Neoliberalism, the University, Public Goods, and Agricultural Innovation

After World War II, most industrialising nations adopted some form of welfare-state approach to balance the economic activities of self-interested agents and social welfare. In the realm of scientific research and innovation, this often meant that governments took primary responsibility for funding public research organisations, including research universities and government laboratories. Over the past four decades, however, the significance of private funding for agricultural research has increased, and academic scientists now often work in public-private partnerships. We argue that this trend needs to be carefully monitored because public goods are likely to be overlooked and undervalued in such arrangements. In the interest of developing indicators to monitor the trend, we document public and private funding for agricultural research and agricultural innovation in four countries: the USA, the UK, Ireland and Germany. Our results show that although neoliberalism is evident in each country, it is not homogeneous in its application and impacts, suggesting that national and institutional contexts matter. This article is directed at stimulating debates on the relationships between university research, agricultural innovation and public goods.

Knowledge stocks, knowledge flows and innovation: Evidence from matched patents and innovation panel data

Successful innovation depends on knowledge – technological, strategic and market related. In this paper we explore the role and interaction of firms’ existing knowledge stocks and current knowledge flows in shaping innovation success. The paper contributes to our understanding of the determinants of firms’ innovation outputs and provides new information on the relationship between knowledge stocks, as measured by patents, and innovation output indicators. Our analysis uses innovation panel data relating to plants’ internal knowledge creation, external knowledge search and innovation outputs. Firm-level patent data is matched with this plant-level innovation panel data to provide a measure of firms’ knowledge stock. Two substantive conclusions follow. First, existing knowledge stocks have weak negative rather than positive impacts on firms’ innovation outputs, reflecting potential core-rigidities or negative path dependencies rather than the accumulation of competitive advantages. Second, knowledge flows derived from internal investment and external search dominate the effect of existing knowledge stocks on innovation performance. Both results emphasize the importance of firms’ knowledge search strategies. Our results also re-emphasize the potential issues which arise when using patents as a measure of innovation.