article

Industry---academia collaboration in fuel cells: a perspective from paper and patent analysis

Authors:

Mu-Hsuan Huang,

Hsiao-Wen Yang,

Dar-Zen ChenAuthors Info & Claims

Scientometrics, Volume 105, Issue 2

Pages 1301 - 1318

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1748-6

Published: 01 November 2015 Publication History

Abstract

This study explores current collaboration trend between industry and academic institutions in fuel cells by examining collaborative papers and patents during the period 1991---2010. Papers and patents from industry---academia collaboration (IAC) are identified; the quantity, ratio, and their origins are analyzed; and the differences in performance of these collaborative documents between academic institutions and industrial institutions are contrasted. This study finds that quantities of industry---academia collaborative papers and patents increased annually in both academic institutions and industrial institutions. Countries with high production of papers and patents tend to produce more industry---academia collaborative papers and patents. Industrial institutions with high patent output and academic institutions with high paper output are active participants in IAC paper collaborations. Only a few pairs of industry---academic alliances have taken active part in IAC patent collaborations. Industry relies highly on collaboration with academia in paper publishing, but not in patenting, while academic institutions rarely rely on industry collaboration for paper or patent productivity.

References

[1]

Abramo, G., D'Angelo, C. A., Di Costa, F., & Solazzi, M. (2009). University-industry collaboration in Italy: A bibliometric examination. Technovation, 29(6-7), 498-507.

[2]

Barrett, S. (2005). Patent analysis identifies trends in fuel cell R&D. Fuel Cells Bulletin, 2005(11), 12-13.

[3]

Bhattacharya, S., & Meyer, M. (2003). Large firms and the science-technology interface patents, patent citations, and scientific output of multinational corporations in thin films. Scientometrics, 58(2), 265-279.

[4]

Bonaccorsi, A., & Thoma, G. (2007). Institutional complementarity and inventive performance in nano science and technology. Research Policy, 36(6), 813-831.

[5]

Breakthrough Technologies Institution. (2011). Fuel cell collaboration in the United States, a report to the Danish partnership for hydrogen and fuel cells. Retrieved from http://www.fuelcelleducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Fuel_Cell_Collaboration_in_the_U_S_1.pdf

[6]

Brusoni, S., Prencipe, A., & Pavitt, K. (2001). Knowledge specialization, organizational coupling, and the boundaries of the firm: Why do firms know more than they make? Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4), 597-621.

[7]

Butcher, J., & Jeffrey, P. (2005). The use of bibliometric indicators to explore industry-academia collaboration trends over time in the field of membrane use for water treatment. Technovation, 25(11), 1273-1280.

[8]

Calvert, J., & Patel, P. (2003). University-industry research collaborations in the UK: Bibliometric trends. Science and Public Policy, 30(2), 85-96.

[9]

D'Este, P., & Fontana, R. (2007). What drives the emergence of entrepreneurial academics? A study on collaborative research partnerships in the UK. Research Evaluation, 16(4), 257-270.

[10]

Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in innovation: The triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Social Science Information, 42(3), 293-337.

[11]

Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and "Mode 2" to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109-123.

[12]

Garrison, H. H., Herman, S. S., & Lipton, J. A. (1992). Collaborative relationships in dental materials research measuring the volume and outcomes. Evaluation Review, 16(2), 184-197.

[13]

Glänzel, W. (2002). Coauthorship patterns and trends in the sciences (1980-1998): A bibliometric study with implications for database indexing and search strategies. Library Trends, 50(3), 461-473.

[14]

Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2004). Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship. In H. Moed, W. Glänzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 257-276). London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

[15]

Godbold, N. (2005). Beyond information seeking: Towards a general model of information behaviour. Information Research, 11(4), 9.

[16]

Hagedoorn, J., van Kranenburg, H., & Osborn, R. N. (2003). Joint patenting amongst companies: Exploring the effects of inter-firm R&D partnering and experience. Managerial and Decision Economics, 24(2/3), 71-84.

[17]

Hicks, D., & Hamilton, K. (1999). Does university-industry collaboration adversely affect university research? Issues in Science and Technology, 15(4), 74-75.

[18]

Hicks, D., & Narin, F. (2000). Strategic research alliances and 360 degree bibliometric indicators. In NSF workshop on strategic research partnership. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf01336/p1s6.htm

[19]

Hong, W. (2007). University-industry linkages in a changing policy environment: Regional knowledge flows in China. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Chicago, IL.

[20]

Huang, M. H., Dong, H.-R., & Chen, D.-Z. (2013). The unbalanced performance and regional differences in scientific and technological collaboration in the field of solar cells. Scientometrics, 94(1), 423-438.

