The entrepreneurial role of the University: A link analysis of York Science Park

Proceedings of ISSI 2011 - 13th Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics

Volumn 2, Issue , 2011, Pages 570-583

  Minguillo, David ^a   Thelwall, Mike ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WOLVERHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INNOVATION INFRASTRUCTURES; INSTITUTIONAL COLLABORATION; ON-LINE INTERACTIONS; REGIONAL AUTHORITIES; SOCIAL WELFARE; STRUCTURED ANALYSIS; SUPPORT NETWORKS; UNIVERSITY OF YORK;

EID: 85015518619     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (34)

1. Barrow, C. (2001). Incubators: A Realist's Guide to the World's New Business Accelerators. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
2. BIS. (2009). UK Innovation Survey 2009 - Statistical Annex. London: Department for Business Innovation & Skills.
3. Castells, M. (2009). Communication power. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Dabinett, G., & Gore, T. (2001). Institutional Influences on EU Funded Regional Technology Development in the UK: A Study of the Yorkshire and East London Regions in the 1990s. European planning studies, 9(8), 995-1010. Routledge. doi: 10.1080/0965431012009331.
5. EBAN. (2010). The European Trade Association for Business Angels, Seed Funds and other Early stage market players. Retrieved from www.eban.org/resource-center/glossary.
6. Etzkowitz, H. (2002). Incubation of incubators: innovation as a triple helix of university-industrygovernment networks. Science and Public Policy, 29(2), 115-128. Beech Tree Publishing.
7. Etzkowitz, H. (2006). The new visible hand: an assisted linear model of science and innovation policy. Science and Public Policy, 33(5), 310-320. Beech Tree Publishing.
8. Etzkowitz, H. (2008). The triple helix: university-industry-government innovation in action. New York: Routledge.
9. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and "Mode2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109-123.
10. Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Cantisano Terra, B. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29(2), 313-330. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00069-4.
11. Fischer, C., Leydesdorff, L., & Schophaus, M. (2004). Science shops in Europe: the public as stakeholder. Science and Public Policy, 31(3), 199-211.
12. Godin, B., & Gyngras, Y. (2000). The place of universities in the system of knowledge production. Research Policy, 29(2), 273-278. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00065-7.
13. Howells, J. (2006). Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy, 35(5), 715-728. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.03.005.
14. Huggins, R., & Johnston, A. (2009). Knowledge Networks in an Uncompetitive Region: SME Innovation and Growth. Growth and Change, 40(2), 227-259. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2257.2009.00474.x.
15. Jaeger, P. T., & Bertot, J. C. (2010). Transparency and technological change: Ensuring equal and sustained public access to government information. Government Information Quarterly, 27(4), 371-376. Elsevier Inc. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2010.05.003.
16. Lambert, R. (2003). Lambert Review of Business-University Collaboration. Norwich: H. M. Treasury.
17. Larsen, M. T. (2010). The implications of academic enterprise for public science: An overview of the empirical evidence. Research Policy, In Press, Elsevier B.V. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2010.09.013.
18. Löfsten, H., & Lindelöf, P. (2002). Science Parks and the growth of new technology-based firms-academic-industry links, innovation and markets. Research Policy, 31(6), 859-876. Elsevier.
19. Minguillo, D., & Thelwall, M. (n.d.). (submitted). Mapping the network structure of science parks: An exploratory study of cross-sectoral interactions reflected on the web.
20. Nottingham Bio City. (2010). UK Life Science Start-up report 2010. Nottingham: Mobius Life Sciences Fund.
21. PREST/CRIC. (2006). The Use and Limitations of Indicators in the Context of City-Region Development Strategy: Discussion Paper. Manchester: Manchester Institute of Innovation Research.
22. Quintas, P., Wield, D., & Massey, D. (1992). Academic-industry links and innovation: questioning the science park model. Technovation, 12(3), 161-175. doi: 10.1016/0166-4972(92)90033-E.
23. RAE. (2010). Research Assessment Exercise 2008. Retrieved from http://www.rae.ac.uk/.
24. Reid, E. (2003). Using Web link analysis to detect and analyze hidden Web communities. In D. Vriens (Ed.), Information and communications technology for competitive intelligence (p. 57-84). Ohio: Ideal Group Inc.
25. Robson, S., & Kenchatt, M. (2010). First findings from the UK Innovation Survey 2009. Economic & Labour Market Review, 4(3), 28-35. doi: 10.1057/elmr.2010.34.
26. Siegel, D., Waldman, D., & Link, A. N. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27-48. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00196-2.
27. Stuart, D., & Thelwall, M. (2006). Investigating triple helix relationships using URL citations: a case study of the UK West Midlands automobile industry. Research Evaluation, 15(2), 97-106.
28. Suvinen, N., Konttinen, J., & Nieminen, M. (2010). How Necessary are Intermediary Organizations in the Commercialization of Research?. European Planning Studies, 18(9), 1365-1389. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2010.492584.
29. Thelwall, M. (2004). Weak benchmarking indicators for formative and semi-evaluative assessment of research. Research Evaluation, 13(1), 63-68. Beech Tree Publishing.
30. Thelwall, M. (2008a). Extracting accurate and complete results from search engines: case study Windows Live. Journal of the American Society for Information, 59(1), 38-50. doi: 10.1002/asi.
31. Thelwall, M. (2008b). Quantitative Comparisons of Search Engine Results. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 59(11), 1702-1710. doi: 10.1002/asi.
32. Vedovello, C. (1997). Science parks and university-industry interaction: Geographical proximity between the agents as a driving force. Technovation, 17(9), 491-531. doi: 10.1016/S0166-4972(97)00027-8.
33. Webb, D., & Collis, C. (2000). Regional Development Agencies and the "New Regionalism" in England. Regional Studies, 34(9), 857-864. doi: 10.1080/00343400020002985.
34. Woollard, D., Zhang, M., & Oswald, J. (2007). Academic enterprise and regional economic growth: Towards an enterprising university. Industry and Higher Education, 21(6), 387-403.