Innovation and new business through mutually beneficial collaboration and proactive procurement

ABSTRACT This dissertation focuses on new technology commercialization, innovation and new business development. Industry-based novel technology may achieve commercialization through its transfer to a large research laboratory acting as a lead user and technical partner, and providing the new technology with complementary assets and meaningful initial use in social practice. The research lab benefits from the new technology and innovation through major performance improvements and cost savings. Such mutually beneficial collaboration between the lab and the firm does not require any additional administrative efforts or funds from the lab, yet requires openness to technologies and partner companies that may not be previously known to the lab- Labs achieve the benefits by applying a proactive procurement model that promotes active pre-tender search of new technologies and pre-tender testing and piloting of these technological options. The collaboration works best when based on the development needs of both parties. This means that first of all the lab has significant engineering activity with well-defined technological needs and second, that the firm has advanced prototype technology yet needs further testing, piloting and the initial market and references to achieve the market breakthrough. The empirical evidence of the dissertation is based on a longitudinal multiple-case study with the European Laboratory for Particle Physics. The key theoretical contribution of this study is that large research labs, including basic research, play an important role in product and business development toward the end, rather than front-end, of the innovation process. This also implies that product-orientation and business-orientation can contribute to basic re-search. The study provides practical managerial and policy guidelines on how to initiate and manage mutually beneficial lab-industry collaboration and proactive procurement.

Institutional regimes for sustainable collective housing stocks

The influence of public policy, property rights and contracts on the sustainability of residential buildings remains largely unknown. This research will use the analytical framework of the housing institutional regime to study the sustainability over time of the housing stock. We aim to produce an inventory of the housing institutional regime in Switzerland, a comparison with the German and Catalan regimes, and policy suggestions to achieve a better sustainability of the housing stock.

Resilient housing : a new resource-oriented approach

The institutional regimes framework has previously been applied to the institutional conditions that support or hinder the sustainability of housing stocks. This resource-based approach identifies the actors across different sectors that have an interest in housing, how they use housing, the mechanisms affecting their use (public policy, use rights, contracts, etc.) and the effects of their uses on the sustainability of housing within the context of the built environment. The potential of the institutional regimes framework is explored for its suitability to the many considerations of housing resilience. By identifying all the goods and services offered by the resource 'housing stock', researchers and decision-makers could improve the resilience of housing by better accounting for the ecosystem services used by housing, decreasing the vulnerability of housing to disturbances, and maximizing recovery and reorganization following a disturbance. The institutional regimes framework is found to be a promising tool for addressing housing resilience. Further questions are raised for translating this conceptual framework into a practical application underpinned with empirical data.

Compliance of hospitality premises to the ban on smoking in all enclosed public places in the Seychelles

In Seychelles, comprehensive tobacco control legislation enacted in 2009, and subsequent regulations, ban smoking in all enclosed places (defined as any area under a fixed or transient roof). A survey in October-November 2014 assessed i) the compliance to the Act and these regulations in 63 restaurants, bars or discotheques and ii) knowledge of the Tobacco control Act and these regulations of supervisors and managers of these hospitality premises; (47 agreed to answer). No person was found smoking in 92% of all premises. However, "no smoking" signs did not conform to regulations in >70% of premises, and ashtrays were seen in 17% of enclosed premises. All supervisors and managers (100%) knew that smoking is banned in enclosed premises but <15% knew the fines liable to persons, respective owners of enclosed places, when a person smokes in an enclosed premise. Furthermore, 60% of supervisors were not aware that no smoking signs must comply with a specific regulation and 40% were not aware that ashtrays are not permitted in enclosed premises. In conclusion, the positive finding is that few persons smoke in restaurants, bars and discotheques, but the survey also showed that several aspects of regulations for tobacco control in enclosed premises are not well implemented. This calls for further information campaigns targeting both the public and the managers of hospitality premises, but also for strengthening enforcement measures, including fines for offenses. Scaling up comprehensive tobacco control measures, including full enforcement of clean air policy, is of paramount importance to meet the national target of 30% reduction of the smoking prevalence between 2010 and 2025.