2009
DOI: 10.1080/03098770903026925
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Academic capitalism in the Pasteur’s quadrant

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
(37 reference statements)
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, Mars et al (2008, p. 642) suggest the need for the production of local case studies of universities and the different ways they operate within the new knowledge/learning regime. If the work to date has insufficiently taken into account the heterogeneity of universities and the variation between disciplines and faculties in their response to academic capitalism, this may in itself account for the contradictory research findings about the prevalence of academic capitalism (Mendoza, 2009). Additionally, if little attention has been given to areas within the university that are not involved in patenting and licensing but may nevertheless be impacted by market processes -such as the humanities and social sciences -we may have developed an insufficiently inclusive theory about the role of the market in the academy.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For instance, Mars et al (2008, p. 642) suggest the need for the production of local case studies of universities and the different ways they operate within the new knowledge/learning regime. If the work to date has insufficiently taken into account the heterogeneity of universities and the variation between disciplines and faculties in their response to academic capitalism, this may in itself account for the contradictory research findings about the prevalence of academic capitalism (Mendoza, 2009). Additionally, if little attention has been given to areas within the university that are not involved in patenting and licensing but may nevertheless be impacted by market processes -such as the humanities and social sciences -we may have developed an insufficiently inclusive theory about the role of the market in the academy.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…Questions have been raised about the effectiveness of efforts within the natural sciences and engineering to licence and patent university discoveries (e.g., Mars, Slaughter, & Rhoades, 2008;Powers & Campbell, 2011;Thursby & Thursby, 2011), and about the extent to which there has been a decline in publishing given the ongoing encouragement for academics to patent their discoveries (Mendoza, 2009;Mendoza & Berger, 2008). Others have suggested that commercialisation has not been extensive and is uneven, having a much greater impact on some faculties (Mars et al, 2008;Szelényi & Bresonis, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The type of research that an academic engages may also assist in this transformation, whereby academic scientists doing more applied science may find it easier to negotiate boundaries, while academic scientists doing more basic, theoretical science may have fewer reasons to do so. Academic scientists working in research fields that are closer to the marketplace have more incentives to engage in boundary spanning behaviour than do scientists whose research product has weaker commercial application (Colyvas & Powell, 2006;Mendoza, 2009). Academic scientists that have established strong forms of engagement with private industry may be more likely to pursue research commercialisation in that they are in position to better exploit the social capital they have acquired through these relationships (Perkmann, Tartari, et.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They concluded that industry funding positively affects publication output at lower funding levels, and negatively affects publication output at higher funding levels. Mendoza (2009), in her analysis and critique of academic capitalism literature, provides a good reason why the literature on the impacts of industry funded research on faculty publication output seem to provide mixed results. She argues that the literature "fails to acknowledge for contextual differences, which results in an oversimplification of the effects of industry-academia collaborations" (2009, p. 301).…”
Section: Impacts On Faculty Publication Outputmentioning
confidence: 99%