Institutional models of the university in socio-economic systems

As a rule, research papers on the analysis of the socioeconomic phenomena raise the question of choosing a model which closely matches the objectives of the study. Even if multiple models are used, they target individual aspects of the research object. This work is an attempt to offer a comprehensive institutional model to evaluate multifaceted activities of the modern university in the innovation systems. The authors address the question of an integrated model design which enhances a subset of agreed models of different types used for the analysis of the same object. Such a comprehensive model is represented by an institutional model that can be used to study the research and educational centers (clusters) as a whole entity as well as universities as institutions and as organizations at different levels of analysis. From a systems perspective, the model integrates submodels of composition and of structure with the elements attributed to specific levels and connections between the elements. The model highlights (1) the functions of the innovative environment and institutions in the innovation system; (2) university interactions in the knowledge flows; (3) a set of indicators for the characterization and analysis of processes in the regional innovation systems and within the universities. These models can be modified and quantitatively described by using an entire range of methods — from simple methods of statistical analysis to sophisticated econometric techniques

Keywords: university, model, institutional function, system approach, entrepreneurial university

References

1. Е. А. Монастырный. Структурная модель инновационной системы//Инновации. 2005. № 8. С. 49-54.

2. В. В. Липов. Институциональная комплементарность в формировании и развитии национальных социально-экономических систем стран мира//Terra Economicus. Экономический вестник Ростовского государственного университета. 2009. Т. 7. № 4. С. 51-67.

3. И. А. Павлова. Университет в инновационных системах макро- и мезоуровней//Вестник науки Сибири: электронный научный журнал. Томский политехнический университет (ТПУ). 2015. № 3 (18). С. 103-123. http://sjs.tpu.ru/journal/article/view/1377/944.

4. B. Schrempf, D. Kaplan, D. Schroeder. National, Regional, and Sectoral Systems of Innovation An overview, Report for FP7 Project «Progress», 2013. – 32 p.

5. J. B. Goddard, P. Chatterton. The Response of Universities to Regional Needs/F. Boekema, E. Kuypers, R. Rutten (eds.). Economic Geography of Higher Education: Knowledge, Infrastructure and Learning Regions, Routledge, London, 2003.

6. J. B. Goddard. Supporting the Contribution of HEIs to Regional Development: Project Overview//OECD IMHE Supporting the Contribution Conference, 6-7 January, 2005, Paris.

7. S. Yusuf, K. Nabeshima. How universities promote economic growth. Washington, D.C: World Bank, 2007. – 289 p.

8. P. Arbo, P. Benneworth. Understanding the Regional Contribution of Higher Education Institutions: A Literature Review//OECD Education Working Papers, No. 9, OECD Publishing, 2007. – 114 p.

9. P. S. Benneworth. Higher Education and Regional Economic Engagement, Consultancy Report to the Department for Education and Skills, CURDS, Newcastle upon Tyne, 2006.

10. P. S. Benneworth, G. J. Hospers. Urban Competitiveness in the Knowledge Economy: Universities as New Planning Animateurs, Cambridge to Consett, Working Paper, CURDS, Newcastle upon Tyne, 2006.

11. D. R. Charles, P. S. Benneworth. The Regional Contribution of Higher Education, HEFCE/Universities UK, London, 2001.

12. P. Vaessen, M. Van der Velde. University Knowledge Transfer through Social and Professional Embeddedness: A Case Study/F. Boekema, E. Kuypers, R. Rutten (eds.). Economic Geography of Higher Education: Knowledge, Infrastructure and Learning Regions, Routledge, London, 2003. P. 87-109.

13. R. L. Geiger. Knowledge and Money: American Research Universities and the Paradox of the Marketplace. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2004.

14. D. A. Wolfe. The role of universities in regional development and cluster formation/G. Jones, P. McCarney, M. Skolnick (Eds.). Creating Knowledge, Strengthening Nations. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005. P. 167-194.

15. J. B. Goddard. Universities and Regional Development — An Overview/Z. Klich (ed.) Universities and Regional Engagement, Southern Cross University Press, Lismore, NSW, 1999. P. 33-46.

16. C. Gunasekara. Reframing the Role of Universities in the Development of Regional Innovation Systems//The Journal of Technology Transfer. 2006. № 31 (1). С. 101-113.

17. B. R. Clark. Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation, Pergamon, IAU Press: Elsevier Science, 1998. – 163 c.

18. И. А. Павлова, Е. А. Монастырный. Комплексное моделирование социально-экономических систем: применение модели институциональных функций научно-образовательного комплекса для анализа предпринимательского университета//Инновации. № 3 (197). 2015. C. 39-44.

19. J. Howells, R. Ramlogan, S-L. Cheng. The Role, Context and Typology of Universities and Higher Education Institutions in Innovation Systems: A UK Perspective. MIoIR Discussion Paper. Manchester: University of Manchester, 2008.

20. Higher Education – Business and Community Interaction Survey. Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). http://www.hefce.ac.uk/data.

21. U-Map: Overview of indicators and data-elements, by dimension. U Map. The European Classification of Higher Education Institutions. http://u-map.eu/U-Map%20dimensions%20and%20indicators%20detail.pdf.

22. 2014 Indicator Book. U-Multirank. Universities Compared. Your Way. http://pre.umultirank.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Indicatorbook_ranking-indicators.pdf.

23. Основные положения и результаты апробации модельной методологии рейтингования российских вузов. Национальный фонд подготовки кадров. http://ranking.ntf.ru/DswMedia/metodologiyaranjirovaniyairezul-tatyiaprobacii_3110.pdf.

24. Заключения и рекомендации о методологии рейтингования образовательных учреждений профессионального образования. Национальный фонд подготовки кадров. http://ranking.ntf.ru/DswMedia/zaklyucheniyairekomendacii_metodologiya.pdf.

25. Д. Норт. Институты, институциональные изменения и функционирование экономики/Пер. с англ. А. Н. Нестеренко; предисл. и науч. ред. Б. З. Мильнера. М.: Фонд экономической книги «Начала», 1997. – 180 с.

26. К. Менар. Экономика организаций. М.: ИНФРА-М, 1996. – 160 с.

27. R. Ackoff. My Systems Credo//Systems Practice. 1988. № 1 (3). C. 239-241.

28. H. Etzkowitz. The Triple Helix. University–Industry–Government. Innovation in Action. New York: Routledge, 2008.

29. В. В. Иванов, Н. И. Иванова, Й. Розебум, Х. Хайсберс (ред.). Национальные инновационные системы в России и ЕС. М.: ЦИПРАН РАН, 2006.

30. И. А. Павлова. Университет в региональной инновационной системе: роли, функции, взаимодействия (на примере Томской области): дис. ... канд. экон. наук: 08.00.05. Нск: Институт экономики и организации промышленного производства СО РАН, 2016. – 195 c.

31. И. А. Павлова, Е. А. Монастырный. Институциональные модели университета в социально-экономических системах. Ч. 1// Инновации, № 6, 2017. С. 29-38.

Authors