ArticlePDF Available

STRENGTHEN AND UPGRADE REGIONAL CAPABILITIES (REGIONAL UNIVERSITY KNOWLEDGE CENTRE PROGRAMME IN HUNGARY)

Authors:
  • Financial Research Co.

Abstract and Figures

The emerging vision of the modern, innovative Hungarian economy, which can compete successfully in the global arena, made it absolutely necessary to encourage business firms to be innovation-oriented and to encourage universities to develop, beyond their traditional teaching mission, also their research performance and their capabilities to transfer research results and new knowledge to convert them into commercially relevant innovations. The role of government was to create a suitable legal environment and proper incentives to stimulate and support change and to enable collaborations between Public and Private Sector actors. Despite all efforts in launching relevant programmes, the competency and attractiveness of universities for strategic research partnerships with the private sector remained heterogeneous and partially unsatisfactory because of shortcomings in their knowledge base and their capability to act as well-performing research partners in collaborative projects. In 2004 Hungary established a new complementary programme which addressed particularly these shortcomings, the Pázmány Péter – Regional University Knowledge Centre programme. This paper describes shortly the programme and then investigates the experiences of two initial calls. This Public-Private-Partnership model, where the state is not the single supporter of the programme, the participating Private Sector actors provide complementary funding. In addition, the centres can also attract external funding from various other sources. In addition, Private Sector enterprises make advanced technical equipment available for use by members and non-members. By the first experiences this programme is a good frame to support overcoming on one of the failure of the system, weak knowledge distribution capability. This initiative, the Pázmány Péter programme provides a potentially transferable example for other countries with shortcomings similar to those of Hungary’s National Science and Innovation System. It was the first policy measure which has attracted a large number of actors and united them in joint regional research activities. This form of Public Sector - Private Sector research collaborations is crucial for the flow of knowledge, the seamless transfer of research results to commercially relevant innovation and for feedback loops in development. The centres offer a stimulating environment for innovators and potential innovators, thus contributing to make the Hungarian economy more competitive.
Content may be subject to copyright.
STRENGTHEN AND UPGRADE REGIONAL
CAPABILITIES
(REGIONAL UNIVERSITY KNOWLEDGE
CENTRE PROGRAMME IN HUNGARY)
Author*: Annamária INZELT
Abstract. The emerging vision of the modern, innovative Hungarian economy, which can
compete successfully in the global arena, made it absolutely necessary to encourage business
firms to be innovation-oriented and to encourage universities to develop, beyond their
traditional teaching mission, also their research performance and their capabilities to
transfer research results and new knowledge to convert them into commercially relevant
innovations. The role of government was to create a suitable legal environment and proper
incentives to stimulate and support change and to enable collaborations between Public and
Private Sector actors.
Despite all efforts in launching relevant programmes, the competency and attractiveness
of universities for strategic research partnerships with the private sector remained
heterogeneous and partially unsatisfactory because of shortcomings in their knowledge base
and their capability to act as well-performing research partners in collaborative projects. In
2004 Hungary established a new complementary programme which addressed particularly
these shortcomings, the Pázmány Péter – Regional University Knowledge Centre programme.
This paper describes shortly the programme and then investigates the experiences of two
initial calls. This Public-Private-Partnership model, where the state is not the single
supporter of the programme, the participating Private Sector actors provide complementary
funding. In addition, the centres can also attract external funding from various other sources.
In addition, Private Sector enterprises make advanced technical equipment available for use
by members and non-members. By the first experiences this programme is a good frame to
support overcoming on one of the failure of the system, weak knowledge distribution
capability.
This initiative, the Pázmány ter programme provides a potentially transferable example
for other countries with shortcomings similar to those of Hungary’s National Science and
Innovation System. It was the first policy measure which has attracted a large number of
actors and united them in joint regional research activities. This form of Public Sector -
Private Sector research collaborations is crucial for the flow of knowledge, the seamless
transfer of research results to commercially relevant innovation and for feedback loops in
development. The centres offer a stimulating environment for innovators and potential
innovators, thus contributing to make the Hungarian economy more competitive.
Key words: university-industry collaboration, regional university knowledge centre,
public-private partnership
JEL classification: O38 - Government Policy, P3 - Socialist Institutions and Their
Transitions
* Prof. Annamária INZELT, Ph.D., Director IKU, Innovation Research Centre, e-mail: annamaria.
inzelt@uni-corvinus.hu
2
Mismatches between the different components of its innovation system accounted for one
of Hungary’s biggest 'systemic failures'. As was the case in other former socialist countries,
the initial level of co-operation between Government and enterprises after the beginning of
the transformation was very low and not comparable in its nature with western countries.
Many failings of the old system were therefore coded into the new institutional structure and
the economic environment. To overcome this systemic failure, Hungary is re-coding its
institutions and in particular the relationship between academic research and Private Sector
innovation in an attempt to create the proper policy and economic environment for a modern,
knowledge-based economy.
1
The emerging vision of the modern, innovative Hungarian economy, which can compete
successfully in the global arena, made it absolutely necessary to encourage business firms to
be innovation-oriented and to encourage universities to develop, beyond their traditional
teaching mission, also their research performance and their capabilities to transfer research
results and new knowledge to convert them into commercially relevant innovations. The role
of government was to create a suitable legal environment and proper incentives to stimulate
and support change and to enable collaborations between Public and Private Sector actors.
In the first period of this transition (1990-1996/8), the majority of new laws relating to the
national Science and Technology (S&T) system were enacted (laws covering the Academy of
Sciences, Higher Education, Intellectual Property Rights and Public Procurement). The law on
higher education (enacted in 1993) defined the tasks of a dual transformation of universities:
The return of research to the broken-winged universities and their transformation from
traditional, teaching-oriented universities to research-driven, modern academic institutions
2
. The
legal framework for co-operation between government and universities was laid down and R&D
governance commissions were established. The 1996 amendment to the Higher Education Act
introduced a normative higher education research support system where a part of the budget is
earmarked for the direct support of R&D. This law and other newly introduced measures were
instrumental to encourage the reform of higher education organisations’ research strategies and
to enhance their research-based interactions with other stakeholders of the Hungarian Research
and Innovation System. But practical experience after their introduction showed that a lot of
subsequent fine-tuning would be necessary and that the effects of these amendments have
melted.
