57
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      If you have found this article useful and you think it is important that researchers across the world have access, please consider donating, to ensure that this valuable collection remains Open Access.

      Prometheus is published by Pluto Journals, an Open Access publisher. This means that everyone has free and unlimited access to the full-text of all articles from our international collection of social science journalsFurthermore Pluto Journals authors don’t pay article processing charges (APCs).

      scite_
       
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Australian University-Industry Research Links: Researcher Involvement, Outputs, Personal Benefits and 'Withholding' Behaviour

      research-article
      Bookmark

            Abstract

            Using data from two surveys of science and technology academics in major Australian research universities, an assessment is made of researcher involvement in industry-research partnerships, the outputs and personal benefits that result, and the occurrence of delaying publications and withholding data and materials from colleagues. An estimated 40% of academics currently have industry research funding, with many also having other sources of funding. Some 60% of respondents with industry funding have attracted individually, or within a research group, funding of more than $250,000 over the past three years. About 35% of principal investigators with industry funding have total annual research budgets of over $101,000. While about 20% of academics have produced research results of commercial value, most of these have been less successful in increasing their personal incomes through research commercialisation and consulting, and equity in companies. Almost 40% with industry funding report having conducted research where the results are the property of a sponsor and cannot be published for a period without consent. Almost 20% of academics in 1997 and just over 20% in 2000 admitted having delayed publications for more than six months. However, safeguarding the researcher's self-interest appears to be as common a motive for delaying publication or failing to share research results or materials with scientific colleagues as protecting the property of a sponsor.

            Content

            Author and article information

            Journal
            cpro20
            CPRO
            Prometheus
            Critical Studies in Innovation
            Pluto Journals
            0810-9028
            1470-1030
            June 2002
            : 20
            : 2
            : 143-158
            Article
            10032449 Prometheus, Vol. 20, No. 2, June 2002, pp. 143-158
            10.1080/08109020210137529
            7bbaf3e7-a947-4d55-8f69-c872d4f8479b
            Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

            All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

            History
            Page count
            Figures: 0, Tables: 0, References: 18, Pages: 16
            Categories
            Original Articles

            Computer science,Arts,Social & Behavioral Sciences,Law,History,Economics
            Research Budgets,University-INDUSTRY Research Links,Withholding Data,Delaying Publications,Research Sponsors,Research Commercialisation

            References

            1. Blumenthal D., Gluck M., Louis K. S., Stoto M. A. and Wise D.. 1986. . 'University--industry research relationships in biotechnology: implications for the university'. . Science . , Vol. 232:: 1361––66. .

            2. Turpin T., Aylward D., Garrett-Jones S. and Johnston R.. 1996. . Knowledge Based Cooperation: University--Industry Linkages in Australia . , Canberra : : Commonwealth of Australia. .

            3. Commonwealth of Australia. . Changing Research Culture Australia: Report of the CRC Program Evaluation Steering Committee July 1995 (Myers Report) . , p. 6 Canberra : : Australian Government Publishing Service. .

            4. Turpin T., Aylward D., Garrett-Jones S., Speak G., Grigg L. and Johnston R.. 1999. . University and Industry Research Partnerships in Australia: An Evaluation of ARC/DETYA Industry-linked Research Schemes . , Canberra : : Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. .

            5. 2001. . Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee . , p. 4 Canberra : : Key Statistics. .

            6. Lee Y. S.. 1996. . 'Technology transfer and the research university: a search for the boundaries of university-industry collaboration'. . Research Policy . , Vol. 25((6)): 843––63. .

            7. Merton R. A.. 1973. . The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigation . , p. 273 Chicago : : University of Chicago Press. .

            8. Blumenthal D., Causino N., Campbell E. and Louis K. S.. 1996. . 'Relationships between academic institutions and industry in the life sciences'. . New England Journal of Medicine . , February;: 368––73. .

            9. Blumenthal D., Campbell E. G., Anderson M. S., Causino N. and Louis K. S.. 1997. . 'Withholding research results in academic life: evidence from a national survey of faculty'. . The Journal of the American Medical Association . , Vol. 277((15)): 1224––25. .

            10. Blumenthal D., Campbell E. R., Causino N. and Seashore K. S.. 1996. . 'Participation of life science faculty in research relationships with industry'. . The New England Journal of Medicine . , Vol. 335((23)): 1734––39. .

            11. Harman G.. 'University-industry research partnerships in Australia: extent, advantages and dangers'. . Higher Education Research & Development . ,

            12. Harman G.. 1999. . 'Australian science and technology academics and university-industry links'. . Higher Education . , Vol. 38((1)): 83––103. .

            13. Campbell E. R., Louis K. S. and Blumenthal D.. 'Looking a gift horse in the mouth: corporate gifts supporting the life sciences'. . The Journal of the American Medical Association . , Vol. 279((13))995––1000. .

            14. Campbell E. G., Weissman J. S., Causino N. and Blumenthal D.. 2000. . 'Data withholding in academic medicine: characteristics of faculty denied access to research results and biomaterials'. . Research Policy . , Vol. 29((2)): 303––12. .

            15. Weinberg R. A.. 1993. . “'Reflections on the current state of data and reagent exchange amongst biomedical researchers'. ”. In Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process, II . , Edited by: Panel on Scientific Responsibility and Conduct of Research, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. . p. 66––78. . Washington, DC : : National Academy Press. .

            16. King R. T.. 1996. . 'Bitter pill: how drug firm paid for university study, and then undermined it'. . Wall Street Journal . , 25 April;

            17. Rosenberg S. A.. 1996. . 'Secrecy in medical research'. . New England Journal of Medicine . , Vol. 334:: 292––94. .

            Comments

            Comment on this article