Depuis 5 à 10 ans, les recherches sont nombreuses sur la réduction de l'énergie en l'informatique (principalement sur la réduction de l'électricité). Plusieurs études ont en effet alerté les intervenants et les organismes environnementaux sur l'urgence du problème de la consommation d'énergie des infrastructures à grande échelle, comme les centres de données, l'informatique en nuage ??ou simplement les sociétés exploitant des serveurs et de nombreux équipements IT. Cette prise de conscience est passée d'un problème peu important à une contrainte majeure sur le fonctionnement de ces infrastructures. Dans certains cas, les coûts d'exploitation surpassent les coûts d'investissement, et de nouvelles méthodologies sont nécessaires pour réduire les coûts et l'impact écologique. De nouveaux matériels sont développés par les fabricants d'équipements pour diminuer ces coûts. Seules quelques techniques de base sont offertes aux niveaux logiciels et intergiciels, par les éditeurs. Mais dans les laboratoires, certaines techniques ont prouvé leur efficacité sur des données synthétiques, des tâches dédiées ou des applications sélectionnées, pour être en mesure d'économiser de l'énergie au cours de la vie d'une infrastructure, dans plusieurs contexte, depuis le Cloud au HPC. Malheureusement, le transfert (ou même la connaissance de l'existence) de ces techniques aux industries est limité à des partenaires de projets, des entreprises innovantes ou de grands centres de recherche privés, capables d'investir du temps (et donc de l'argent) sur ce sujet. Dans ma thèse, je m'intéresse sur les raisons de la faible adoption de plusieurs résultats de la recherche, des plus simples aux plus élaborés et je modélise les liens et les interactions entre les acteurs du transfert technologique. Le champ cible a été limité au Green IT (ou informatique éco-responsable), mais la méthodologie et les modèles développés peuvent être étendus à d'autres domaines. L'idée est d'identifier ce qui manque et comment augmenter la vitesse du transfert des connaissances scientifiques. La méthodologie est basée sur le cheminement suivant: d'abord, identifier les acteurs impliqués dans le processus de transfert technologique, comprendre leurs motivations, leurs moyens d'actions et leurs limites. Après une étude de l'état de l'art dans le domaine de la diffusion de l'innovation et de la gestion de l'innovation, cette phase a consisté à la production et l'analyse d'une enquête dédiée ciblant des chercheurs et des entreprises, de tailles et de chiffre d'affaire différentes, restreinte à ceux qui travaillent dans le Green IT. Identifier chaque acteur ne suffit pas, car ils interagissent, et par conséquent, leurs liens et le potentiel de ces liens pour le transfert technologique ont également été étudiés avec soin dans une deuxième phase afin d'identifier les plus importants, avec la même méthodologie que l'identification des acteurs. A partir de ces deux phases, un système multi-agents (SMA) a été conçu. / Over the past 5 to 10 years, research is numerous on energy reduction in IT (mainly electricity reduction). Several studies indeed alerted the stakeholders and environmental agencies on the urgency of the problem of the energy consumption of large scale infrastructures, like data centres, clouds or simply companies running servers and lots of IT equipment. This awareness moved from a non-so-important issue to major constraints on the operation of these infrastructures. In some cases, the operational costs reach the investment costs, urging new methodologies to appear in order to reduce costs and ecological impact. As of today, new hardware are developed by equipment manufacturers to decrease these costs. Only few and basic techniques are offered at the software and middleware levels out-of-the-box: But in laboratories, some techniques have proven on synthetic data, dedicated workflows or selected applications, to be able to save energy during the lifetime of an infrastructure, in several contexts, from Cloud to HPC in particular. Unfortunately, the transfer (or even the knowledge of the existence) of these techniques to industries is limited to project partners, innovative companies or large private research centres, able to invest time (thus money) on this topic. In my thesis, I investigate the reasons restraining the large adoption of several research results, from the simpler ones to more elaborated ones and I model the ties and interactions between the actors of the technological transfer. The target field has been restricted to Green IT but the methodology and the developed models can be extended to other domains as well. The idea is to identify, on the scale of technical maturity for wider adoption, what is missing and how to increase the speed of the transfer of scientific knowledge. The methodology is based on the following path: First, identifying the actors involved in the process of technology transfer, and understanding their motivations, their means of actions and their limitations. After a study of the state of the art in the domain of innovation diffusion and innovation management, this phase involved the production and the analysis of a dedicated survey targeting researchers and companies, from different size and turnover, restricted to those working in the Green IT field. Identifying each actor is not sufficient since they all interact; therefore their links and the potential of these links for technology transfer have also been studied carefully in a second phase so as to identify the most important ones, with the same methodology with the actors' identification. From these two phases, a multi-agent system (MAS) has been designed.

