The role of proximity dimensions and mutual commitment in shaping the performance of university-industry research centres

Author's accepted version (postprint).This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Routledge (Taylor & Francis group) in Innovation: Organization and Management on 09/09/2019.Available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14479338.2019.1662725acceptedVersio

Boundary spanners enabling knowledge integration for sustainable innovations in university–industry research centres

This book chapter was originally published by De Gruyter in “Universities, entrepreneurial ecosystems, and sustainability” on 06/12/2021.Available online: https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110670219/htmlpublishedVersio

University-industry collaboration : drivers and barriers

Author's accepted version (postprint).This is an Accepted Manuscript of a book chapter published by Edward Elgar Publishing on 20/09/2022.Available online: https://www.elgaronline.com/display/book/9781800374409/book-part-9781800374409-15.xmlThe material cannot be used for any other purpose without further permission of the publisher, and is for private use only.acceptedVersio

Collective resources in entrepreneurship : a reconceptualisation of resource mobilisation

Author's accepted version (postprint).This is an Accepted Manuscript of a book chapter published by Edward Elgar Publishing on 15/03/2022.Available online: https://www.elgaronline.com/display/edcoll/9781839108167/9781839108167.00012.xml.The material cannot be used for any other purpose without further permission of the publisher, and is for private use only.Some resources needed by an entrepreneurial firm to pursue opportunities are collective by nature, which means that these resources are owned and used by more than one actor. Collective resources (e.g., natural resources and resources collectively co-created in networks) cannot simply be bought in a market because of the shared governance, and thus require alternative resource-mobilization approaches, for example through social arrangements. We therefore ask how entrepreneurial firms mobilise collective resources for opportunity exploitation. We conceptually explore the mobilisation of collective resources through utilising theoretical insights from the resource-based view, resource dependence theory and new institutional economics. Additionally, we use examples from the Norwegian salmon farming industry to illustrate different mobilisation approaches for collective resources. We argue that collective resources are mobilised without ownership transfer, which requires for idiosyncratic arrangements to mobilise collective resources. In particular, collective resources often are mobilized through social contracting and institutional arrangements.Collective resources in entrepreneurship: a reconceptualisation of resource mobilisationacceptedVersio

In the same boat? The dynamics of embedded firms in peripheral regions

publishedVersio

Increasing companies' absorptive capacity through participation in collaborative research centres

Norway has developed ambitious goals to become one of the leading environment friendly energy nations. The establishment of Centres for Environment-friendly Energy Research (CEER) scheme is one of the main measures for addressing these goals. The CEER scheme seeks to develop expertise and promote innovation through focus on long-term research in selected areas of environment-friendly energy, in close collaboration between prominent research communities and users like industry and public administrative bodies. The main objective of this paper is to explore and present the potential benefits companies may gain from participation in collaborative research centres like CEER, as well as possible barriers for participation. The framing in this paper is on the development of the absorptive capacity for the industry partners through active participation in the concrete research activities. Based on the empirical material for this paper, collected from one of the eight technological CEERs, we conclude that there are benefits to be gained from companies involving themselves in large-scale research centres. Their potential absorptive capacity is increased by exposure of knowledge and hopefully new positive experience with collaboration over time. However, both this effect, and a potential increase in realized absorptive capacity is very dependent on the active involvement of the company and choosing the right persons to represent the company towards the research centre. By contacting the researchers on a regular, keeping up to date, taking initiative and proposing research projects, combined with some patience, participating industry partners should be well positioned to reap the benefits from their funding

Collaborative dynamics in environmental R&D alliances

Author's accepted version (postprint).This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Elsevier in Journal of Cleaner Production on 04/12/2018.Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652618336886acceptedVersio

How R&D subsidies alter firm activities and behaviour

publishedVersio

Case-based entrepreneurship education in and for the Nordic region

publishedVersio

The Role of Proximity Dimensions in Facilitating University-Industry Collaboration in Peripheral Regions: Insights from a Comparative Case Study in Northern Norway

It is commonly argued in the literature on regional innovation that regions must continuously develop new economic activities to compensate for economic decline. If a region manages to diversify from an existing path, it can sustain long-term economic development. One of the measures taken to increase these types of opportunities and to avoid lock-in is to stimulate a closer relationship and collaboration between universities and industry partners. However, we know little about the formation and investigation of successful university-industry relationships in regions outside metropolitan areas. This paper seeks to fill this research gap by investigating how different dimensions of cognitive, organizational, social and geographical proximity facilitate or hinder innovation processes in collaborations between industry and universities in peripheral regions. We find that social proximity, combined with high organizational proximity, overcomes the barriers presented by low geographical proximity. Social proximity compensates for thin regional structures with few high-tech firms, a lack of knowledge producers and a weak support system. An important policy implication is that stimulating collaboration within areas of expertise possessed by university and industry partners create potential for innovation