El papel de las universidades y los centros tecnológicos como impulsores de la actividad innovadora

Referencias bibliográficas

• ACS, Z.; D. AUDRETSCH, y M. FELDMAN (1994), «R&D spillovers and recipient firm size», The Review of Economics and Statistics,76, n.º 2: 336-340.
• AGRAWAL, A., y R. HENDERSON (2002), «Putting patents in context: Exploring knowledge transfer from MIT», Management Science, 48, n.º 1: 44-60.
• AMARA, N., y R. LANDRY (2005), «Sources of information as determinants of novelty of innovation in manufacturing firms: evidence from the 1999 statistics Canada innovation survey», Technovation, 25: 245-259.
• ARNOLD, E., y B. THURIAUX (1997), Developing Firms' Technological Capabilities, OECD Report, Brighton, Technopolis.
• ARNOLD, E.; H. RUSH; J. BESSANT, y M. HOBDAY (1998), «Strategic planning in research and technology institutes, R&D Management, 28, n.º 2: 89-100.
• BARGE-GIL, A. (2010), «Cooperation-based innovators and peripheral cooperators: An empirical analysis of their characteristics and behaviour», Technovation,30(1): 195-206.
• BARGE-GIL, A., y A. MODREGO-RICO (2008), «Are technology institutes a satisfactory tool for public intervention in the area of technology? A neoclassical and evolutionary evaluation», Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 26, n.0 4: 808-823.
• BARGE-GIL, A., y A. MODREGO-RICO (2010), «The impact of research and technology organizations on firm competitiveness. Measurement and determinants», Journal of Technology Transfer (en prensa).
• BEISE, M., y H. STAHL (1999), «Public research and industrial innovations in Germany», Research Policy, 28: 397-422.
• BELDERBOS, R.; M. CARREE; B. DIEDEREN; B. LOKSHIN, y R. VEUGELERS (2004), «Heterogeneity in R&D cooperation strategies», lnternational Journal of lndustrial Organisation, 22: 1237-1263.
• BENDER, G., y LAESTADIUS, S. (2005), «Non-science based innovativeness -on capabilities relevant to generate profitable novelty», Perspectives on Economic, Political and Social lntegration, 11 (1-2): 123- 170.
• BRESCHI, S., y F. LISSONI (2001), «Knowledge spillovers and local innovation systems: a critical survey», lndustrial and Corporate Change, 10, n.º 4: 975-1005.
• CASSIMANN, B., y R. VEUGELERS (2002), «R&D cooperation and spillovers: Some empirical evidence from Belgium», American Economic Review, 92, n.º 4: 1169-1184.
• CHEN, S., y J.S. LONG (2007), «Testing for IIA in the multinomial logit model», Sociological Methods & Research, 35(4): 583-600.
• COHEN, W.; R. NELSON, y J. WALSH (2002), «Links and impacts: The influence of public research on industrial R&D», Management Science, 48 n.º 1: 1-23.
• DEL BARRIO-CASTRO, T., y J. GARCÍA-QUEVEDO (2005), «Effects of university research on the geography of innovation», Regional Studies, 39, número 9: 1217-1219.
• ETZKOWITZ, H., y L. LEYDESDORFF (1999), «The future location of research and technology transfer», Journal of Technology Transfer, 24, n.º 2-3: 111-123.
• ETZKOWITZ, H., y L. LEYDESDORFF (2000), «The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and «Mode 2» to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations», Research Policy, 29: 109-123.
• FAGGIAN, A., y P. MCCANN (2006), «Human capital flows and regional knowledge assets: a simultaneous equation approach)), Oxford Economic Papers, 52: 475-500.
• FELDMAN M. (1994), The geography of innovation, Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic.
• FELLER, I.; C. AILES, y D. ROESSNER (2002), «Impacts of research universities on technological innovation in industry: evidence from engineering research centres», Research Policy, 26: 317-330.
• FRITSCH, M., y R. LUKAS (2001), «Who cooperates on R&D?», Research Policy, 30: 297-312.
• FUELLHART, K., y A. GLASMEIER (2003), «Acquisition, assessment and use of business information by small-and medium-sized business: a demand perspective», Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 15: 229-252.
• GALLI, R., y M. TEUBAL (1997), «Paradigmatic shifts in national innovation systems», en EDQUIST, C. (ed.), Systems of lnnovation: Technologies, lnstitutions and Organisations: 342-370. Londres, Pinter Publishers.
• GEISLER, E. (1997), «Intersector technology cooperation: hard myths, soft facts», Technovation,17, n.º 6: 309-320.
• GEROSKI, P. (1992), «Antitrust policy towards co-operative R&D ventures», Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 9: 58-71.