Depuis la loi du 15 juillet 1982, la valorisation des résultats de la recherche constitue l'une des missions de la recherche publique. Enjeu majeur du système de recherche français, l'objectif de valorisation a été saisi par le droit, qui tente, par différents moyens, de l'encourager et de l'organiser. La présente étude fait apparaître que la régulation juridique de la valorisation s'opère en deux temps. Dans un premier temps, le législateur s'efforce de rapprocher les sphères publique et privée, estompant la frontière qui les sépare, afin de faciliter la circulation des résultats de la recherche. La régulation institutionnelle de la valorisation passe ainsi par la création d'un cadre juridique favorable à son accomplissement, notamment par des incitations fiscales au profit des entreprises, des structures ad hoc destinées aux établissements et une adaptation du métier de chercheur. Dans un second temps, le législateur délègue aux établissements la charge de conjuguer la valorisation avec les autres missions de la recherche publique. Les établissements doivent alors concilier des objectifs parfois contradictoires. Pour ce faire, ils s'appuient sur le contrat pour reconstituer la frontière entre la recherche publique et les entreprises et réaliser la valorisation de leurs résultats. La souplesse et l'adaptabilité de la technique contractuelle permettent, avec des outils de droit commun – tels que les contrats d'entreprise ou de vente –, de valoriser l'ensemble des résultats de la recherche et des compétences des chercheurs. De cette manière, les établissements parviennent à sauvegarder leurs intérêts et, plus fondamentalement, ceux de la recherche publique, tout en accomplissant leur mission de valorisation. / L'auteur n'a pas fourni de résumé en anglais.

Doctorat en sciences sociales, politiques et économiques / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

This doctoral dissertation studies the effect of economic integration on the performance of firms. The ongoing process of global economic integration has been characterized by dismantling of trade barriers and openness to foreign direct investments (FDI). These changes have not only brought opportunities to firms in terms of market access and the possibility to learn about foreign technologies brought in by foreign counterparts. The new economic environment has also posed new challenges through a greater competitive pressure urging firms to continuously align their production patterns to more efficient business practices. The agility of firms to adjust to external shocks, and hence the potential of countries to benefit from economic integration, does presumably not only depend on the internal assets of firms but may also be influenced by government policies and national institutional settings. This conceptual background constitutes the storyline of the doctoral dissertation.<p><p>Chapter 1 of the dissertation is a step forward in understanding the externalities of foreign direct investments on the economic performance of domestic firms. During the late eighties and early nineties, Spain saw an upswing in foreign direct investments that placed the economic at the top of FDI recipients in Europe. To provide fresh insights into the firm-levels responses to FDI, Chapter 1 investigates the effects of foreign direct investment on the productivity of domestic firms within the same sector of activity as foreign firms, and whether FDI externalities differed depending on their level of technology. The empirical results show that foreign presence had an overall positive effect on the productivity growth of domestic firms. The gains were not, however, evenly distributed across firms. Firms closer to the frontier benefited more from FDI than firms far from the technology frontier. <p><p>A further integration of the world economy with new economic actors, like China and India, has highlighted the need for European firms to climb the quality ladder and shift towards high value added products and greater flexibility in delivering new products in order to survive new competitive threats. Chapter 2 is a theoretical and empirical examination of the role of innovation for the export activities of firms. The intuition is that firms through innovation enhance their access to foreign markets by improving cost competitiveness and the quality of products. The Chapter builds on previous literature to develop a trade model in which firms differ in their propensity to innovate and export based on their underlying productivity. The empirical results, in line with the theoretical model, suggest a positive effect of innovation on the probability of participation in export markets.<p><p>The innovative activities of firms may not only depend on their internal assets, but presumably also on their relations with other actors in the national innovation systems. To understand better the role of firms’ relations with the science sector, Chapter 3 turns to one of the major producers of knowledge –universities- and investigates the factors that contribute to the successful transfer of knowledge from universities to the market. The results from Chapter 3 show that universities with established technology transfer policies, procedures, and large and experienced technology transfer offices perform better. <p><p>Previous chapters demonstrate that innovation gives a competitive edge to firms exploring foreign markets. Chapter 4, which is joint work with economists from France’s central bank, investigates how credit market imperfections affect the expansion and survival of firms in foreign markets, which is essential for the design of policies stimulating aggregate trade and competitiveness. Chapter 4 develops a theoretical model to study the impact of credit constraints on the number of newly served export destinations by firms and their exits from the export market and tests it using French firm-level data. The results show that credit constraints negatively affect the number of newly created export relations and have a negative effect on the probability of exit from the export market.<p> / Doctorat en Sciences économiques et de gestion / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

