Policy-driven collaborative research networks in Europe

Abstract

This paper examines the nature and structure of particular types of networks, i.e. policy-driven collaborative research networks. More specifically, it analyses the emerging networks formed under the fourth, fifth, and sixth EU Framework Programmes in the area of Information Society Technologies. This considerable time-span of roughly 12 years allows for comprehensive monitoring of these networks' evolution. Four sets of results with significant policy implications arise: (a) the networks analysed display characteristics of complex networks such as small-world property and scale-free distributions, (b) the networks examined are structured around a core of organizations, mainly universities and research institutes which have assumed a very influential role over time, (c) the introduction of new instruments in FP6 has considerably increased interconnectivity compared with the previous FPs, thus contributing to the implementation of the European Research Area initiative. In addition, another set of targeted instruments for upgrading the strategic position - within the networks - of promising peripheral actors should be designed.European Framework Programmes, research joint ventures, R&D networks, information society technologies, social network analysis,

Public research intensity and the structure of German R&D networks: a comparison of 10 technologies

“…However, do universities hold more central positions in science-based industries' knowledge networks although even though the main application developers are large multinational corporations? At least in the context of the EU FPs, this seems to be the case (Protogerou, Caloghirou, and Siokas 2010b).…”

Does intentional mean hierarchical? Knowledge flows and innovative performance of European regions

“…Despite the high variance in databases, levels of analysis and estimation methods, the economic literature on research networks financed under the EU Framework programmes (Autant-Bernard et al 2007;Balland 2012;Caloghirou et al 2004;Breschi and Cusmano 2004;Protogerou et al 2010;Lata and Scherngell 2010;Barber 2009, 2011) shows the existence of an oligopolistic structure in which a restricted number of institution localized in central, high-income regions play a major role along a core-periphery pattern. Thus, we can expect the interregional network structure also to be heavily influenced by the spatial distribution of members and coordinators in the different European regions.…”

Environmental complexity and stakeholder theory in formal research network evaluations

“…(Rigby, 2005, p.6) There has been a tendency to use this template to analyse relational patterns and to imply that particular patterns, such as small worlds, have implications for the success of the network and fostering knowledge exchange and innovation (see Protogerou et al, 2010;Van der Valk and Gijsbers, 2010). Thus, there is an expanding field of analyses of the mathematical properties of network connectedness (Klenk et al, 2009;Protogerou et al, 2010;Mattsson et al, 2010;Howells and Edler, 2011) that uses network relationship structures for mapping the collaborative connectedness of specific research networks. Its conclusions have not gone unquestioned (Kilduff and Brass, 2010;Steen et al, 2011).…”