The Relationship between University Innovation Ability and National Economic Growth based on Multinational Empirical Analysis
AUTHORS
Achmad Alamsyah,Universitas Muhammadiyah, Yogyakarta Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Hendry Ratna,Universitas Muhammadiyah, Yogyakarta Yogyakarta, Indonesia
ABSTRACT
This article discusses the important issue of university innovation ability and national economic growth through empirical methods. This article examines the relationship between university innovation ability and unit labor output from three aspects: university R&D funding input, university R&D personnel density, and government financial support for higher education. The research results show that: the enhancement of a university's innovation ability is conducive to the increase of unit labor output and is conducive to long-term economic growth. The quantile coefficient of university R&D expenditure first rose and then fell; the contribution coefficient of R&D personnel density to the increase in unit labor output continued to increase. There is a U-shaped relationship between the degree of government financial support for higher education and economic growth. On the one hand, enhancing the sources of funding for running schools through multiple channels will help colleges and universities to form a more effective interaction mechanism with society, and enhance the innovation vitality and motivation of their universities. On the other hand, due to the high-risk, unpredictable and long-term nature of innovation activities, the innovation activities implemented by universities have higher sunk costs than enterprises. Both scientific research and personnel training require continuous high investment.
KEYWORDS
University innovation ability, National economic growth, Financial support, R&D funding
REFERENCES
[1] C. Freeman, “The national system of innovation in historical perspective,” Cambridge Journal of Economics, vol.19, no.1, pp.5-24
[2] R. Nelson, “National innovation systems: A comparative analysis,” New York: Oxford University Press
[3] H. Ezkowitz, “The three-helix innovation model: selected works of Henry Ezkowitz,”
[4] H. Chesbrough, “Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology,” Boston: Harvard Business School Press, (2003)
[5] G. Eliezer, “Industry -university technology cooperation-a theory of inter-organizational relationships,” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, vol.7, no.2, pp.217-229
[6] M. Gibbons et al., “New models of knowledge production: the dynamics of contemporary social science and research,”
[7] R. Geiger, “The paradox between universities and the market,”
[8] F. Martin, “The economic impact of Canadian university R&D,” Research Policy, vol.27, no.7, pp.677-687
[9] D. Woodward, O. Figueiredo, and P. Guimares, “Beyond the Silicon Valley: University R&D and high-technology location,” Journal of Urban Economics, vol.60, no.1, pp.15-32. (2006)
[10] P. Aghion, M. Dewatripont, C. Hoxby, A. Mas-Colell, and M. Sapir, “The governance and performance of universities: Evidence from Europe and the US. Economic Policy,” vol.25, no.61, pp.7-59, (2010)
[11] G. C. Hartmann, M. B. Myers, and R. S. Rosenbloom, “Planning your firm’s R&D investment,” Research-Technology Management, vol.49, no.2, pp.25-36, (2006)
[12] C. H. Wang, “Clarifying the effects of R&D on performance: Evidence from the high technology industries,” Asia Pacific Management Review, vol.16, no.1, pp.51-64, (2011)
[13] M. L. Yeh, H. P. Chu, P. J. Sher, and Y. C. Chiu, “R &D intensity, firm performance and the identification of the threshold: Fresh evidence from the panel threshold regression model?” Applied Economics, vol.42, no.3, pp.389-401, (2010)