Financing University Research

While the detailed mechanisms of the interplay of knowledge creation and economic growth have been discussed in great detail by endogenous growth theory, this paper is interested in assessing the role that universities play in the knowledge based economy. It does so at the example of best practice scenarios, as currently being undertaken by the University of Oxford, U.C. Berkeley, the M.I.T. and Chalmers School of Technology. It argues that key to successful research commercialization is the leverage of clusters and networks that assure knowledge flows between universities and business. We call this the ‘Third Way’ of university research commercialization, which focuses on systemic change, rather than on single stakeholder intervention. It reflects a novel generation of knowledge policies that focuses on training, awareness raising and the leverage of cluster effects, rather than the development of physical infrastructure (i.e. science parks). This is a unique approach that outperforms existing best practice in many ways; i.e. it focuses on the leverage of networks among the various academic institutions, rather than repeating the traditional ‘one university – one technology transfer office’ approach. The ‘Third Way’ also outperforms existing best practices by adopting latest trends in intellectual property management , such as online trading, perceiving intellectual property as a financial asset and leveraging open innovation for improving patent quality. Organizational values, structures & procedures of various actors (business, academia, government) are recognized and different institutional cultures are sought to be overcome through boundary spanning. The competing demands and interests of business and academia are reflected through the introduction of ‘social responsible university research commercialization’, as currently undertaken by U.C. Berkeley.Technology Transfer, Research Funding, Intellectual Property, Chalmers School of Technology, U.C. Berkeley, Oxford University

Evaluating Transfer of Continuing Education to Practice: A Retrospective Mixed-Methods Study

Background: Continuing education (CE) is an essential component of building and maintaining the competence and performance of health professionals. Evidence of its impact on practice is lacking. Organizations need evidence of CE transfer to the practice setting to demonstrate its value and inform CE practice. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to provide evidence of CE’s impact on practice by analyzing nurses’ reports of intent to change practice, actual practice change, and examples of practice change. Research assessing the effects of CE on nursing practice across multiple courses involving different topics, levels of nursing practice and location supports generalizability. The analysis of the nurses’ practice change examples provides a deeper understanding of the outcomes and factors affecting CE transfer. Methods: This retrospective, mixed-methods study analyzed nurses’ quantitative and qualitative survey responses, both end-of-course and in a longitudinal evaluation. Descriptive and inferential statistics were generated on the intent and actual practice change responses. Thematic content analysis was conducted on the examples of practice change and respective barriers. Results: Most participants reported positive intent to change practice (88.6%) and actual practice change (89.1%) following the CE courses. The actual practice change examples revealed four common themes including becoming certified, improved leadership, enhanced role performance, and educating or mentoring others. In some cases, these practice changes led to improvements at the organizational level. Conclusions: The results of this study provide evidence that knowledge gained from CE can positively impact nursing practice, and that CE-related practice changes by nurses can lead to broader organizational improvements

Linking knowledge and action for sustainable development

It is now commonplace to assert that actions toward sustainable development require a mix of scientific, economic, social and political knowledge, and judgments. The role of research-based knowledge in this complex setting is ambiguous and diverse, and it is undergoing rapid change both in theory and in practice. We review conventional views of the linkages between research-based knowledge and action, and the early response to concerns that these links could and should be improved, through efforts at translation and transfer. We then examine the range of critiques that challenge those conventional views by highlighting different aspects of the relationships between science and society, focusing on the implications for action toward sustainable development. We then review the theories and strategies that have emerged in the attempt to improve the linkages between research-based knowledge and action in the context of sustainability across four broad categories: participation, integration, learning, and negotiation. These form a hierarchy with respect to how deeply they engage with the various critiques. We propose that the relationships between research-based knowledge and action can be better understood as arenas of shared responsibility, embedded within larger systems of power and knowledge that evolve and change over time. The unique contribution of research-based knowledge needs to be understood in relation to actual or potential contributions from other forms of knowledge. We conclude with questions that may offer useful orientation to assessing or designing research-action arenas for sustainable development

Benefit transfers of cultural heritage values - how far can we go?

