The Dynamic Creation of Knowledge: Analysing Public-private Collaborations.” Technovation 25 (No. 2 2005): 83-94.
13. Dutta, S., and Weiss, A. “The Relationship between a Frim's Level of Technological Innovativeness and Its Pattern of Partnership Agreements.” Management Science 43 (No. 1997): 3643-56.
14. Fontana, R., Geuna A., and Matt, M. Firm Size and Openness: The Driving Forces of University-industry Collaboration. Paper Presented in EARIE 2004 Conference, Berlin, September 2-5, 2004.
15. Fontana, R., Geuna A., and Matt, M. “Factors Affecting University–Industry R&D Projects: The Importance of Searching, Screening and Signaling.” Research Policy 35 (No. 2 2006): 309-23.
16. Greene, W. H. Econometric Analysis. 5th Edition, New Jersey: Pearson Education, 2003.
17. Hagedoorn, J. “Strategic Technology Partnering during the 1980s: Trend, Network and Corporate Patterns in Non-core Technologies.” Research Policy 24 (No. 2 1995): 207-32.
18. Hagedoorn, J., Link, A., and Vonortas, N. “Research Partnerships.” Research Policy 29 (Nos. 4-5 2000): 567-86.
19. Hameri, A. P. “Technology Transfer between Basic Research and Industry.” Technovation 16 (No. 2 1996): 51-7.
20. IDRC Survey. “University-Industry Survey of Automotive, Biotechnology and Electronics Firms in Malaysia. Funded by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Vancouver, 2007.
21. Kamien, Morton I., and Zang, I. “Meet Me halfway: Research Joint Ventures and Absorptive Capacity.” International Journal of Industrial Organization 18 (No. 7 2000): 995-1012.
22. Katz, J. “Structural Change and Domestic Technological Capabilities.” Cepal Review 89 (August 2006): 55-68.
23. Kim, Y. M. and Park, K. S. “Multiskilling and Firm Performance.” Seoul Journal of Economics 16 (NO. 4 2003): 387-422.
24. Kleinknecht, A., and Reijnen, J. “Why Do Firms Cooperate on R&D: An Empirical Study.” Research Policy 21 (No. 4 1992): 347–60.
25. Koza, M., and Lewin, A. “The Co-Evolution of Strategic Alliances.” Organization Science 9 (No.3 1998): 255-64.
26. Lall, S. “The East Asian Miracle: Does the Bell Toll for Industrial Strategy?” World Development 22 (No. 4 1994): 645-54.
27. Laursen, K., and Salter, A. “Searching Low and High: What Types of Firms Use Universities as a Source of Innovation?” Research Policy 33 (No. 8 2004): 1201-15.
28. Malaysia. Eight Malaysia Plan (2001-2005). Kuala Lumpur: Government Printers, 2001.
29. Malaysia. Ninth Malaysia Plan (2006-2010). Kuala Lumpur: Government Printers, 2006.
30. Mansfield, E. “Academic Research and Industrial Innovation.” Research Policy 20 (No. 1 1991): 1-12.
31. Mansfield, E., and Lee, J. Y. “The Modern University: Contributor to Industrial Innovation and Recipient of Industrial R&D Support.” Research Policy 25 (No. 7 1996): 1047-58.
32. Marshal A. Principles of Economics, London: Macmillan, 1890.
33. Mohnen, P., and Hoareau, C. “What Type of Enterprise Forges Close Links with Universities and Government labs? Evidence from CIS 2.” Managerial and Decision Economics 24 (Nos. 2-3 2003): 133-45.
34. Mora-Valentin, E. M., Montoro-Sanchez, A., and Guerras-Martin, L. A. “Determining Factors in the Success of R&D Cooperative Agreements between Firms and Research Organizations.” Research Policy 33 (No. 1 2004): 17-40.
35. Motohashi, Kazuyuki. Economic Analysis of University-industry Collaborations: The Role of New Technology based Firms in Japanese National Innovation Reform. RIETI Discussion Paper Series 04-E-001, Tokyo, Japan: RIETI, 2004.
36. Nelson, R. R. “Economic Development from the Perspective of Evolutionary Economic Theory.” Oxford Development Studies 36 (No. 1 2008): 9-21.
37. Nelson, R. R., and Winter, S. G. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. New York: Harvard University Press, 1982.
38. North, Douglass C. “Institutions.” The Journal of Economic Perspectives 5 (No. 1 Winter 1991): 97-112.
39. Numprasertchai, S., and Barbara, I. “Managing Knowledge Through Collaboration: Multiple Case Studies of Managing Research in University Laboratories in Thailand.” Technovation 25 (No. 10 2005): 1173-82.
40. Penrose, E. The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1959.
41. Powell, Walter W., Kenneth, K., and Smith-Doerr, L. “Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology.” Administrative Science Quarterly 41 (No. 1 1996): 116-45.
42. Rasiah, R. “Flexible Production Systems and Local Machine Tool Subcontracting: Electronics Component Transnationals in Malaysia.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 18 (No. 3 1994): 279-98.
43. Rasiah, R. Foreign Capital and Industrialization in Malaysia. London: Macmillan ; New York: St. Martins, 1995.
44. Rasiah, R. “Foreign Firms, Exports and Technological Capabilities: A Study of Electronics Firms in Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines and Thailand.” European Journal of Development Research 16 (No. 3 2004): 141-77.
45. Rasiah, R. “The Systemic Quad: Technological Capabilities and Economic Performance of Computer and Component Firms in Penang and Johor, Malaysia.” International Journal of Technological Learning and Development 1 (No. 2 2007): 179-203.
46. Rasiah, R. “Industrial Clustering of Electronics Firms in Indonesia and Malaysia.” In I. Kuroiwa and M. H. Toh (eds.), Production Networks and Industrial Clusters: Integrating Economies in Southeast Asia. Singapore, IDE: Jetro and ISEAS, 2008.
47. Rasiah, R. “Technological Capabilities of Automotive Firms in Indonesia and Malaysia.” Asian Economic Papers 8 (No. 1 2009a): 151-69.
48. Rasiah, R. “Institutions and Public-Private Partnerships: Learning and Innovation in Electronics Firms in Penang, Johor and Batam-Karawang.” International Journal of Institutions and Economies 1 (No. 2 2009b): 206-33.
49. Sanchez, A. M., and Tejedor, A. P. “University-Industry Relationship in Peripheral Regions: The Case of Aragon in Spain.” Technovation 15 (No. 10 1995): 613-25.
50. Williamson, O. E. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets Relational Contracting. New York: Free Press, 1985.