The second wave of legislation in the years 2003-2005 refined the system, adjusted it to
the new international environment (e.g. Bologna process, Barcelona targets) and harmonised
it with EU legislation in preparation of Hungary’s membership. It encompassed the following:
Act CXXXIV of 2004 on Research and Development and Technological Innovation
allows public organizations, e.g. universities, to participate in the creation of enterprises
on the basis of scientific research results and technological innovation. The law
1
The previous version of this paper was prepared for ***
2
Important milestones of Hungarian transformation include: Introduction of master and Ph.D. curricula,
new evaluation and grant system for professors in view of research quality, grants for Ph.D. students,
accreditation of universities, higher education research bidding system and participation in EU-funded co-
operative research programmes. In this process, mergers of higher education institutions were enforced by
authorities. But at the same time, they developed to autonomous organisations. And an organisational
framework evolved, including Rectors' Conference, trade unions for scientific personnel, and others.
3
encourages also Public-Private-Partnerships in knowledge exploitation and allocates a
high priority to collaborative research and innovation activities, primarily between
public research organisations and Private Sector enterprises.
Act No. XC of 2003 on the Research and Technological Innovation Fund enables
support for application-oriented research and innovation.
Act XXXVIII of 2005 on Higher Education regulates how universities can establish or
participate in the establishment of knowledge utilisation organisations and spin-offs.
These new laws framed an improved environment for knowledge transfer and collaboration
between universities and Private Sector enterprises. This was one of the government’s declared
main research policy priorities since the beginning of the transition to a market economy,
together with the stimulation of business demand for R&D, enhanced technology transfer, the
promotion of innovative, technology-devoted SMEs, the preservation and strengthening of
national R&D capabilities and access to international networks.
History of programmes
Only in 1995, a first programme
3
started to provide specific support for this purpose. The
time-line of government calls shows that until 2000 the stimulation of research collaboration
was a secondary research policy priority.
4
But the new programmes allocated a higher priority
to the development of collaborative research projects. Private Sector associations and
representatives contributed to initiation and design of this policy measure (e.g. through
membership of a politically recognised business representative in the OMFB Council).
The first programme which made collaborative research an important priority was the Co-
operative Research Centre programme (CRC, launched in 2000). This programme made
universities ‘centres of gravity of research collaborations to develop and leverage their
potential as drivers of growth in a knowledge-based economy
5
. The programme induced the
establishment of CRCs and supports their operation in close relation with Hungarian higher
education institutions, other non-profit research facilities and Private Sector enterprises. In the
CRCs, education, research and development, knowledge and technology transfer are
integrated for strategic purposes. In a CRC “…the leading institutions of the consortia may
only be those offering PhD courses and accredited by the Hungarian Academic Committee
6
and it can only be established in a partnership with Private Sector partners.
A new large-scale programme, the National Research and Development Programme of the
Széchenyi Plan (NRDPS) was launched in late 2000 to promote collaborative research in
consortia with Private Sector participation, led by Higher Education or academic research
institutes. The formation of consortia is mandatory except in the Social Science Programme.
7
3
The programme was called Promotion of Applied Research.
4
For more details see Inzelt 2004.
5
However, decision-making was also influenced by the restructuring of the administrative and government
elements of the national research and innovation governance system.
6
Quotation from the call for tenders.
7
The NRDPs are built on a tender system focusing on five fields: (1) improving the quality of life, (2)
information and communication technologies, (3) research into environmental and materials science, (4)
research into agribusiness and biotechnology, and (5) research into the national heritage and
contemporary social challenges. Members of consortia may be any legal entities and organisations without
legal status registered in Hungary. Any research institution or business venture registered in the EU or in
associated countries can join the consortia. But they are not entitled to Hungarian government funding
(www.om.hu).
4
Despite all these efforts, the competency and attractiveness of universities for strategic
research partnerships with the Private Sector remained heterogeneous and partially
unsatisfactory because of shortcomings in their knowledge base and their capability to act as
well-performing research partners in collaborative projects. Table 1 summarises these
limitations of Public Sector research collaborations with Private Sector enterprises.
Table 1
Shortcomings of Hungarian industry-university
collaborations
Shortcomings of Public Sector research collaborations with the Private Sector
Few companies regarded universities as crucial innovation partners. As a result, the
interaction in collaborative research had an asymmetric nature, with a very limited number of
universities and enterprises involved and a focus on few disciplines, predominantly in the
areas of natural, engineering medical sciences.
Short-term market-
oriented research contracts had evolved as the predominant form of Public
Sector - Private Sector research interaction. These helped to solve short-term development
problems of enterprises, but did not provide a basis for a stable long-term relationship which
provides continuous knowledge transfer for the Private Sector partner and reliable sources of
income for the Public Sector research institution. Such strategic partnerships were rare.
Shortcomings of Public Sector research collaborations with the Private Sector
According to the judgement of several important Private Sector R&D representatives
involved in collaborative research, only few universities had the capability to mobilise the
necessary critical mass of research capacities and competencies. This was partially due to
their absence, but partially also due to limited university in-house collaboration.
University-internal regulation and processes did not support collaborative research to the
necessary extent. For example, the allocation of Intellectual Property rights remained unclear
and the reform of the administrative/economic functions and governance structures of
universities had to be pushed further towards efficient structures.
In view of this gap, several politically recognised business representatives made a strong
case vis-à-vis policy makers to further improve legal and other framework conditions and to
implement the new policy guidelines consequently. Another recommendation was to create
incentives which stimulate a changed attitude of Public Sector researchers and enhance their
commitment to Private Sector research collaboration. These interventions contributed to the
launch of the above-mentioned second wave of legislation. And they were also instrumental
for a newly initiated complementary programme which addressed particularly these
shortcomings, the Pázmány Péter – Regional University Knowledge Centre programme.
Programme overview
Based on the assumption that universities could be a magnet for regional development, the
Pázmány ter Regional University Knowledge Centre programme was developed. The
National Office for Research and Technology launched the first call in October 2004. The aim
of this programme is to attract leading-edge, technology intensive enterprises in search of
research, development and education partners. In addition, the formation of spin-off
companies and of innovation clusters with a critical mass of competencies and actors is
5
stimulated in support of regional business areas in different parts of the country. Both national
and regional authorities, as well as various Private Sector stakeholders, contributed to the
initiation of the programme. Debates about how to shape the programme were held in
different formal and informal forms.
The design of this programme was also influenced by its predecessor, launched by the
Ministry of Economic Affairs and Transport within the ‘Programme for Technological
Development and Innovation’. This programme aimed to support knowledge-based
collaborations, to upgrade transfer of knowledge between university and industry, to make
universities more attractive partners for R&D laboratories of Multi National Companies
(MNCs), and to link (potentially) innovative SMEs to knowledge centres in regional clusters.
8
To achieve intensified collaboration, Public-Private-Partnerships were sought in this context.
Government funding should mobilise complementary Private Sector resources and enforce a
strong Private Sector impact on resulting research. This programme started with a call for
feasibility studies, including the preparation of draft operational plans in 2003. Already this
preparatory process led to enhanced joint thinking on strategic issues and had a positive
impact, not only on the on-going legislation procedure but also on collaborative R&D
9
. In
early 2004, the Ministry was not able to facilitate the designed strategies of the winners, but
launched another call to support the infrastructure development at already established
innovation and scientific centres. Three centres received grants under this scheme.
When the funding situation changed, there was a rearrangement in governmental structure.
The Research and Technological Innovation Fund established at the end of 2003 offered
much more generous financial support than support previously allocated by the Ministry of
Economy and Transportation..
After the re-arrangement of STI governmental structure the Council of Research and
Technological Innovation formulated its own strategic objectives, including the intensification
of university-industry collaboration, the strengthening of regional knowledge-based
capabilities and the development of clusters in high value-added sectors. An operative
government agency, the National Office for Research and Technology (NKTH) was
responsible for the development of the new Regional University Knowledge Centres
programme
10
, based on these principles. The first call for tenders was launched in the autumn
of 2004.
The Regional University Knowledge Centres Programme
The programme objective is to stimulate the development of regional knowledge centres as
joint Public and Private Sector consortia, centred at university sites. These knowledge centres
aim to integrate the regionally existing knowledge-base and to support its development by the
members for mutual benefit. For this purpose, they foster research collaborations, spin-offs,
start-ups, and other innovation activities with a high relevance for regional development. The
policy programme promotes the creation of such centres and supports their first years of
operation financially with the objective to ensure a sustainable cluster development.
Under this framework, the independent partners of the consortium formulate jointly targets
and strategies for collaborative research and the exploitation of its results. To enable such
8
Source: GKM Document, 2003.
9
The winners of this call concentrated in Budapest, but there was one representative from both Northern
Hungary and from the Northern Great Plain Region. All of Trans-Danubia was absent.
10
Renamed subsequently Pázmány Péter.
6
research on a state-of-the-art base, a critical mass of participants is crucial to ensure the
necessary financial resources, trained staff and implementation power.
This paper analyses the experiences of two calls that were launched in October 4, 2004,
and in the second one April 29, 2005. The winning consortia obtained access to funding by
the programme, financed by the Research and Technological Innovation Fund (established at
the end of 2003). Following the Public-Private Partnership model, where the state is not the
single supporter of the programme, the participating Private Sector actors provide
complementary funding. In addition, the centres can also attract external funding, e.g. from
regional authorities, local and international financial investors and venture capital, non-profit
investors, foundations or EU research programmes. In addition, Private Sector enterprises
make advanced technical equipment available for use by members and non-members.
Two important experiences from the first round of centres funded led to modifications of the
criteria used for the second call: (1) The short time available for the preparation of applications
was criticised by several applicants. Therefore it was extended for the second call. However
deadlines were kept short because the timeline of the
second call since was known and because
preference was given to support for regions, where at least a basic level of collaboration and
dedication to partnership-building existed already. (2) The initial requirement to submit a 10-
year strategic plan was released in the second call. This modification was based on formal logic:
If the grant is available only for three or four years, any plans beyond this time frame should not
be part of the selection criteria. However, this remained a controversial issue because policy
makers’ intention is to instigate sustained long-term research collaboration by supporting their
initial development phase where they are particularly vulnerable. On the other side, it was
argued that the majority of applicants have a credible long-term vision and dedication, which is
a sufficient base for long-term joint activities, while formulation of a formal 10-year strategic
plan might remain a theoretical exercise under the current, highly fluent external conditions
Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the two calls. Compared with the first call, the
second call targeted less centres with a lower overall budget. The minimum grant size and the
duration of support were also reduced.
To evaluate the applications, monitor and evaluate the projects (with the help of expert
reviewers), a programme governing committee was nominated by the NKTH for the whole
duration of each call. Two business representatives in each of these committees ensured an
appropriate involvement of the Private Sector
11
.
Table 2
The key characteristics of the calls
Issues 2004 2005
Maximum number of granted applications 5
4
Duration of support (months) 48
36
Allocated budget (Million HUF) 9,000
6,000
Minimum sum per project (Million HUF) 1,440
1,000
Period between launching calls and deadline for application (in
calendar days)
31
48
2.1. Implementation of Regional University
11
Source: RTI Fund.
7
Knowledge Centres
The 12 existing centres encompass 91 founding members from the Private Sector,
including 43 SMEs. The programme provides flexibility for the winning regional consortia to
develop and pursue tailor-made approaches for their specific research issues and regional
environment. As a result, centres have developed different structures with Private Sector
partners ranging from a group of SMEs cooperating with a single large multinational
company to a grouping of several large companies. Figure 1 shows the stylised centre
structure.
NKTH
Governance
Board
Scientific
Council
Research
programmes
University
rector
TTO
Consortium members:
University, large firms, SMEs,
other academic organisations
Programme
council
Knowledge diffu-
sion & utilisation
Educational &
research training
programme
Regions:
operative Programme
Centre managing
director
Sub-program 1
Sub-program 2
Sub-program 4
Sub-program 3
Incubation
start up
Incubation
spin off
SMEs
IT support
PhD special
courses
Other courses
On the job re-
search training
Administration
Research
organisation
Advisory activity
Project office
PR
Finance
Figure 1. Stylised Structure of Regional Knowledge
Centres
The centres’ research activities are characterised by a high degree of inter- and trans-
disciplinarity, where various university departments work together in targeted research
programmes. The Private Sector participants have an important role in setting the research
agenda and participate in the Centre’s research activities as an active partner in projects, as a
‘client’ or as a user of facilities. The number of research programmes varies by centres.
The evaluation of the first round winners started in November 2005. The programme
governing committee evaluates the performance on the basis of several criteria, which are
partially newly introduced in Hungarian evaluation schemes. Table 3 summarises the
common criteria applied in regular monitoring and performance evaluation of all centres.
8
Table 3
Evaluation criteria of the Regional University Knowledge Centres
Regional University Knowledge Centres (Hungary)
Performance Evaluation Criteria
1
Scientific performance
Scientometric methods; scientific awards; dissertations; integrated and acknowledged in the
international scientific network.