Digital Library

[21]

Huang, M. H., & Yang, H. W. (2013). A scientometric study of fuel cell based on paper and patent analysis. Journal of Library and Information Studies, 11(2), 1-24.

[22]

Jaffe, A. B., Fogart, M. S., & Banks, B. A. (1998). Evidence from patents and patent citations on the impact of NASA and other federal labs on commercial innovation. Journal of Industrial Economics, 46(2), 183-205.

[23]

Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1-18.

[24]

Klitkou, A., Nygaard, S., & Meyer, M. (2007). Tracking techno-science networks: A case study of fuel cells and related hydrogen technology R&D in Norway. Scientometrics, 70(2), 491-518.

[25]

Kneller, R. (2007a). The beginning of university entrepreneurship in Japan: Tlos and bioventures lead the way. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 32(4), 435-456.

[26]

Kneller, R. (2007b). Japan's new technology transfer system and the pre-emption of university discoveries by sponsored research and co-inventorship. Industry and Higher Education, 21(3), 211-220.

[27]

Kyvik, S. (2003). Changing trends in publishing behaviour among university faculty, 1980-2000. Scientometrics, 58(1), 35-48.

[28]

Lander, B. (2013). Sectoral collaboration in biomedical research and development. Scientometrics, 94(1), 343-357.

Digital Library

[29]

Lechevalier, S., Ikeda, Y., & Nishimura, J. (2007). Investigating collaborative R&D using patent data: The case study of robot technology in Japan. IER Discussion. Retrieved from http://www2.ier.hit-u.ac.jp/Common/publication/DP/DP498.pdf

[30]

Lei, X.-P., Zhao, Z.-Y., Zhang, X., Chen, D.-Z., Huang, M.-H., & Zhao, Y.-H. (2012). The inventive activities and collaboration pattern of university-industry-government in China based on patent analysis. Scientometrics, 90(1), 231-251.

Digital Library

[31]

Liang, L., Chen, L., Wu, Y., & Yuan, J. (2012). The role of Chinese universities in enterprise-university research collaboration. Scientometrics, 90(1), 253-269.

Digital Library

[32]

Lissoni, F., & Montobbio, F. (2008). Guest authors or ghost inventors? Inventorship attribution in academic patents. In The 25th DRUID celebration conference. Retrieved from http://www2.druid.dk/conferences/viewpaper.php?id=3010&cf=29

[33]

Metcalfe, A. S. (2006). The corporate partners of higher education associations: A social network analysis. Industry & Innovation, 13(4), 459-479.

[34]

Meyer, M., & Bhattacharya, S. (2004). Commonalities and differences between scholarly and technical collaboration. Scientometrics, 61(3), 443-456.

[35]

Mowery, D. C., & Sampat, B. N. (2001). University patents and patent policy debates in the USA, 1925-1980. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(3), 781-814.

[36]

Neef, H.-J. (2009). International overview of hydrogen and fuel cell research. Energy, 34(3), 327-333.

[37]

Noyons, E. C. M., van Raan, A. F. J., Grupp, H., & Schmoch, U. (1994). Exploring the science and technology interface: Inventor-author relations in laser medicine research. Research Policy, 23(4), 443-457.

[38]

Owen-Smith, J. (2003). From separate systems to a hybrid order: Accumulative advantage across public and private science at research one universities. Research Policy, 32(6), 1081-1104.

[39]

Park, H. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Longitudinal trends in networks of university-industry-government relations in South Korea: The role of programmatic incentives. Research Policy, 39(5), 640-649.

[40]

Perkmann, M., & Walsh, K. (2009). The two faces of collaboration: Impacts of university-industry relations on public research. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18(6), 1033-1065.

[41]

Persson, O., Glänzel, W., & Danell, R. (2004). Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies. Scientometrics, 60(3), 421-432.

[42]

Renault, C. S. (2003). Increasing university technology transfer productivity: Understanding influences on faculty entrepreneurial behavior. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

[43]

Seymour, E. H., Borges, F. C., & Fernandes, R. (2007). Indicators of European public research in hydrogen and fuel cells--An input-output analysis. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 32(15), 3212-3222.

[44]

Sin, S.-C. J. (2011). Longitudinal trends in internationalisation, collaboration types, and citation impact: A bibliometric analysis of seven LIS journals (1980-2008). Journal of Library and Information Studies, 9(1), 27-49.

[45]

Steele, B. C. H., & Heinzel, A. (2001). Materials for fuel-cell technologies. Nature, 414(6861), 345-352.

