产学研外文翻译---对于减少大学和产业合作障碍的因素的探究(编辑修改稿)

产学研外文翻译---对于减少大学和产业合作障碍的因素的探究(编辑修改稿)内容摘要：

rriers to working with universities (Nooteboom, 2020。 McEvily et al., 2020). Our approach provides a window on some of the mecha nisms that may limit the depth and quality of interactions between universities and businesses. The analysis is based on the statistical analysis of a large sur vey of UK firms that have collaborated on publicly funded research projects, bined with data from records of prior involvement in research collaboration with universities. The analysis shows that prior experience of collaborative research lowers orientation related barriers and that greater levels of trust reduce both types of barriers studied. We also find that breadth of interaction diminishes the orientationrelated, but increases transactionrelated barriers. We explore the implications of these findings for research and pol icy. Incentives and conflicts between public and private knowledge In contrast to the relatively open nature of the science system, the process of knowledge creation in the private sector is domi nated by attempts to appropriate the economic value of what firms know in order to gain petitive advantage (Teece, 1986). This‘private’ knowledge is largely closed, remaining hidden within the firm or disclosed in a limited way through patents filed primarily for the purposes of obtaining temporary monopolies (Allen, 1984。 Dasgupta and David, 1994). This is not to say that industry knowl edge is pletely closed: many forms of knowledge exchange and leakage occur between firms working in the same sector. A consid erable number of firms publish academic and technical papers to signal their petencies or to defend against others’ attempts to control particular areas of technology (Hicks,1995。 Cockburn and Henderson,1998). They may also participate in open source soft ware projects to help lower the costs of their own development activities (von Hippel and von Krogh, 2020), and there is some evi dence that firms engage in strategic trading of information with petitors (von Hippel,1987). Despite these examples of open ness, the primary motivation of firms’ knowledge creation activities is the appropriation of knowledge for private gain, and openness to external actors is used as a strategic mechanism to gain advantage over petitors (Chesbrough, 2020). Given these two different systems of knowledge production, U–I collaborations are likely to be plagued with conflicts due to a weak attitudinal alignment between partners. Private firms often con flict with university researchers over attitudes towards the topics of research or the timing and form of disclosure of research results. While researchers may be keen to disclose information to gain pri ority, firms may wish to keep secret or appropriate the information. To paraphrase Brown and Duguid (2020), academics wish to create‘leaky’ knowledge so that their ideas will be acknowledged by their peers while firms want the knowledge to be ‘sticky’ so that they can control a resource that is not available to their petitors. University researchers are also likely to choose research topics that are perceived by their peers to be interesting and valuable, while firms are likely to choose topics and problems that are perceived as being valuable for the development of new products and services for their customers (Nelson, 2020). This means that the problems that each party may want to explore within a research project may be very different and the types of outputs each partner is interested in may also diverge. Conflicts over IP and university adm。