2
Human resources
Utilisation of research results in education
No. of graduate students, PhD Students, young researchers involved in the projects
No. of fresh scientific degrees
No. of new jobs (mainly technical personnel and post-doctoral positions) generated at private
firms, at research organizations
3
Knowledge transfer and the industrial utilisation
Number of patent applications and registered patents (national, PCT, foreign)
Number of other IPRs
Patents reaching the phase of licence selling, and the amount of income thereof (which the
researchers will directly financially be part of).
Number of developed new products, process, service, prototype and innovation
4
Economic utilizations
No. of participating research organizations and private firms
No. and sales of start-up companies,
No. of generated spin-off by projects
Mode of utilization (product sales, selling licence and know-how)
Project results
Additional total incomes (in which export income)
Diminished costs
5
Societal utilization
Project contributed to
Sustainable development
Equality of chances
Security
Moderation of regional inequality
Public presentation of projects to
Professional audience
General public
6
Other criteria
Evaluating personal and management competencies (team-work, managerial competencies, strategic
orientation, organisational innovation, adaptability to changes, presentation skills), project marketing
1. Impact of private sector involvement and effectiveness in leveraging publicly
funded RTD/stimulating private sector RTD investment
The Pázmány Péter Regional University Knowledge Centre programme was initiated in
order to help correct historically grown inefficiencies in the Hungarian research system and to
accelerate in particular the development of Public Sector Private Sector research
collaboration. At the time of preparation of this study, the following effects can be observed:
a. “Kick start” for the mobilisation of (potential) clusters
For the first call, 12 applications were received and 6 grants were awarded. For the second
call, 15 applications were received and again 6 grants were awarded. The total grant amount
was HUF 15 billion for two calls. As a result of the increased support for collaborative R&D
in the centres, Private Sector participation grew considerably from a share of 12% of the grant
9
volume in 2004 to 30% in 2005. Private Sector contributions were HUF 2.31 billion in 2004
and HUF 2.58 billion in 2005. The Private Sector contribution constituted 26% of available
financial resources in 2004, and 43% in 2005, meaning that additional financial resources
were significantly larger in the case of the 2nd call. The number of Private Sector members in
the applications was 72 in 2004 and 96 in 2005.
Table 4
The results of the two calls
Issues 2004 2005
Nr of granted applications 6
6
Nr of all applications 12
15
Nr of represented regions in granted applications 5
4
Nr of represented regions in all applications 7
6
The total sum of grant (M HUF) 9,000
6,000
The smallest grant (Million HUF) 1100
500
The highest grant (Mio. HUF) 1700
1200
Average amount of the support of an application (Mio. HUF) 1,500
1,000
The ratio between applications and awarded grants was 1:2 for the first call and 1:2.5 for
the second call. Grant sizes are not comparable, because the duration of support was shorter in
the second call than in the first, which affected the total sum of grants and the size of grants to
individual centres.
In the implementation of both calls, some of the tender conditions were modified, because
the governing committee wanted to ensure a sufficiently large sample of centres. Therefore,
six applications were accepted in each call despite a limited overall programme budget
(instead of five and four for the two years, as was announced in the calls), but with lower
average grant sums.
In the calls, the minimum project budget was 1440 and 1000 respectively, but the smallest
awarded grants were 1100 and 500 respectively.
Table 5
Number of RETs by fields and regions in 2005
Regions Total Natural
resources
Biological &
pharma
Nanotech-
nology
ICT Vehicles
Great Plain
§ Northern 1 1
§ Southern 2 1 1
Central Hungary 5 1 1 2 1
Northern Hungary 1 1
Trans-Danubia
§ Western 2 1 1
§ Southern 1 1
§ Central
Total 12 2 3 2 2 3
10
Overall, the scheme has proven its capability to strengthen region specific clusters. The
winners include 10 out of 25 Hungarian universities. Each region - except Central Trans-
Danubia - has at least one knowledge centre.
From 12 centres that were set up in 2004 and 2005, five were established in Central
Hungary, mostly in Budapest and its surroundings, where large, established universities are
located. In Budapest, around the country’s largest technical university, BME, there are two
knowledge centres: (1) IT2, focused on information technology and (2) Advanced Vehicles and
Vehicle Control. The largest medical university, Semmelweis University, Budapest hosts one
knowledge centre, Szentágothai János which focuses on molecular biology and info-bionics.
With its strong natural sciences faculty, ELTE University, Budapest is the centrepiece of the e-
Science Regional University Knowledge Centre. The fifth centre of the region is located outside
of Budapest, mainly in Gödöllő, at the Szent István University, a Centre of Excellence in
Environmental Industry based on Natural Resources.
The University of Szeged in the Southern Great Plain Region has attracted two centres: (1)
Environmental and Nanotechnology that includes the development of integrated systems for
the improvement of the quality of life; and (2) the Neurobiological Knowledge Centre.
Western Trans-Danubia has also two knowledge centres, attached to two different
specialised universities with a strong link to their regional economic environment. The centre
of Forest and Wood Utilisation is linked to the West Hungarian University in Sopron and the
Széchenyi István University-based Knowledge Centre for Vehicle Industry is located in Győr.
Three other Centres are linked to other regions’ largest universities: the Genom-Nanotech
Debrecen Knowledge Centre at Debrecen University in the Northern Great Plain region, the
Centre of Knowledge-intensive mechatronics and logistics systems at Miskolc University in
Northern Hungary and the Southern-Trans-Danubian University Innovation Knowledge
Centre for Developing Medicines and Methods of Treatment to Improve Life Quality at the
University Pécs; in Southern Trans-Danubia.
As an example of such a successful regional initiative, the appendix of this case study
provides a detailed description of the Szentágothai Knowledge Centre (SzKC).
b. Private sector involvement and effectiveness in leveraging publicly funded
RTD/stimulating private sector RTD investment
Because of the short history of the programme, it is too early for a final evaluation of the
programme’s impact on Private Sector involvement and resulting leverage
12
. But obviously, it
has attracted a considerable number of business partners. The 12 consortia have 91 Private
Sector members and many other partners. Among the Private Sector members, 48 are large
firms and 43 are SMEs. The majority of centres involve a larger, mixed group of Private
Sector partners
13
. Besides these formal members, centres have also developed partnerships
with other small businesses in their regions. And some of them are also preparing spin-offs.
Changes in the programme regulations encouraged Private Sector participation further. For
example, the first call employed a complicated method to calculate the level of support:
12
The first monitoring exercise started recently, but it will only be concluded after the end of this study.
13
With some exceptions: One centre has only one single large business partner and several small ones.
Another one consists of several large MNCs with no SME participation.