Assessing the economic values attached to alternative land uses, when cultural heritage goods are at stake, makes the valuation process more articulated. Economic elicitation of cultural heritage values is quite a recent practice. Not many case studies have applied non-market valuation techniques, such as contingent valuation methods or travel cost methods, to derive monetary estimates of cultural goods attribute and even fewer applications have been policy oriented. Being a relatively recent research field, the first applications have mainly dealt with the challenges faced by the valuation techniques and the validity and reliability of results. These studies, particularly contingent valuation ones, have very high implementation costs. Hence, to obtain primary estimates of cultural values, agencies need to spend a great deal of money and time. Since these resources are scarce, there is an impinging need to consider the possibility of transferring benefit estimates from a specific “study site” for which data has been collected, to a “policy site” for which there is little or no information. An important question often addressed in the literature is what we can learn from individual case studies for a next case study. How general are the results of case study research? Can we transfer findings from a set of rather similar case studies to a new case study? This question is known as the benefit transfer (or value transfer) issue and seeks to investigate under which (general and specific) conditions common findings from various case studies are more or less valid for a new given case at a distinct site. Knowledge acquisition in the social sciences, and hence also in economics, is usually based on a reductionist approach, which eliminates many person-specific, object-specific or site-specific characteristics of a phenomenon, but the major advantage is that it allows for generalization through a common standardized approach that is applicable to a larger population. This methodology lies also at the heart of meta-analysis, which seeks to synthesize research findings from different case studies (van den Bergh et al. 1997, van den Bergh and Button 1997, 1999). Through the use of common relevant descriptors (behavioural, methodological, contextual) it is possible to draw inferences from a large sample of cases. For value transfer (also commonly named ‘benefit transfer’) the possibility of using meta-analysis is of major importance (Bal and Nijkamp 1998a). The basic idea of value transfer is that knowledge accumulated over time may be subjected to a transfer to a new, similar type of study. For the use of knowledge on a new similar study, it would be ideal if almost identical site characteristics could be transferred without any manipulation and if, at the same time, typical site-unique characteristics could be taken into account: that is, if it were possible to adapt derived variables for these site-unique characteristics.Value transfer studies in cultural heritage economics are rather rare, and the idea itself is quite controversial. In this paper we offer a concise – and certainly not exhausting – review of some recent value transfer studies in this area, with a particular view to spatial variability and transferability. We discuss limits and potentialities of benefit transfer approach for cultural values, aiming to raise debate on the topic. We acknowledge the local nature of cultural values and the strict relationship with the population to which the specific heritage belongs, but we focus on the more universally shared values that are embedded in cultural heritage and on possible ways of expressing them in terms of priorities and clusters. More research is needed in this direction before dismissing the possibility to apply benefit transfer in the case of cultural values estimates.

Flows of Knowledge, Expertise and Influence:A Method for Assessing Policy and Practice Impacts from Social Science Research

Social science research undoubtedly does impact on public policy and practice but Such non-academic impacts are rarely amenable to precise, quantitative metrics. In the of accountability, it is however possible to find proxy indicators of connectivity with research users and these may form steps toward impacts. Understanding these connections can lead to a deeper appreciation of the factors that shape the processes leading to research uptake. This study adopted a detailed and largely qualitative approach to identify the flows of knowledge, expertise and influence that take place during the process of knowledge transfer in order to trial a method for assessing policy and practice impacts from social science research. As a corollary to this assessment, the Study further identified five factors that can influence and enhance the process of knowledge exchange between researchers and users.</p

Using Indigenous Approaches as a Bridge between Policies, Interventions, and the Grassroots