• GOLDSTEIN, H., y J. DRUCKER (2006), «The economic development impacts of universities on regions: Do size and distance matter?», Economic Development Quarterly, 20, n.º 1: 22-43.
• HAGEDOORN, J. (2002), «Inter-firm partnerships: an overview of major trends and patterns since 1960», Research Policy, 31: 477-492.
• HAM, R.M., y D. MOWERY (1998), «Improving the effectiveness of public-private R&D collaboration: case studies at a US weapons laboratory», Research Policy, 26: 661-675.
• HASSINK, R. (1997), «Technology transfer infrastructures: Some lessons from experiences in Europe, the US and Japan», European Planning Studies, 5: 352-370
• HENDERSON, R.; A. JAFFE, y M. TRAJTENBERG (1998), «Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of university patenting 1965-1988», Review of Economics and Statistics, 80, n.º 1: 119-127.
• IZUSHI, H. (2003), «Impact of the length of relationships upon the use of research institutes by SMEs», Research Policy,32: 771-788.
• IZUSHI, H. (2005), «Creation of relational assets through the 'library of equipment'model: an industrial modernization approach of Japan's local technology centres», Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 17, n.º 3: 183-204.
• JAFFE, A. (1989), «Real effects of academic research», The American Economic Review, 79, n.º 5: 957-970.
• JUSTMAN, M., y M. TEUBAL (1995), «Technological infrastructure policy (TIP): creating capabilities and building markets», Research Policy, 24: 259-281.
• KLEVORICK, A.; R. LEVIN; R. NELSON, y S. WINTER (1995), «On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities», Research Policy, 24: 185-205.
• KLINE, S., y ROSENBERG, N. (1986), «An overview of innovation», en LANDAU, R., ROSENBERG, N. (eds.), The positive sum strategy: harnessing technology for economic growth, National Academic Press: 273- 305.
• KOSCHATZKY, K., y STERNBERG, R. (2001), «R&D cooperation in innovation systems - Some lessons from the European Regional Innovation Survey (ERIS)», European Planning Studies, 8, n.º 4: 487-501.
• LAMBRECHT, J , y F P RNAY (2005), «An evaluation of public support measures for private external consultancies to SMEs in the Walloon region of Belgium», Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 17: 89-108.
• LARANJA, M. (2009), «The development of technology infrastructure in Portugal and the need to pull innovation using proactive intermediation policies», Technovation, 29(1): 23-34.
• LAURSEN, K., y A. SALTER (2004), «Searching high and low: what types of firms use universities as a source of innovation?», Research Policy, 33: 1201-1215.
• LEITNER, K. (2005), «Managing and reporting intangible assets in research technology organisations», R&D Management, 35, n.º 2: 125-136.
• LEYDESDORFF, L., y H. ETZKOWITZ (1996), «Emergence of a triple helix of university-industry-government relations», Science & Public Policy, 23: 279-286.
• LOVE, J.H., y S. ROPER (1999), «The determinants of innovation: R&D, technology transfer and networking effects», Review of Industrial Organization, 15: 43-64.
• MACPHERSON, A., y M. ZIOLKOWSKI (2005), «The role of university-based industrial extension services in the business performance of small manufacturing firms: case-study evidence from Western New York», Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 17: 431-447.
• MAIRESSE, J., y P. MOHNEN (2007), «A survey of innovation surveys. Taking stock of a growing literature», ponencia en la CEPR-Banque de France Conference on Innovation, Enghien-Les-Bains, 5-6 de julio.
• MANSFIELD, E. (1991), «Academic research and industrial innovation», Research Policy, 20: 1-12.
• MARTIN, S. (1996), «Protection, promotion and cooperation in the European semiconductor industry», Review of industrial organization, 11: 721-735.
• MAS-VERDÚ, F. (2007), «Services and innovation systems: European models of Technology Centres», Service Business,1: 7-23.
• MCFADDEN, D. (1973), «Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour» en P. ZAREMBKA (ed.), Frontiers in econometrics, New York, Academic Press: 105-142.
• MILES, I. (2005), «Knowledge intensive business services: prospects and policies», Foresight, 7: 39-63.
• MIOTTI, L., y F. SACHWALD (2003), «Co-operative R&D: why and with whom? An integrated framework of analysis», Research Policy, 32: 1481-1499.
• MODREGO-RICO, A.; A. BARGE-GIL, y R. NÚÑEZ-SÁNCHEZ (2005), «Developing indicators to measure Technology Institutes' performance», Research Evaluation, 14, n.º 1: 177-184.
• MOLAS-GALLART, J.; A. SALTER; P. PATEL; A. SCOTT,y X. DURAN (2002), Measuring Third Stream activities, Final Report to the Rusell Group of Universities, SPRU, University of Sussex.
• MOLINA-MORALES, X. y MAS-VERDÚ, F. (2008), «Intended ties with local institutions as factors in innovation: An application to Spanish manufacturing firms», European Planning Studies, 16, n.º 6: 811-827.
• MOWERY, D.; R. NELSON; B. SAMPAT,y A. ZIEDONIS (2001), «The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. Universities: An assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980», Research Policy, 30: 99-119.
• NARIN, F.; K. HAMILTON,y D. OLIVASTRO (1997), «The increasing linkage between U.S. Technology and public science», Research Policy, 26: 317-330.
• NELSON, R. (1986), «lnstitutions supporting technical advance in industry», American Economic Review, 76, n.0 2: 186-189.
• OECD (1997), Oslo Manual: Proponed Guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological innovation data, segunda edición, París, OECD Publications.
• OECD (2003), Science, Technology and lndustry Scoreboard, 2003, París, OECD Publications.
• OECD (2005), Oslo Manual. Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation, Tercera edición, París, OECD Publications.
• OLDSMAN, E. (1997), «Manufacturing extension centres and private consultants: collaboration or competition?», Technovation, 17, n.º 5: 237-243.
• PERKMANN, M., y WALSH, K. (2007), «University-industry relationships and open innovation: Towards a research agenda», lnternational Journal of Management Reviews, 9, n.º 4: 259-280.
• RAYMOND, W.; P. MOHNEN; F. PALM, y S. VAN DER LOEFF (2006), «A classification of dutch manufacturing based on a model of innovation», De Economist,154: 85-105.
• ROLFO, S., y G. CALABRESE (2003), «Traditional SMEs and innovation: the role of the industrial policy in ltaly», Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 15, n.º 3: 253-271.
• SÁNCHEZ, P. (1999), «Política tecnológica para sectores tradicionales», Papeles de Economía Española, 81: 242-259.
• SANTAMARÍA, L.; MJ. NlETO,y A. BARGE-GlL (2009), «¿Hay innovación más allá de la l+D? El papel de otras actividades innovadoras», Universia Business Review, 22: 102-117.
• SANZ-MENÉNDEZ, L., y L. CRUZ-CASTRO (2005), «Explaining the science and technology policies of regional governments», Regional Studies, 39(7): 939-954.
• SHAPlRA, P.; D. ROESSNER,y R. BARKE (1995), «New public infrastructures for small firm industrial modernization in USA», Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 7: 63-84.
• SMALLBONE, D.; D. NORTH,y R. LElGH (1993), «The use of external assistance by mature SMEs in the UK: some policy implications)), Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 5: 279-295.
• SMITH, H.L. (2007), «Universities, innovation and territorial development: a review of the evidence», Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 25: 98-114.
• SMITH, K. (1997), «Economic infrastructures and Innovation Systems», en Systems of lnnovation: Technologies, lnstitutions and Organisations, EDQUIST, C. (ed.): 86-106, Londres, Pinter Publishers.
• SMITS, R., y S. KUHLMANN (2004), «The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy», lnternational Journal of Foresight and lnnovation Policy, 1, n.º 1-2: 4-32.
• SPENCER, J. (2001), «How relevant is university-based scientific research to private high-technology firms? A United States-Japan comparison», Academy of Management Journal, 44: 432-440.
• STEPHAN, P. (1996), «The economics of science», Journal of Economic Literature, XXXIV: 1199-1235.
• TETHER, B. (2002), «Who cooperates for innovation, and why. An empirical analysis», Research Policy, 31: 947-967.
• TEUBAL, M. (1997), «A catalytic and evolutionary approach to horizontal technology policies (HTPs)», Research Policy,25: 1161-1188.
• TÓDTLING, F., y M. TRIPPL (2005), «One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach», Research Policy, 34: 1203-1219.
• TÓDTLING, F.; P. LEHNER,y M. TRIPPL (2006), «Innovation in knowledge intensive industries: the nature and geography of knowledge links», European Planning Studies, 14, n.º 8: 1035-1058.
• VAN HELLEPUTTE, J., y A. REID (2004), «Tackling the paradox: can attaining global research excellence can be compatible with local technology development?», R&D Management, 34, n.º 1: 33-44.
• VICKERS, I., y NORTH, D. (2001), «Regional technology initiatives: Some insights from the English regions», European Planning Studies, 18, número 3: 301-318.
• WEEKS, M., y C. ORME (1998), «The statistical relationship between bivariate and multinomial choice models», Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 9912.