11
Private Sector participants could obtain 100% support for basic research, a maximum of 60%
for applied research costs and a maximum 35% of the cost of experimental development
14
.
Fulfilment of additional criteria allowed to increase this support to 75 or 50 % respectively
under certain conditions) This very complicated calculation method was revised after
interventions from both Private Sector participants and the programme governing committee
(In particular by its Private Sector members) A simplified calculation in the second call
defined that Private Sector organisations could obtain 50% state support for their programme-
related R&D expenditures. As a result, business members of the consortia established in 2004
received 12 % of the total support in the year of winning the grant, compared with 30% in
2005.
In the context of the 2004 call, Private Sector members of consortia added twice the amount
of state grants. For the 2005 call, this relation was 1.5. According to our interviews, business
members are willing to invest more and to launch additional joint projects.
In a preliminary summary view, after a time-consuming ramp-up period and the
implementation of some improvements, the programme has achieved its objective to stimulate
the formation of regional research and innovation clusters and Private Sector research
investment therein.
1. Conclusions and transferability
The enhancement of interaction between the different actors of their innovation systems is
vitally important for economies in transition. Backed by some political support and new
legislation, Hungary’s dedicated research policy approach has certainly made progress in this
area through the described trials and errors-based approach of governmental agencies in
setting up programmes for this purpose.
As a key element of this initiative, the Pázmány Péter Regional University Knowledge
Centre programme provides a potentially transferable example for other countries with
shortcomings similar to those of Hungary’s National Science and Innovation System. It was
the first policy measure which has attracted a large number of actors and united them in joint
regional research activities. The centres have created and/or brought forward forms of Public
Sector - Private Sector research collaborations which are crucial for the flow of knowledge,
the seamless transfer of research results to commercially relevant innovation and for feedback
loops in development. The centres offer a stimulating environment for innovators and
potential innovators, thus contributing to make the Hungarian economy more competitive.
In the assessment of the transferability of this research policy approach, the lessons of the
initial programme period have to be taken into account:
Private Sector involvement
Through its capability to stimulate Private Sector research activities and to strengthen its
links with Public Sector research, the Pázmány Péter – Regional University Knowledge
Centre programme contributes to Hungary’s efforts to reach the Barcelona target of 3% of
national R&D investment, out of which two thirds are Private Sector financed. In this
particular scheme, the Private Sector contributed 20% of the total budget of first year winners
and 30% of the second year winners.
14
Public Sector research organisations can receive up to 100% financing for their activities.
12
Two different groups of Private Sector actors have to be considered:
The financial and technological potential of large multinational corporations makes
them attractive partners for local actors. To attract them, the centre must offer attractive
research and innovation opportunities and access to regional research potentials.
SMEs can benefit particularly from a participation in the centre for the development of
their research and technological competencies. Regional clusters offer them access to
an extended knowledge pool and research infrastructure with state-of-the-art
equipment. This is beneficial for strengthening regionally important sectors.
Therefore it is important that consortia are open for new collaborators with own high
research potential or with a specific need to be involved in state-of-the-art research. However,
this creates another challenge: Centres must find a sound balance between this openness to
achieve spill-over effects and the need to develop leading-edge research competencies to be
attractive magnets for top-level research partners and to create sustainable competitive
advantage. This may impose limitations on the centres’ capability to broaden their regional
impact.
Development of university organisations
In their first years of operation, the centres have created a strong momentum to accelerate
the modernisation of universities, including the development of their research competencies,
organisational reforms and the orientation towards the transfer of research results and
scientific knowledge. In this sense, the impact of the Private Sector partners in the consortia
has reinforced the pressure coming from research policy makers through new legislation and
regulations. Through these combined effects, universities were motivated to put the new
regulations into practice rapidly and consequently. At the same time, enhanced new
regulations, e.g. on university patents and efficient new technology transfer mechanisms, have
contributed to making the centres more attractive and to remove barriers for their efficient
functioning.
Advanced research
Through the encouragement of interdisciplinary and trans-disciplinary research, the centres
have also contributed to overcome the traditional shortcomings of university research in
isolated disciplines. Collaboration between various departments of the involved universities is
encouraged and incentives are created to enhance activities beyond the traditional teaching
and research focus towards a ‘third mission’ of creating value for society through transfer of
knowledge and research results. At the same time, the introduction of modern collaborative
working methods and of a new performance evaluation system is accelerated and a new spirit
is fostered in universities.
Sustainability
After the ramp-up period of the centres, participants expressed a growing need for an
enhanced formal framework for their durable long-term collaboration. Since they do not have
a status as legal entities, the centres can for example not participate in tenders for research
projects. According to participants, filing such applications through the centres’ academic
parent organisations or through Private Sector partners is not a satisfactory solution. This
growing pressure to introduce an upgraded organisational collaboration framework is a sign
for the high interest of the involved Private Sector enterprises.
13
Regional development
The intellectual potential, research and educational activities and new technology/ business
incubation function of the centres can become an important element of their region’s
economic development. As technologically attractive ‘magnets’, they attract innovative
enterprises, thus contributing to strengthening the region’s competency and resource pool. At
the same time, they can play a vital role in the development of the technological capabilities
of regional SMEs through collaborative research, the transfer of knowledge and the education
of highly skilled staff.
But the successful development of such centres requires a favourable environment. There
must be a critical mass of academic research potential and of technology-oriented enterprises.
And there must be a supportive overall policy framework: Economic, education, tax and other
policy domains must support the technology-driven development path for which the centres
stand.
14
Appendix A
Additional important literature and information
15
1. Literature
Balogh, T., Hol állunk Európában? (The current position of Hungarian and European RD)
in: Magyar Tudomány No. 3, 2002.
Galasi, P., Varga, J., Does Private and Cost-Priced Higher Education Produce Poor Quality?
Budapest Working Papers on the Labour Market, No. 1. Institute of Economics,
Hungarian Academy of Sciences and Department of Human Resources, Budapest
University of Economics, Budapest, 2002.
GKM-MTESZ, Egy lépés a tudásalapú gazdaság felé. Üzleti innovációs modellek az
egyetem-vállalat kapcsolatrendszerében (One step toward knowledge based economy.
Business innovation models in university-industry relationships.) Conference
Proceedings volume, 7 December, 2004.
HCSO Kutatás és fejlesztés..., Kutatás és fejlesztés a felsőoktatásban (Research and
Development in the Higher Education) in Magyar Felsőoktatás Plusz, No. 9, 1998
Hrubos, I., The managerial university, ISC Sentinel vol. 11. No. 1, 2002.