Cette thèse présente une vue d'ensemble des processus de transfert des connaissances et de technologie aux centres de recherche université-industrie, sous l'angle de la création de valeur. Spécifiquement, on s'intéresse aux motivations de quatre principaux acteurs pour leur soutien et leur participation au niveau de ces centres (valeur perçue), à la valeur créée par ces centres de recherche pour les différents membres et enfin, à la valeur assimilée par les membres et leurs organisations. On a abordé des études de cas comparatives de trois centres de recherche université-industrie dans le secteur canadien des produits forestiers et de ceux opérant dans la province de Québec. L'objectif principal est d'illustrer la perception de quatre principales catégories d'acteurs jouant des rôles importants dans ce contexte particulier. Les catégories d'acteurs sont les universités, les organisations intermédiaires (Howells, 2006; Kodama et al, 2008), le gouvernement (provincial et fédéral) et les grandes, les moyennes et les petites entreprises oeuvrant dans (et fournissant des services pour) le secteur canadien des produits forestiers. Les recherches suscitent un intérêt croissant sur les notions de création de valeur et de la valeur assimilée dans la gestion des processus d'innovation (Lepak et al, 2007). Cependant, cet intérêt a soulevé plus de questions que de réponses concernant le rôle joué par la valeur perçue, la valeur créée et la valeur assimilée dans le processus de l'innovation. En outre, il n'existe aucune mesure universelle, non-monétaire qui permet aux divers acteurs d'évaluer véritablement les rendements tangibles et intangibles des valeurs perçues, créées et assimilées dans les processus d'innovation. Un défi additionnel se manifeste quand il s'agit du cas des centres de recherche université-industrie. Ces derniers constituent le centre d'intérêt des gouvernements à travers les incitatifs politiques (D'Esté et Patel, 2007). De plus, le rôle des universités et des chercheurs universitaires a évolué. Ils ont dépassé leurs rôles traditionnels d'enseignement et de recherche pour devenir des ±entrepreneurs¿ (Etzkowitz, 2003), et ce grâce à leurs connaissances, leurs compétences et les résultats de leurs recherches. Par ailleurs, comme toutes les industries deviennent de plus en plus basées sur la connaissance, et que les produits, les processus et les systèmes d'entreprise sont de plus en plus complexes, les entreprises se tournent vers les groupes de recherche universitaire afin de les aider dans leur processus d'innovation (Van Horne et al., 2006). Ces collaborations créent de la valeur à travers le développement et le transfert des technologies (nouveaux produits, processus, modèles d'affaires, etc.), des connaissances et des services (sous forme de formation, de conseil, de recrutement de personnel hautement qualifié, de stagiaires, etc) aux entreprises (Adams et al, 2000; Etzkowitz et Leydesdorff, 2000). En outre, la valeur est créée pour les gouvernements grâce au développement économique et social (Etzkowitz, 2003). Quant aux universités et chercheurs, la création de valeur se manifeste par l'obtention des fonds supplémentaires, l'accès aux données et aux problèmes de recherche de l'industrie, la croissance de la réputation, etc. (D'Esté et Patel, 2007). Ces différentes formes de valeur sont présentement mal saisies. Toutefois, il est temps pour les dirigeants de ces centres de recherche et leurs membres, de mieux comprendre cette valeur afin d'être en mesure de mieux gérer leur processus d'innovation (Adams et al., 2006; Rainbird et Walters, 2007). Dans cette thèse, trois principales questions seront abordées: 1. Comment la valeur perçue par les quatre acteurs des centres de recherche université-industrie, opérant dans l'industrie des produits forestiers, permet de motiver ces derniers à participer et à appuyer les actions prises par ces centres? 2. Comment les centres de recherche universitaires oeuvrant dans l'industrie canadienne des produits forestiers, utilisent les processus de transfert formels et informels pour créer de la valeur aux différents acteurs de cette industrie? 3. Comment les acteurs des centres de recherche université-industrie parviennent à capter la valeur créée? Cette thèse est composée de trois articles: deux contributions théoriques qui sont en cours de révision et un troisième article qui sera présenté à la Conférence de Triple Helix en Juin 2009. Ces articles sont soutenus par deux chapitres. Le premier décrit le contexte théorique de la collaboration université-industrie et celui de "l'innovation" dans l'industrie canadienne des produits forestiers. Le deuxième chapitre concerne la méthodologie utilisée dans ce travail.