[46]

Stek, P. E., & van Geenhuizen, M. S. (2014). Measuring the dynamics of an innovation system using patent data: A case study of South Korea, 2001-2010. Quality & Quantity, 49(4), 1-19.

[47]

Sun, Y., Negishi, M., & Nishizawa, M. (2007). Coauthorship linkages between universities and industry in Japan. Research Evaluation, 16(4), 299-309.

[48]

Tijssen, R. (2004). Is the commercialisation of scientific research affecting the production of public knowledge? Global trends in the output of corporate research articles. Research Policy, 33(5), 709-733.

[49]

Tijssen, R., & Korevaar, J. (1997). Unravelling the cognitive and interorganisational structure of public/ private r&d networks: A case study of catalysis research in the Netherlands. Research Policy, 25(8), 1277-1293.

[50]

Van Looy, B., Callaert, J., & Debackere, K. (2006). Publication and patent behavior of academic researchers: Conflicting, reinforcing or merely co-existing? Research Policy, 35(4), 596-608.

[51]

Wang, Y., Huang, J., Chen, Y., Pan, X., & Chen, J. (2013). Have Chinese universities embraced their third mission? New insight from a business perspective. Scientometrics, 97(2), 207-222.

Digital Library

[52]

Wen, J., & Kobayashi, S. (2001). Exploring collaborative R&D network: Some new evidence in Japan. Research Policy, 30(8), 1309-1319.

[53]

Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036-1039.

[54]

Zaidi, S. J., & Rauf, M. A. (2009). Fuel cell fundamentals. In Polymer membranes for fuel cells (pp. 1-6).

Cited By

Chen HSong XJin QWang X(2022)Network dynamics in university-industry collaboration: a collaboration-knowledge dual-layer network perspectiveScientometrics10.1007/s11192-022-04330-9127:11(6637-6660)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11192-022-04330-9
Dip J(2021)What does U-multirank tell us about knowledge transfer and research?Scientometrics10.1007/s11192-020-03838-2126:4(3011-3039)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11192-020-03838-2
Salatino AOsborne FMotta E(2020)ResearchFlow: Understanding the Knowledge Flow Between Academia and IndustryKnowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management10.1007/978-3-030-61244-3_16(219-236)Online publication date: 16-Sep-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-61244-3_16
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

International scientific and technological collaboration of China from 2004 to 2008: a perspective from paper and patent analysis

Since China adopted Open-Up and Reformed Policy for global collaboration, China's science and technology have experienced an astounding growth. Papers and patents encompass valuable scientific and technological (S&T) information and collaborative ...
International collaboration development in nanotechnology: a perspective of patent network analysis

International collaboration has played an important role in the development of nanotechnology. Patents encompass valuable technological information and collaborative efforts. Thus, this paper examines international collaboration development in ...
The unbalanced performance and regional differences in scientific and technological collaboration in the field of solar cells

This study attempts to explore collaborations in the field of solar cell science and technology, focusing on the productivity and citations of papers and patents at the global and country levels. This study finds that most papers and patents are ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Scientometrics

Scientometrics Volume 105, Issue 2

November 2015

580 pages

ISSN:0138-9130

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © Copyright © 2015 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.

Publisher

Springer-Verlag

Berlin, Heidelberg

Publication History

Published: 01 November 2015

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

6
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 24 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Chen HSong XJin QWang X(2022)Network dynamics in university-industry collaboration: a collaboration-knowledge dual-layer network perspectiveScientometrics10.1007/s11192-022-04330-9127:11(6637-6660)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11192-022-04330-9
Dip J(2021)What does U-multirank tell us about knowledge transfer and research?Scientometrics10.1007/s11192-020-03838-2126:4(3011-3039)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11192-020-03838-2
Salatino AOsborne FMotta E(2020)ResearchFlow: Understanding the Knowledge Flow Between Academia and IndustryKnowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management10.1007/978-3-030-61244-3_16(219-236)Online publication date: 16-Sep-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-61244-3_16
Qi YZhu NZhai YDing Y(2018)The mutually beneficial relationship of patents and scientific literatureScientometrics10.1007/s11192-018-2693-y115:2(893-911)Online publication date: 1-May-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11192-018-2693-y
Chang S(2018)A pilot study on the connection between scientific fields and patent classification systemsScientometrics10.1007/s11192-017-2613-6114:3(951-970)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11192-017-2613-6
Qu ZZhang SZhang C(2017)Patent research in the field of library and information scienceScientometrics10.1007/s11192-017-2269-2111:1(205-217)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11192-017-2269-2

View Options

View options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents