Back
 AJIBM  Vol.6 No.5 , May 2016
Innovative Exploration of Capital Science and Technology Resource Platform: Theory and Case Study
Abstract: To promote sharing of science and technology resource in universities and research institutes, Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission started a reform of the Capital Science and Technology Resource Platform (CSTRP) in 2009. Due to great success, CSTRP’s new practice is under consideration to be introduced to other provinces in China. This paper introduces the characteristics and highlights of CSTRP, discusses the underlying theories including triple helix theory, multi-level governance theory and innovation network theory, and makes a case study in detail. Finally, suggestions on CSTRP’s future development are discussed.
Cite this paper: Zhao, F. and Deng, Q. (2016) Innovative Exploration of Capital Science and Technology Resource Platform: Theory and Case Study. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 6, 589-599. doi: 10.4236/ajibm.2016.65055.
References

[1]   Beijing Municipal Bureau of Statistics, NBS Survey Office in Beijing (2015) Beijing Statistical Year Book 2015.
http://www.bjstats.gov.cn/nj/main/2015-tjnj/indexeh.htm

[2]   Beijing Technology Market Management Office (2014) Beijing Technology Market Analysis Report.
http://www.cbtm.gov.cn/bjjssc/scjc_show_ids503monitorTypes1.html

[3]   Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. (2000) The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. Research Policy, 29, 109-123.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4

[4]   Li, P.F. (2014) Effectiveness Analysis and Policy Recommendations of the Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government in China. Science of Science and Management of S. & T., 35, 3-9. (In Chinese)

[5]   Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. (2001) Multi-Level Governance and European Integration. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Oxford.

[6]   Bache, I. and Flinders, M., Eds. (2004) Multi-Level Governance. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0199259259.001.0001

[7]   Kaiser, R. and Prange, H. (2004) Managing Diversity in a System of Multi-level Governance: The Open Method of Co-Ordination in Innovation Policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 11, 249-266.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1350176042000194421

[8]   Freeman, C. (1991) Networks of Innovators: A Synthesis of Research Issues. Research Policy, 20, 499-514.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(91)90072-X

[9]   Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. and Nelson, R., Eds. (2004) The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

[10]   Baker, W.E., Grinstein, A. and Harmancioglu, N. (2016) Whose Innovation Performance Benefits More from External Networks: Entrepreneurial or Conservative Firms? Journal of Product Management, 33, 104-120.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12263

[11]   Li, J.Z. and Deng, Q.W. (2011) Beijing Mode to Promote Openness and Sharing of S & T Resources. China Science & Technology Resources Review, 43, 1-10. (In Chinese)

[12]   Li, J.Z., Deng, Q.W. and Chu, W.B. (2012) Practical Exploration and Theoretical Distillation of “Beijing Mode”. China Science & Technology Resources Review, 44, 17-23. (In Chinese)

[13]   Li, J.Z., Deng, Q.W. and Sorensen, O. (2011) Building National Innovation Platform in China: Theoretical Exploration and Empirical Study. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 2, 58-78.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17585521111107898

 
 
Top