Le transfert de technologie est un processus d’innovation loin de se résumer à une simple relation émetteur / récepteur de connaissances. Il est complexe et de ce fait, les facteurs déterminants de son succès sont encore mal connus, sa modélisation reste à étudier et des principes de pilotage sont à établir.Cette thèse propose une modélisation descriptive du processus de transfert de technologie afin de mieux comprendre la dynamique des projets de transfert de technologie et de dégager des bonnes pratiques permettant de mieux le piloter. Dans le champ théorique, nous avons analysé les modèles de transfert de technologie existant dans la littérature et avons proposé un méta-modèle du point de vue de l’ingénierie système. Nous avons ensuite cherché à mieux comprendre les phénomènes in situ.Pour ce faire, une méthodologie d’observation pour la collecte des données au niveau « micro » a été mise au point. Nous avons suivi cinq projets de transfert durant une période allant de trois mois à deux ans. Deux dimensions ont été privilégiées : la dimension immatérielle et matérielle. Le concept d’Objet Intermédiaire de Transfert (OIT) est introduit à partir de la notion d’Objet Intermédiaire de Conception. Les données obtenues ont été analysées selon deux approches :- une approche comparative descriptive, permettant d’identifier les invariants et les phénomènes divergents entre les cinq processus. - une approche multicritère basée sur la théorie des ensembles approximatifs. Cette dernière approche fournit des informations utiles pour la compréhension du processus par l’intermédiaire des règles de connaissances. Elle a validé l’importance des OIT dans la dynamique du projet final / Technology transfer is an innovation process far from to be defined as a simple transmitter / receiver relationship of knowledge. It is complex. Thus the determinants of its success are still poorly understood and its modeling remains to be studied to a better management and optimization of the process.This thesis proposes a descriptive modeling of the technology transfer process. The aim is to have better understanding of the dynamics of technology transfer projects, and developing best practices to improve its management.In the theoretical field, we analyzed the models of the literature and proposed a meta-model of technology transfer from the point of view of systems engineering. We then sought to better understand the phenomena in situ.In order to reach our aim, an observation methodology for data collection at the micro level has been developed. We followed five transfer projects for a period ranging from three months to two years. Two dimensions have been emphasized: the immaterial and the material dimension. The concept of Intermediate Transfer Object (ITO) is introduced from the concept of design intermediary object.The data obtained were analyzed using two approaches:- a comparative descriptive approach, identifying invariants and divergent phenomena between the five processes. This has allowed us to propose best practices for technology transfer project management in the context of brazing.- a multicriteria approach based on the rough sets theory. This approach provides useful information for understanding the process through the decision rules. It validated the importance of the technology transfer object in the dynamics and the success of a project

A l’issue de la transition économique et dans le contexte de rattrapage au sein de l’Union Européenne, cette thèse étudie le transfert de technologie associé aux investissements directs étrangers (IDE) en Europe Centrale et Orientale. Les externalités technologiques sont considérées comme la contribution principale des IDE au développement économique des pays d’accueil. La première partie de ce travail analyse le mécanisme microéconomique du transfert de technologie. Après avoir évalué le potentiel de transfert à travers l’excédent de productivité et l’intensité des échanges intersectoriels, nous analysons l’effet des externalités sur la productivité des entreprises locales. Nous construisons ainsi plusieurs mesures d’externalités horizontales et verticales, en accordant une toute attention particulière à la position des entreprises dans la filière. Enfin, nous nous intéressons au rôle de la capacité d'absorption locale et du décalage technologique dans la capture de ces externalités. Dans la deuxième partie de la thèse nous menons une analyse macroéconomique centrée autour de deux directions : la relation entre les IDE et l’investissement local, ainsi que l’impact agrégé des IDE sur la croissance. Tout d’abord, nous partons de l’hypothèse de destruction créatrice entre les IDE et l’investissement local, puis nous analysons cette problématique dans la perspective des différents types d’IDE. Nous séparons également le mécanisme