Evolution, Organization and Economic Behavior

Evolution, Organization and Economic Behavior

Edited by Guido Buenstorf

This new and original collection of papers focuses on the intersection of three strands of research: evolutionary economics, behavioral economics, and management studies. Combining theoretical and empirical contributions, the expert contributors demonstrate that the intersection of these fields provides a rich source of opportunities enabling researchers to find more satisfactory answers to questions that (not only evolutionary) economists have long been tackling. Topics discussed include individual agents and their interactions; the behavior and development of firm organizations; and evolving firms and their broader implications for the development of regions and entire economies.

Chapter 5: Scientists’ Valuation of Open Science and Commercialization: The Influence of Peers and Organizational Context

Stefan Krabel

Subjects: economics and finance, behavioural and experimental economics, evolutionary economics


Stefan Krabel INTRODUCTION 1 Over the past decades, universities and other public research organizations have faced the challenge of transforming themselves into ‘entrepreneurial enterprises’. Observing the importance of academic research for sciencebased industries such as biotechnology or nanotechnology, policy makers called upon public research to make scientific achievements more relevant to industry (Slaughter and Leslie, 1997; Cohen et al., 1998). Facing these changed policy expectations for economic development and seeking new sources of income, universities and public research organizations escalated their involvement in technology transfer (see, for example, Powers and McDougall, 2005). With the demand for commercialization efforts of scientists increasing, a scholarly debate has arisen whether and to what extent scientific norms are changing as a result. Existing studies highlight that in research a dual system of reward allocation has evolved (Dasgupta and David, 1994; Hong and Walsh, 2009). On the one hand, scientists still need to disseminate their results openly, for example, by publication, in order to prove their academic advances. Thus, in the spirit of the Mertonian norm of communism, many scientists freely share their research outcome and receive the recognition of peers when distinguished advances are achieved – adhering to the concept of open science (Merton, 1957; Hong and Walsh, 2009). On the other hand, a large percentage of scientists regard successful commercialization as a tool for gaining academic repute (Owen-Smith and Powell, 2004; Colyvas and Powell, 2007). The latter view is based on the rationale that scientists become increasingly visible and also attract external funding when...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information