Inzelt, A., The evolution of University-Industry-Government relationships during transition,
Research Policy, Vol. 33. Issue 6-7, 2004, pp. 975-995.
Inzelt, A., Restructuring and Financing R
D: New Partnerships, in (eds. Varga, A. and
Szerb, L.) Innovation, Entrepreneurship, Regions and Economic Development:
International Experiences and Hungarian Challenges, University of cs, Hungary,
Pécs, 2003, pp. 27-50.
Lippényi, T., A regionális innovációs rendszer kialakulása (The creation of regional
innovation systems), Working Paper available on www.nkth.gov.hu, 2004.
Nikodémus, A., A technológia intenzív kis- és középvállalkozások innováció ösztönzése
(Innovation incentives for technology oriented SMEs), in GKM-MTESZ Egy lépés a
tudásalapú gazdaság felé. Üzleti innovációs modellek az egyetem-vállalat
kapcsolatrendszerében (One step toward knowledge based economy. Business
innovation models in university-industry relationships.) Conference Proceedings
volume, 2004, pp. 3-20.
Patkós, A., Excellence and Social Relevance in Hungarian Higher Education, in Technology
Transfer: from Invention to Innovation (eds. Inzelt and Hilton), Kluwer Academic
Publishers, 1998.
Tamás, P., Az innovációs törvény előszítéséről és csomópontjairól, (About the preparation
and nodal points of the innovation law), Working Paper available on www.nkth.gov.hu,
2003.
Tarrósy, I. (ed.), Higher Education in Hungary - Heading for the Third Millennium, Ministry
of Education, Budapest, 2002.
2. Internet sources
15
For basic information already quoted, please refer to the country report for Hungary in this study.
15
www.nkth.gov.hu NKTH
www.kutatas.hu KPI
www.ejjt.bme.hu Advanced Vehicles And Vehicle Control Knowledge Centre
www.szjt.hu Szentágothai Knowledge Centre (Password required)
www.it2.bme.hu Információtechnológiai Innovációs és Tudásközpont, (IT) 2
3. Documents
2003 Act No XC. of 2003 on Research and Technological Innovation Fund
2005 Act CXXXIX of 2005 on Research and Development and Technological
Innovation (short name: Hungarian Innovation Act)
1993 ACT LXXX of 1993 on Higher Education
2005 Law on Higher Education
Different documents of the Szentágothai Knowledge Centre
2004 d) Research and development in Hungary 2003-2004 (Working Paper available
on http://www.nkth.gov.hu/main.php?folderID=466&articleID=3653&
ctag=articlelist&iid=1
GKM 2003 Technological development and Innovation Programme, 2003, April
16
Appendix B
Szentágothai Knowledge Centre (SzKC) as an example
for a successful regional initiative
This Centre was one of the winners of the first call. It was established in 2004 by three
scientific organisations, one large and four small Private Sector enterprises. The founding
organizations had collaborated previously to re-channel and broaden their research. Their
shared objective in the fall of 2003 was to fundamentally transform the university’s research
approach from an overly academic and publication-oriented attitude towards a seamless
research and innovation chain which takes scientific results directly to the various forms of
commercial utilisation.
In the spring of 2004, the participants signed a Letter of Intent to form a Consortium and
initiated first steps for the establishment of an innovation centre and scientific park at an
international standard - the BIMIP (Bio-Info-Medical Innovation Park). In July 2004, the
president of the Semmelweis University Council, the leading organisation of the consortium,
initiated an amendment of the University Constitution, allocating 0.5% of the total university
budget to the transformation of the R&D process. At the same time, plan emerged to establish
a Technology Transfer Office as an independent business entity owned by the university. It
would be responsible for the commercialisation of the university’s intellectual potential.
But this strategic plan was jeopardised by a shortage of financial resources. The new
Regional University Knowledge Centre programme was launched just in time to prevent
stagnation of the ambitious project.
The founding members of the consortium beside the host, Semmelweis University were:
The Information Technology (IT) Faculty of Pázmány Péter University from the same
region. This young faculty (launched in 2001) has a high competency in IT research
and education and has established itself as a recognised actor in the field of natural and
artificial recognition and sensing in conjunction with neurosciences and introductory
physiological knowledge. The IT faculty operates the Jedlik R&D Laboratory. Its
operations are supported by four academic institutions (SZTAKI, KOKI, MFA, and
PKI).
Another scientific founding member, MTA Experimental Medical Science Research
Institute (MTA KOKI) is the exclusive medical-biological research site in Hungary. Its
main activity consists of multidisciplinary neuroscience research.
Hungary’s enterprise with the highest rate of R&D spending (8% of revenues), the
pharmaceutical company Richter Gedeon SHC is among the initiators of the Centre and
a founding member. The company’s own R&D organization works with a staff of over
700 in drug development.
Four small companies are also among the founders:
KPS Biotechnology Ltd. (established in 2003) is the first bio-technological spin-off
enterprise connected to the Semmelweis University. It obtained a ‘start-up state
grant for developing gene-therapy and cell-therapy technologies.
Analogic Computers Ltd. (established in 2000) is a spin-off company of the
Analogic and Neural Laboratory of the MTA-SZTAKI (Hungarian Academy of
Sciences IT and Automation). This laboratorys internationally recognised
17
scientists and research & development engineering group have been active in
Cellular Network research and development in the past ten years.
As an SME, MorphoLogic Ltd. (established in 1991) has had already considerable
commercial success, for example with its spell-checking program integrated in the
Microsoft Office software. The company is exclusively active in computer-based
linguistic research (speech recognition, text reading, mechanic translating
technology and sentence analysing technology).
3DHISTECH Ltd (established in 1992) had reoriented its core activity from trading
to medical device development in 1996. The company developed an automatic
object-slide digitalising system and a related program pack consisting of a
pathologic database management system, object-slide digitalising software, a virtual
microscope program pack and tele-consulting programs.
Besides the consortium members, several other enterprises supported the development of
the centre and participate in the 4- and 10-year strategic concepts worked out by the
consortium. These include four businesses enterprises (Philips Hungary Ltd Medical
Department, IBM Hungary Ltd Life Sciences Department, Proactive Management
Consulting, PMC 2002 Ltd., RÉV 8 /Futureal (Corvin-Szigony) Ingatlanfejlesztő SHCo.),
three academic institutes (MTA – SZTAKI, National Nerve Surgery Scientific Institute,
Gottsegen National Cardiology Institute) and the Budapest Local Government of District #8.