d’interaction entre les filiales et les entreprises locales selon le marché réel et le marché financier. Ensuite, nous évaluons la contribution des externalités agrégées au progrès technique, ce qui nous permet d’illustrer l’impact global des IDE sur la croissance économique. Enfin, nous considérons la relation IDE-croissance dans une double perspective, afin de montrer l’existence d’un cercle vertueux. / At the end of the economic transition and in the context of catching up within the European Union, this thesis studies the technology transfer associated with foreign direct investment (FDI) in Central and Eastern Europe. Technological externalities are considered the main contribution of FDI to the economic development of host countries. The first part of this work analyzes the microeconomic mechanism of technology transfer. After having evaluated the potential for spillovers through the productivity gap and the intensity of intersectoral linkages, we identify the impact of technological spillovers on the productivity of domestic firms. We construct several measures of horizontal and vertical externalities, while giving particular attention to local firm’s status throughout the supply chain. Finally, we tested the role of local absorptive capacity and technological gap in the capture of spillovers. In the second part we conduct a macroeconomic analysis oriented on two directions: the relationship between FDI and local investment and the aggregate impact of FDI on growth. We start from the assumption of destructive creation between FDI and local investment and analyze this issue from the perspective of different types of FDI. We also separate the interaction mechanism between the affiliates and the domestic firms according to the real market and the financial market. We then evaluate the contribution of aggregate externalities to technical progress, which allows us to illustrate the overall impact of FDI on economic growth. Finally, we consider the FDI-growth relationship from a double perspective, in order to show the existence of a virtuous circle

Cette thèse a pour objet d’analyser l’impact des flux d’investissement direct étranger (IDE) reçu par l’Afrique sur la croissance économique, l’industrialisation et le transfert de technologie. Les analyses portant sur la croissance économique et l’industrialisation sont basées sur des données macroéconomiques comprenant respectivement 50 et 49 pays africains observés sur la période 1980-2009 ; et les analyses portant sur l’impact des flux d’IDE sont basés une étude de cas mobilisant des données microéconomiques des firmes kenyanes du secteur manufacturier observées en 2012/2013. Les résultats des analyses de l’impact des IDE sur la croissance économique suggèrent que : les flux d’IDE ont eu impact positif et significatif sur la période 1980-2009 ; mais que cet impact a probablement été non significatif ou négatif pendant la période 1980-1994 alors que l’impact a été significativement positif sur la période 1995-2009. En outre, le relatif faible niveau des capacités d’absorption n’a pas contraint l’impact positif sur la croissance économique. S’agissant de l’industrialisation, les analyses suggèrent que l’impact des IDE sur le secteur manufacturier n’a pas été significativement différent de zéro pendant la période d’étude. Concernant l’existence de transferts de technologie horizontaux au Kenya, les analyses révèlent une absence de significativité de l’impact des IDE sur le degré d’innovation des firmes locales en concurrence avec les firmes internationales. / The objective of this thesis is to analyze the impact of foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows towards Africa on economic growth, industrialization, and technological transfer. Analyses aiming at studying the nexuses FDI-economic growth and FDI-industrialization are based on macroeconomic data from respectively 50 and 49 African countries observed during the period from 1980 to 2009; and analyses on FDI related technological spillovers are based on Kenyan firm-level data observed in the manufacturing sector during the period 2012/2013. Concerning the FDI-economic growth nexus, it is found that FDI inflows had a significant impact on economic growth in the African region during the period of interest. It also finds that while the low level of human resources did not limit the impact of FDI, and that the impact of FDI on economic growth was negative or non-significant during the period from 1980 to 1994 and positive during the period from 1995 to 2009. The results indicate that FDI most likely did not have a significant impact on the industrialization of African countries. Concerning the existence of FDI-related technological transfer, it is found that FDI inflows did not spur innovation in local firms competing against multinational firms.