Indigenous approaches are crucial for indigenous people across the world including Africans, in assessing the impact of imperialism and its manifestations in colonialism, liberalism, globalization, and Western research. Such approaches acknowledge the fundamental importance of local culture, recognizing that geographical, empirically based knowledge provides culturally appropriate solutions to problems. Indigenous approaches serve as a bridge between policies, interventions, and the grassroots. Social work, as a practice-based profession and an academic discipline, should acknowledge and include indigenous knowledge and methodologies in its curriculum. It is important to empower and provide space and a voice for the grassroots to articulate problems and participate in solving them by sharing their own wisdom and experiences. It is shortsighted and unworkable to rely upon prescribed Western policies and curriculums with the assumption that they will seamlessly transfer to other, fundamentally different, people and cultures. Failing to discard such an “apples to apples approach” will only result in a prolonged failure to adequately address the socioeconomic problems in Sub-Saharan Africa and will only perpetuate the problems associated with imperialism and [neo]colonialism. This chapter provides conceptual definitions to constructs such as decolonization and indigenous knowledge and demonstrates the importance of decolonization and indigenous approaches in social work scholarship and practice as it relates to Africa

Critical appraisal of meta-analyses: an introductory guide for the practicing surgeon

Meta-analyses are an essential tool of clinical research. Meta-analyses of individual randomized controlled trials frequently constitute the highest possible level of scientific evidence for a given research question and allow surgeons to rapidly gain a comprehensive understanding of an important clinical issue. Moreover, meta-analyses often serve as cornerstones for evidence-based surgery, treatment guidelines, and knowledge transfer. Given the importance of meta-analyses to the medical (and surgical) knowledge base, it is of cardinal importance that surgeons have a basic grasp of the principles that guide a high-quality meta-analysis, and be able to weigh objectively the advantages and potential pitfalls of this clinical research tool. Unfortunately, surgeons are often ill-prepared to successfully conduct, critically appraise, and correctly interpret meta-analyses. The objective of this educational review is to provide surgeons with a brief introductory overview of the knowledge and skills required for understanding and critically appraising surgical meta-analyses as well as assessing their implications for their own surgical practice

Linking knowledge and action for sustainable development.

I Abstract It is now commonplace to assert that actions toward sustainable development require a mix of scientific, economic, social and political knowledge, and judgments. The role of research-based knowledge in this complex setting is ambiguous and diverse, and it is undergoing rapid change both in theory and in practice. We review conventional views of the linkages between research-based knowledge and action, and the early response to concerns that these links could and should be improved, through efforts at translation and transfer. We then examine the range of critiques that challenge those conventional views by highlighting different aspects of the relationships between science and society, focusing on the implications for action toward sustainable development. We then review the theories and strategies that have emerged in the attempt to improve the linkages between research-based knowledge and action in the context of sustainability across four broad categories: participation, integration, learning, and negotiation. These form a hierarchy with respect to how deeply they engage with the various critiques. We propose that the relationships between research-based knowledge and action can be better understood as arenas of shared responsibility, embedded within larger systems of power and knowledge that evolve and change over time. The unique contribution of research-based knowledge needs to be understood in relation to actual or potential contributions from other forms of knowledge. We conclude with questions that may offer useful orientation to assessing or designing research-action arenas for sustainable development

Learning in university technology transfer offices: transactions-focused and relations-focused approaches to commercialization of academic research

University Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) need a wide range of abilities to facilitate commercial exploitation of research outputs; however, we know relatively little about how these important abilities are developed and refined over time. We draw on practice-based studies of learning to create a novel conceptualization of learning processes and their outcomes in TTOs and show that this conceptualization of learning provides new empirical insights into how learning in TTOs shapes their commercialization practice. We investigate learning-in-practice in case studies of six UK TTOs and find two approaches to commercialization, namely transactions-focused practice and relations-focused practice. We find that both practices co-exist and co-evolve in some TTOs while other TTOs are predominantly transactions-focused. For the latter the development of a relations-focused approach is difficult, but possible if there is strategic direction and if sources of inertia are removed by TTO directors. Given that evolving practice cannot be fully explained by informal learning processes, we suggest that so far separate streams of practice-based literature on learning and strategizing should be brought together. The implications for further investigations of TTO abilities and some recommendations for policy and practice are discussed