The aims of the Consortium were:
1. to transform the university’s research activity fundamentally. The most important
element is a new vision of a university research process that adopts a seamless
innovation chain resulting in various forms of commercial utilisation of research results
(including patent, licences, royalty, spin-off and start-up);
2. to identify synergies in relevant scientific fields and to stimulate a multidisciplinary
research approach leading to innovative novel products and services;
3. to rapidly found and build the Technology Transfer Office at the university leading the
consortium;
4. to develop a ‘core facilityentity; and
5. to invest massively in the necessary infrastructure and in the incubator in order to host
spin-off and start-up companies on an international standard.
An important underlying objective was the rapid change of the traditional, academic
attitude towards business-oriented thinking. For this purpose, a strong emphasis was put on
education and on student involvement in research and development to develop their
professional, industrial and international skills. This included a Ph.D. course in industrial
innovation and innovation management, the transfer of practical experiences and international
best practice” knowledge by recognised industry experts, founders and managers of
successful start-up and spin-off companies and other support for career and professional
development.
The centre’s activities focus on interdisciplinary research at the interface between
biological and IT sciences at the forefront of scientific progress. In this area, the SzKC has 5
coherent programs focusing on drug development, individual genetic medication therapies,
exploration of predictive genetic patterns for the prevention of cancer and diseases of
18
civilisation and screening of such diseases, creation of diagnostic methods and instruments
and information processes encompassing the therapy process, and a broader industrial
introduction of info-bionic instruments and bionic prostheses. Targeted R&D activities focus
on projects with a high application potential which utilise synergies between consortium
partners. This provides also a further impetus for co-operation with industry experts,
postdoctoral researchers, Ph.D. students and university researchers in R&D projects organised
by the SzKC.
Co-operation is based on joint research & development and innovation activities involving
the regional Public and Private Sector actors. This collaborative research is supported by the
university infrastructure, which is extended through investments which are enabled by grants
from the Regional University Knowledge Centre programme and by contributions of the
consortium partners. Beyond collaborative research, other approaches gain importance for
bridging the academic sector with the business sector, e.g. licence sales, royalty contracts,
start-up and spin-off activities.
Another challenge for the development of the centre is its geographical dispersion. Today,
it is spread out over several locations without a ‘common roof’ and a modern R&D
infrastructure which ensures the necessary concentration and integration of resources and
intellectual potential. As a prerequisite for participating in international R&D networks, EU-
sponsored research programmes, etc., the centre needs a state-of-the-art infrastructure at
international standards. However, this fifth aim of the centre is not supported by the Pázmány
Péter programme, because infrastructure investments are not compatible with its principles. A
possible solution for this problem could come from synergies with another governmental
program, the Regional Operative Program of Central Hungary (ROPCH), which focuses on
support for SMEs to develop the region’s knowledge base. Another possible synergy could b
with the city restoration program (Corvin-Szigony Project) which would allow significant
development of physical infrastructure to offer a common roof in a 21st century research
building for various activities of the knowledge centre. The presence of such supporting
measures can contribute to the success of the centre concept.
In its first operational year 2005, the SzKC has prepared the foundations for its efficient
operation. Methods and mechanisms for collaborative research and a project-oriented
operational framework were defined and implemented
16
. This includes criteria for monitoring
and performance evaluation of researchers and programmes. Evaluations take place regularly
in defined time periods, for example at project milestones or before significant career steps.
Project managers are responsible for the performance of their projects.
The Centre launched 3 new Ph.D. courses for medical and IT students on industrial property rights, on
science and project management and on national and international bidding systems. 0 graduate
students, 8 PhD students and 25 young researchers were involved in the numerous research activities of
the centre. In the course of these activities, an international project was launched, five articles were
published in international journals, and 15 new research jobs were created.
16
Resulting for example in two publications Regulation of Intellectual Property and Handbook for
Operations
... If the local ecology is not rich enough, internationalisation reshapes the university-industry relationship. x (Inzelt 2004, Inzelt 2008a, Kállay and Lengyel 2008, Inzelt and Csonka 2008 Companies build especially close relationships with certain universities, and the academic excellence of universities and public research laboratories attract the R&D departments of large firms. The attractiveness of a university to external actors depends on many factors such as the university's research potential, the way in which the university is equipped to develop knowledge jointly with companies and the capabilities for technology transfer offices. ...
Article
Although the impact of open innovation on a global scale on the collaboration between universities and foreign industry is clearly important, empirical evidence from the field is lacking. This chapter investigates the collaboration between Hungarian universities and foreign companies in research and development. The chapter attempts to provide a relevant picture of the research-related linkages of Hungarian universities and foreign companies by employing secondary data processed from various data-banks. The analysis suggests that foreign direct investment and foreign companies play major roles in the internationalisation of research during this second decade of the transition process. Assessing the research and technology products which have originated in university-industry collaboration is no easy task. According to experimental measurements and pilot data-bank, there were more joint publications involving foreign than domestic companies, and the citation value per publication was significantly higher with the former. Data-bank also show that developments in new technology in terms of patent figures rarely involved university-owned or co-owned inventions, although there is some evidence there are more patents which are university-related than owned. Domestic invention and the foreign ownership of patents represent one more sign of Hungarian involvement in global innovation in the development of new technologies.
... The Law on the Academy, however, neither supports nor hinders their establishment, but the limited opportunities result in organisations being trapped in a less-than-stable form within scientific organisations-and in lost benefits for both semi-entrepreneurs and scientific organisations. 13 This phenomenon is not unique in the world; it was also the situation in Hungary until the mid-2000s-before, that is the enactment of the relevant law on HEIs and Academy (Inzelt 2008). ...
Article
Full-text available
In the age of Open Innovation, it is vital for a country in the lower middle-income bracket to free itself from those constraints which seriously weaken the links between science and industry. A descriptive analysis of these linkages in a post-Soviet economy—Armenia—sheds some light on developments in policy-making which reinforce the interests of the private sector in the academic research and development (R&D) sphere. However, the way of thinking is still predominantly the ‘science-push’ model—which is far removed from the (horizontal) Triple Helix concept. According to empirical analysis, the scarcity of innovative companies is a serious handicap for industry-science collaboration and if the private sector has little demand for knowledge or science, then the innovation system cannot be effective. Very few higher education institutions (HEIs) or research institutes have devoted attention to the management of technology transfer, including necessary human resources. Human capacity problems, outdated infrastructure and an ageing workforce are significant barriers in scientific organisations. The autonomy of scientific organisations is an important asset which only half-exists in Armenia. On the escape route from a command economy, there are two potential traps on the way of autonomy: one occurs when the state overarches legal autonomy and creates a semi-autonomous situation; the other arises when the state is reluctant to regulate the framework for autonomous scientific organisations. Both exist in Armenia.
Article
A kutatás-fejlesztés és innováció hálózatosodása mára nyilvánvalóvá vált az evolucionista közgazdasági szakirodalom alapján. Magyarországon e folyamat lassabban és kisebb mértéket ért el, mint amit a szakirodalom alapján várhatnánk, nem függetlenül a kutatás-fejlesztési és innovációs (KFI) környezet általános gyengeségeitől. A kutatás hazai KFI-hálózatok vizsgálatával arra keresi a választ, hogyan épülnek fel és működnek a hazai KFI-hálózatok, milyen szerepet játszanak a partnervállalkozások képességeinek fejlesztésében? A kutatás két hazai, autóipari hálózat jellegzetességeit tárja fel, amelyek részt vesznek a regionális egyetemi tudásközpontokat támogató programban is. Noha a támogatás miatt a hálózat központi szereplői elvileg hasonló működési kereteket dolgoztak ki, a hálózatok szerkezete a gyakorlatban néhány fontos eltérést mutat. E különbségeknél azonban fontosabbak az azonosságok, amelyek a központi szereplők pozitív helyzetét és tevékenységét erősítik meg, szemben a hálózat peremén lévők korlátozottabb képességeivel és lehetőségeivel. A vizsgált hálózatoknak azonban így is nagyon nagy érdeme, hogy hozzájárulnak ahhoz a tanulási folyamathoz, amelynek során a hazai vállalkozások új tudást és új képességeket sajátíthatnak el – szakmai téren és az együttműködésekkel kapcsolatban is –, valamint olyan bizalmi viszonyokat alakíthatnak ki, amelyek hosszabb távú sikerességüket is megalapozhatja.
Article
Full-text available
Since the beginning of the transition, Hungarian higher education has been undergoing continuous transformation. The number of students in higher education more than doubled, and this was accompanied by the appearance of newly founded church-run and private higher education institutions and newly established cost-priced places. The paper focuses on the potential negative effects private and cost-priced higher education might have on the quality of the education and students by making use of labour market success indicators (wages and labour market status) with the help of multivariate estimation techniques. A unique data set, the Second Fid‚v Survey, is used which provides information about the September 2000 labour market situation of persons graduated from higher education in 1999. The results suggest that education at cost-priced, state funded places and private higher education institutions provides essentially the same level of knowledge or produces the same educational quality as measured by wages. No negative effect has been detected as for the labour market status of exstudents. Students from cost-priced places and private institutions experience the same unemployment probability, whereas the overall employment probability of students graduated from cost-priced places is higher than that of persons studied at state-funded places. One can conclude that although the opportunity of establishing more and more cost-priced places might have been advantageous for higher education institutions so as to increase their revenues, they have shown some selfrestraint in this respect, and there is no sign that the increase in costpriced places has led to lower quality workers.
Chapter
Higher Education in Hungary has gone through essential transformations during the period since the change of the political system has been started. The number of students has almost doubled, while the number of teachers/researchers employed in this sphere has suffered a 15% reduction. This decrease, however, was much milder than in other institutions of the R&D sphere, therefore the part of higher education in the human resources of research and development has increased from 41,2% in 1989 to 59,8% in 1996 (see Table 1). The teaching load of the staff increased substantially. This circumstance might explain, why the number of the teachers having PhD degree grows somewhat slowly relative to the non-educational R&D institutions. In any event, the fact that 69,5% of the researchers with PhD or equivalent degrees has been working in the sphere of higher education in 1996, clearly demonstrates the importance of these institutions for the future of research, development and experimental production in Hungary.
Article
This paper deals with the transformation of relationships between business and universities, as reflected in government programmes and in the innovation activities of firms, in a transition economy, Hungary.The paper examines how government facilitates partnership between university and industry and how companies relate to universities. Its empirical basis is four pilot innovation surveys, together with research and development statistics. Employing innovation surveys in an investigation of university-business collaboration allows us to identify how strong a factor is the influence of universities in a given system.The new government programmes tend to encourage closer links between public sector research and private sector expectations. Casual observations have shown that an innovation network can be created and exist if business firms are hungry for innovation. Hungarian business which is barely innovative or which is mainly involved in moderate innovation is still able to create limited research tasks—mainly in experimental development and design, in trials and in the tooling-up process. Government programmes are moving in the right direction when they promote interaction in a national system of innovation. However, such interaction is still limited in the move towards a knowledge- or learning-based economy.
Higher Education in Hungary -Heading for the Third Millennium, Ministry of Education
  • I Tarrósy
Tarrósy, I. (ed.), Higher Education in Hungary -Heading for the Third Millennium, Ministry of Education, Budapest, 2002.
Kutatás és fejlesztés a felsőoktatásban (Research and Development in the Higher Education) in Magyar Felsőoktatás Plusz
  • . Hcso Kutatás És Fejlesztés
HCSO Kutatás és fejlesztés..., Kutatás és fejlesztés a felsőoktatásban (Research and Development in the Higher Education) in Magyar Felsőoktatás Plusz, No. 9, 1998
Restructuring and Financing RD: New Partnerships, in (eds. Varga, A. and Szerb, L.) Innovation, Entrepreneurship, Regions and Economic Development: International Experiences and Hungarian Challenges
  • A Inzelt
Inzelt, A., Restructuring and Financing RD: New Partnerships, in (eds. Varga, A. and Szerb, L.) Innovation, Entrepreneurship, Regions and Economic Development: International Experiences and Hungarian Challenges, University of Pécs, Hungary, Pécs, 2003, pp. 27-50.
Az innovációs törvény előkészítéséről és csomópontjairól, (About the preparation and nodal points of the innovation law
  • P Tamás
Tamás, P., Az innovációs törvény előkészítéséről és csomópontjairól, (About the preparation and nodal points of the innovation law), Working Paper available on www.nkth.gov.hu, 2003.
Hol állunk Európában? (The current position of Hungarian and European RD) in: Magyar Tudomány
  • T Balogh
Balogh, T., Hol állunk Európában? (The current position of Hungarian and European RD) in: Magyar Tudomány No. 3, 2002.
A regionális innovációs rendszer kialakulása (The creation of regional innovation systems
  • T Lippényi
Lippényi, T., A regionális innovációs rendszer kialakulása (The creation of regional innovation systems), Working Paper available on www.nkth.gov.hu, 2004.
The managerial university
  • I Hrubos
Hrubos, I., The managerial university, ISC Sentinel vol. 11. No. 1, 2002.