L'accord ADPIC a été accepté par la Tunisie comme un mal nécessaire afin d'obtenir des bénéfices commerciaux dans les secteurs de grand intérêt. Il était également considéré comme bien pensé car il accordait une période de transition aux PED afin qu'ils puissent adapter leurs systèmes à cet instrument exhaustif et établir un standard minimum qui pourrait s'appliquer à tous les pays et rattacher les DPI au commerce. La Tunisie constitue un cas d'analyse intéressant et ce, surtout comparativement aux autres pays qui ont maintenu une attitude de rejet par rapport aux traités classiques de PI. Notre pays était membre aux conventions de Paris et de Berne depuis plus d'un siècle. Il était certes le bon élève qui s'est harmonisé en développant une nouvelle culture de protection à la PI conformément au nouveau système international. La raison est que la PI est conçue afin d'être, dans la nouvelle économie cognitive, un outil important dans la compétitivité internationale. Elle constitue également un instrument pour attirer les IDE. En même temps, et comme le stipule l'ADPIC, la PI serait un composant essentiel dans la promotion de l'innovation et la facilité du transfert de technologie. Mais ce schéma d'harmonisation sur la base de prétendus standards minimums n'a pas satisfait l'engouement des pays industrialisés qui se sont lancés dans la conclusion d'accords commerciaux bilatéraux au-delà de l'ADPIC. Notre objectif est donc d'analyser ces présupposés et d'essayer d'expliquer ce qui s'est passé depuis l'accord ADPIC. La question est de savoir si le pays, en procédant de cette manière, avait réussi à établir cette articulation entre les considérations commerciales qu'exige l'ADPIC et les préoccupations internes se rapportant à la santé, l'agriculture, la diversité culturelle et l'environnement. Vingt trois ans après, le pays a-t-il tiré profit de l'alignement de son régime de PI sur l'accord ADPIC ? L'un des objectifs avoués de l'ADPIC était la diffusion du savoir et par là, l'amélioration des capacités R & D. Cependant, très peu de progrès a été réalisé, il semble même que la situation ait empiré. / The TRIPS agreement has been accepted by Tunisia as a necessary evil in order to obtain commercial benefits in sectors of great interest. It was also considered well thought out because it provided a transition period for developing countries to adapt their systems to this comprehensive instrument and establish a minimum standard that could apply to all countries and link IPR to trade. Tunisia is an interesting case of analysis, especially in comparison with other countries maintaining an attitude of rejection towards the traditional treaties of IP. Our country has been a member of the Paris and Berne Conventions for more than a century. It was, of course, the right student who harmonized by developing a new culture of IP protection in accordance with the new international system. The reason is that IP is designed to be, in the new cognitive economy, an important tool in international competitiveness. It is also an instrument for attracting FDI. At the same time, and as stipulated in TRIPS, IP would be an essential component in promoting innovation and ease of technology transfer. But this pattern of harmonization on the basis of so-called minimum standards has not satisfied the enthusiasm of the industrialized countries that have embarked on the conclusion of bilateral trade agreements beyond TRIPS. Our objective is therefore to analyze these assumptions and try to explain what has happened since the TRIPS agreement. The question is whether, in doing so, the country has succeeded in establishing this link between the trade considerations required by TRIPS and the internal concerns related to health, agriculture, cultural diversity and environment. Twenty-three years later, has the country benefited from the alignment of its IP regime with the TRIPS Agreement? One of the stated objectives of TRIPS was the spread of knowledge and thereby the improvement of R & D capabilities. However, very little progress has been made, and it seems that the situation has worsened.

National innovative performance is a key driver for sustainable growth (Pavitt, 1980). National innovative capacity may be improved by fostering industrial Research and Development (R&D), by funding academic research and by effectively supporting university-industry interactions in order to strengthen the linkage between R&D and product development. In a context of growing relevance of external sources of innovation, where the industry, rather than relying on internal R&D, increasingly engages in ‘open innovation’ (Chesbrough, 2006), the role played by universities is crucial. The essays presented in this thesis focus mainly on academic R&D and knowledge transfer mechanisms from the university viewpoint, as opposed to government or industry perspectives. These essays contribute to our understanding of how universities organise themselves to adapt to this changing context. In other words, the thesis looks at the ‘reflexivity’ norm of the system associated with the entrepreneurial university, as established by Etzkowitz (2004); or “a continuing renovation of the internal structure of the university as its relation to industry and government changes, and of industry and government as their relationship to the university is revised”. <p>Universities play a major role in the national innovative capacity of a country as producers and transmitters of new knowledge (see for instance, Adams, 1990; Mansfield, 1991; Klevorick et al. 1995; Zucker et al. 1998; Cohen et al. 2002; Arundel and Geuna, 2004; Guellec and van Pottelsberghe, 2004). While European countries play a leading global role in terms of scientific output, they lag behind in the ability to convert this strength into wealth-generating innovations (this is known as the ‘European paradox’, see for instance Tijssen and van Wijk, 1999; and Dosi et al. 2005). This level of innovation may be improved by different factors; for instance, by fostering an entrepreneurial culture, or by increasing industry’s willingness to develop new products, new processes. One of these factors relies on the notion of an ‘entrepreneurial university’. Universities, in addition to the two traditional missions of research and teaching, foster their third mission of contribution to society, by improving the transfer of knowledge to the industry. New tools and regulations have been established to support universities in this process. Since the early 80’s, academic technology transfer offices (TTOs) have been created, dedicated employees have been trained and hired, incubators for the launch of new academic ventures have been set up, academic or independent pre-seed investment funds have been founded and laws related to the ownerships by university of their invented-patents have been promulgated. <p>But what exactly stands behind the notion of ‘entrepreneurial university’? There exist more different descriptions of a similar concept or of a similar evolution than a general agreed definition. Indeed, "(…) There is high heterogeneity, there is no such thing as a typical university, and there is no typical way to be or become an entrepreneurial university" (Martinelli et al. 2008, p.260). However some similar patterns of what is or should be an entrepreneurial university may be identified.<p>First, there is this notion of a revolution experienced by universities that now have to integrate a third mission of contributing to economic development aside of their traditional academic missions. “(…) But in the most advanced segments of the worldwide university system, a ‘second revolution’ takes off. The entrepreneurial university integrates economic development into the university as an academic function along with teaching and research. It is this ‘capitalisation of knowledge’ that is the heart of a new mission for the university, linking universities to users of knowledge more tightly and establishing the university as an economic actor in its own right” (Etzkowitz, 1998, p.833). <p>This revolution finds its origin in a necessary adaptation of universities to an external changing environment where modern societies put a strong emphasis on knowledge. “The concept of the entrepreneurial university envisions an academic structure and function that is revised through the alignment of economic development with research and teaching as academic missions. The transformation of academia from a ‘secondary’ to a ‘primary’ institution is a heretofore unexpected outcome of the institutional development of modern society (Mills, 1958). In consequence, the knowledge industry in modern societies is no longer a minor affair run by an intellectual elite, an activity that might be considered by pragmatic leaders as expendable; it is a mammoth enterprise on a par with heavy industry, and just as necessary to the country in which it is situated (Graham, 1998, p.129)”, quoted by Etzkowitz et al. (2000, p.329).<p>The notion of an ‘entrepreneurial university’ also exceeds the simple idea of the protection of academic intellectual property by patents owned by universities and their out-licensing as well as the launch of new ventures. It encompasses an overall change of how the university is organised. “In the gruesome and heady world of changing external environments, organizations – including universities – will need to seek opportunities beyond their existing competences (Hamel and Prahalad, 1989, 1994), which suggests the need for an entrepreneurial orientation (Lumpkin and Dess, 1996)”, quoted by Glassman et al. (2003, p.356). This entrepreneurial orientation will only be possible if the overall organisation of the university changes. “An entrepreneurial university, on its own, actively seeks to innovate how it goes about its business. It seeks to work out a substantial shift in organizational character so as to arrive at a more promising posture for the future. Entrepreneurial universities seek to become 'stand-up' universities that are significant actors on their own terms” (Clark, 1998, p.4). <p>The notion of entrepreneurial university also encompasses the concept of academic entrepreneurship in its broad sense. For a university to become entrepreneurial, individual academics also have to adapt and to behave in an entrepreneurial way. This concept is not solely conceived here as the launching of new ventures by academics (a view embraced by Shane, 2004, for instance). It relates more to the view of Stevenson, Roberts and Grousbeck (1989), referenced by Glassman et al. (2003, p.354) or “the process of creating and seizing an opportunity and pursuing it to create something of value regardless of current available resources.”<p>The difficulty facing universities is then to adapt to their external environment while preserving the integrity of their two traditional academic missions. However, some conceive this challenge as precisely an ability that characterise the very intrinsic university’s nature. "The uniqueness of the university,(…) lies in its protean capacity to change its shape and function to suit its temporal and sociopolitical environment while retaining enough continuity to deserve its unchanging name” (Perkin, 1984, p.18). <p>Furthermore, others perceive this challenge as a tension that has always been at the root of the university’s character. “The cherished view of some academics that higher education started out on the Acropolis of scholarship and was desecrated by descent into the Agora of materialistic pursuit led by ungodly commercial interests and scheming public officials and venal academic leaders is just not true for the university systems that have developed at least since 1200 A.D. If anything, higher education started in the Agora, the market place, at the bottom of the hill and ascended to the Acropolis on the top of the hill… Mostly it has lived in tension, at one and the same time at the bottom of the hill, at the top of the hill, and on many paths in between” (Kerr, 1988, p.4; quoted by Glassman, 2003, p.353).<p>Nevertheless, it appears that some institutions, the ones integrating the best their different missions and being the most ‘complete’ in terms of the activities they perform, will be better positioned to overcome this second revolution than other institutions. “Since science-based innovations increasingly have a multidisciplinary character and build on "difficult-to-codify" people-centred interactions, university-based systems of industry science links, which combine basic and applied research with a broader education mission, are seen as enjoying a comparative advantage relative to research institutes” (OECD, 2001 quoted by Debackere and Veugeleers, 2005, p.324). Or as stated by Geuna (1998, p.266), in his analysis of the way the different historical trajectories of European universities are influencing their ability to adapt to the current changing environment, “ (…) the renowned institutions of Cluster IV (pre-war institutions, large in size, with high research output and productivity) are in a strong position both scientifically and politically, and can exercise bargaining power in their relations with government and industry. (…) On the other side, universities in the other two clusters (new postwar universities, characterised by small size, low research output and low research orientation and productivity, whether involved in technological research or in teaching), with very low research grants from government, are pushed to rely more heavily on industrial funding. Being in a weak financial position, they may find themselves in an asymmetric bargaining relationship with industry that they may be unable to manage effectively.”<p>To summarize, one could attempt to define the broad notion of an ‘entrepreneurial university’ as follows. An entrepreneurial university is a university that adapts to the current changing environment that puts a stronger emphasis on knowledge, by properly integrating the third mission or the capitalisation of knowledge aside of its two traditional missions. This adaptation requires a radical change in the way the university is organised. It will require important strategic reorientation from the top but also, and mainly, it will require from the individual academics to better seize new opportunities to generate value (not only financial but also scientific or academic) given scarcer resources. Renowned and complete universities (with teaching, basic and applied research) have an edge over other institutions to overcome this second revolution.<p>This notion of ‘entrepreneurial university’ has drawn criticisms. For example, academics’ interactions with industry could impact negatively on research activities by reorienting fundamental research towards more applied research projects (Cohen and Randazzese, 1996; David, 2000), by restricting academic freedom (Cohen et al. 1994; Blumenthal et al. 1996; Blumenthal et al. 1997), or by potentially reducing scientific productivity (see for instance van Zeebroeck et al. 2008 for a review on this issue). The present work does not address the issue of the impact of increased interactions with the business sector on traditional academic missions nor the question of whether universities should become entrepreneurial or not. Instead, the essays start from the idea that the ‘entrepreneurial university’ notion is part of the intrinsic nature of modern universities, or at least, is a part of its evolution. Industry-university relationships are not a new phenomenon; it can be traced at least to the mid- to late-1800s in Europe and to at least the industrial revolution in the USA (Hall et al. 2001). What is evolving is the nature of such relationships that become more formal. The present analysis starts then from the general observation that some universities (and researchers) are more entrepreneurially-oriented and better accept this mission than others. From that stems the primary research question addressed in this thesis: are there characteristics or conditions leading to a smooth coexistence of traditional and new academic missions inside an entrepreneurial university? And if so, what are they?<p>Existing work on the entrepreneurial university is a nascent but already well developed field of research. The aimed contribution of this thesis is to analyse the topic under three specific but complementary angles. These three perspectives are explored into the four main chapters of this work, structured as follows. Chapter 1 is titled “Turning science into business: A case study of a traditional European research university”. It introduces the topic by investigating the dynamics at play that may explain the propensity of a traditional, research-oriented university to start generate entrepreneurial outputs, while being not full-fledge entrepreneurially organised. Exploring the importance of “new” entrepreneurial outputs, as defined as patents and spin-off companies, compared to other ways of transferring new knowledge to the industry, Chapter 2 reviews the literature on the variety of knowledge transfer mechanisms (KTMs) used in university-industry interactions. It is titled “University-Industry interactions and knowledge transfer mechanisms: a critical survey”. Given scarcer structural funds for academic research and increasing pressure on academics to diversify their activities in terms of being involved in patenting or spin-off launching, Chapter 3 and Chapter 4 investigate the role played by individual characteristics of researchers in attracting competitive, external funding. Chapter 3 presents stylised facts related to external fundraising at ULB and characteristics of researchers who attracted these funds over the period 1998-2008. The empirical analysis on associations between individual characteristics of researchers (intrinsic, scientific and entrepreneurial) and the extent of funds attracted from different sources (national, regional and business) is presented in Chapter 4, titled “The determinants of academic fundraising.” Chapter 5 concludes and suggests ideas for future investigation on this topic. Chapter 6, in appendix of the present work, titled “A note on the drivers of R&D intensity”, is not directly linked to the issue of the entrepreneurial university. It has been included to complement the studied topic and to put in perspective the present work. Academic research and university-industry interactions constitute important drivers of a national R&D and innovation system. Other factors are at play as well. Looking at this issue at the macroeconomic level, Chapter 6 investigates to what extent the industrial structure of a country influences the observed R&D intensity, and hence would bias the well-known country rankings based on aggregate R&D intensity.<p> / Doctorat en Sciences économiques et de gestion / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished