Download Prior Results IST RTD Networks

Using Social Networks Methodology
to Evaluate
Research & Development Programs
Franco Malerba
CESPRI
Luigi Bocconi University
&
Nicholas S. Vonortas
Center for International Science and Technology Policy
and Department of Economics
The George Washington University
Joint AEA/CES Meetings
Toronto, Canada
October 27, 2005
PRIOR RESULTS ON IST-RTD
NETWORKS
Prior Results
European IST RTD Networks
The network of research collaborations has:

A self-organizing structure, dominated by
“hubs”, which are also key nodes in National
research networks

A scale-free architecture at the thematic levels
Prior Results
European IST RTD Networks
European research is characterized by “small world”
connectivity
Strong tendency of scientists to cluster around national
communities
Strong tendency to cluster with research disciplines and
within industrial sectors
The funding structure has a strong influence on research
co-operations
Prior Results
European IST RTD Networks
As a result of the new Integrated Projects and Networks
of Excellence:
 The density of links is higher
 The share of participants in the principal component
is higher
 The average path length is lower
 Large firms and research institutes are more dominant
as gate-keepers of collaboration
 Small companies are “crowded out” relative to FP5
Prior Results
European IST RTD Networks
The IST RTD network as a whole has “small world”
characteristics - but this is not true for each and every
one of its programmes
FP6 is more likely than other research collaboration
frameworks to:
 Connect universities and industry
 Connect different research themes
 Include new Member States
 Include key patent-holders
 Include SMEs
CURRENT STUDY ON IST-RTD
NETWORKS
Towards an ERA for IST:
Overall Objectives
Develop and apply a quantitative analytical framework
for the assessment of the characteristics and
performance of networks supported by IST RTD in
FP5 and FP6.
Analyze knowledge and partnership networks in
selected IST RTD domains, concentrating on network
nature, topology, time evolution and effectiveness.
Supplement quantitative information with some
qualitative information, and inter-organizational
networks with inter-personal networks
Towards an ERA for IST:
Evaluation Questions

How do the characteristics of the IST-RTD
partnership and knowledge networks compare with
the characteristics of the global partnership and
knowledge networks of IST-RTD companies and
with the characteristics of the related global
networks?

How well are the companies participating in IST
RTD programs positioned in the global partnership
and knowledge networks?
Towards an ERA for IST:
Evaluation Questions

How effective are IST-RTD networks as
mechanisms for transmitting knowledge?

Are the Integrated Projects (IPs) and the
Networks of Excellence (NoEs) creating
leading “knowledge hubs”?

What makes these “knowledge hubs”
effective?
Towards an ERA for IST:
Evaluation Questions



To what extent does the prominent network status of
certain IST RTD companies of clusters match the EU
technological leadership in certain areas?
Are the global networks of selected “hub” companies
with extensive ICT supply chains represented in the
FP6 IST RTD?
Are the perceived national IST “knowledge hubs”
well integrated into the FP6 network?
IST-RTD
Framework Programme 6
Selection of
IST
technology
domains
Patent
examiners
Matching of IPC
codes with
technological
domains
Field
experts
Matching of SIC
codes with
technological
domains
PARTNERSHIP
NETWORK Ia
EP-CESPRI
patents/citations
KNOWLEDGE
NETWORKS
(Ib, IIb, IIIb)
INNET
alliances
PARTNERSHIP
NETWORKS
(IIa, IIIa)
Towards an ERA for IST:
Network Types

IST-RTD partnership network

IST-RTD knowledge network

Global partnership network of IST-RTD project participants

Global knowledge network of IST-RTD project participants

Global partnership network akin to the E technology units

Global knowledge network akin to the E technology units
Towards an ERA for IST:
Examined Programs
FP6
Thematic Areas
1. Applied IST research
addressing major societal
and economic challenges
2. Communication, computing
and software technologies
3. Components and
micro-systems
Strategic objectives

eSafety of road and air transports

eHealth

Technology-enhanced learning and access to cultural heritage

Towards a global dependability and security framework




Networked business and governments
eInclusion
Applications and Services for the Mobile User and worker
Cross-media content for leisure and entertainment



GRID-based Systems and solving complex problems
Improving Risk management
Broadband for all



Mobile and wireless systems beyond 3G
Networked audiovisual systems and home platforms
Open development platforms for software and services

Embedded systems

Pushing the limits of CMOS and preparing for post-CMOS

Micro and nano-systems

Advanced displays

Optical, opto-electronic, photonic functional components
Towards an ERA for IST:
Examined Programs
FP 5
Key Actions
FP6
Thematic Areas
1. System and services for the citizen
1. Applied IST research
addressing major societal
and economic challenges
2. New method of wok and electronic
commerce
2. Communication,
computing
and software technologies
4. Essential technologies and
infrastructures
3. Components and
micro-systems
TA 1-2-3 FP6
Projects
Not Selected
115
27,3
Selected
307
72,7
Not selected
27%
Selected
73%
TA 1-2-3 FP6
Participants
Not selected
1340
21,8
Selected
4814
78,2
Not selected
22%
Selected
78%
Participants: counted once for every project they have participated in
TA 1-2-3 FP6
By instrument
(projects)
0,5
0,4
0,3
Not Selected
0,2
Selected
0,1
0
CA
CA: Coordination Action
IP: Integrated Project
NoE: Network of Excellence
IP
NoE
SSA
STREP
SSA: Specific Support Project
STREP: Specific Targeted Research Project
TA 1-2-3 FP6
Organization Type
0,35
0,3
0,25
0,2
Not Selected
0,15
Selected
0,1
0,05
0
HE
HE: Higher Education
IND: industry
IND
OTH
REC: Research
OTH: Other
REC
TA 1-2-3 FP6
SMEs and Large Enterprises
Not Selected
Large Company
SME
Selected
Large Company
SME
1032
21.15
260
21.17
3846
78.85
968
78.83
0,8
0,7
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0
Not Selected
Selected
SME
Large
Company
Correspondence between TAs, IPC
and SIC Codes…
Technology Classes: Patents
Class
description
Class
description
1
Electrical engineering
16
Chemical Engineering
2
Audiovisual technology
17
Surface Technology
3
Telecommunications
18
Materials Processing
4
Information Technology
19
Thermal Processes
5
Semiconductors
20
Environmental Technology
6
Optics
21
Machine Tools
7
Control Technology
22
Engines
8
Medical Technology
23
Mechanical Elements
9
Organic Chemistry
24
Handling
10
Polymers
25
Food Processing
11
Pharmaceutics
26
Transport
12
Biotechnology
27
Nuclear Engineering
13
Materials
28
Space Technology
14
Food Chemistry
29
Consumer Goods
15
Basic Materials Chemistry
30
Civil Engineering
FP6 Patents/ Technological Classes
30
25
20
15
10
TA 3
TA 2
5
0
cla
s
s1
ss
a
l
c
TA 1
4
s7
s
10
cla
s
s
13
s
cla
6
s
1
a
l
s
c
9
s
s1
cla
s
22
s
cla
s
5
s2
cla
s
8
s2
cla
s
cla
SIC Codes: Alliances
Class
description
1311 Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas
Plastics Materials, Synthetic Resins, and
2821
Nonvulcanizable Elastomers
Biological Products, Except Diagnostic
2836
Substances
Computer Peripheral Equipment, Not
3577
Elsewhere Classified
3571 Electronic Computers
3651 Household Audio and Video Equipment
3661 Telephone and Telegraph Apparatus
Radio and Television Broadcasting and
3663
Communications Equipment
3674 Semiconductors and Related Devices
3679
Electronic Components, Not Elsewhere
Classified
3714 Motor Vehicle Parts and Accessories
3711 Motor Vehicles and Passenger Car Bodies
4512 Air Transportation, Scheduled
4812 Radiotelephone Communications
4813
Telephone Communications, Except
Radiotelephone
Class
description
4841 Cable and Other Pay Television Services
Communications Services, Not Elsewhere
4899
Classified
4911 Electric Services
Computers and Computer Peripheral
Equipment and Software
Electronic Parts and Equipment, Not
5065
Elsewhere Classified
6794 Patent Owners and Lessors
7372 Prepackaged Software
5045
7375 Information Retrieval Services
7373 Computer Integrated Systems Design
7371 Computer Programming Services
Computer Related Services, Not Elsewhere
Classified
8731 Commercial Physical and Biological Research
Commercial Economic, Sociological, and
8732
Educational Research
8742 Management Consulting Services
7379
13
28 11
28 21
35 36
7
35 7
36 71
5
36 1
61
36
6
36 3
74
36
7
37 9
14
37
1
45 1
1
48 2
12
48
1
48 3
4
48 1
99
49
1
50 1
4
50 5
6
67 5
9
73 4
7
73 2
7
73 5
7
73 3
7
73 1
7
87 9
3
87 1
3
87 2
42
FP6 Alliances / Relevant SIC
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
TA1
TA2
TA3
Cliques Vs. Stars
Assumption about the structure of the
affiliation network: clique vs. star
Assumption about the role played by prime contractor:
no specific role for participants - clique hp.
vs.
A participant serves as the coordinating agent - star hp.
PC
PC
Clique vs. Star

Both assumptions: rather strong and somewhat
arbitrary

Equally reasonable, they represent the upper
and lower limits
So we explore the main topological
characteristics of the network under both
assumptions
Indicative Analysis: 3 subjects
Subject 1: Identifying HUBs and
their relative roles
Hub definition
• An organization is a hub in a specific
network if it has many links and/or if it
connects the otherwise unconnected parts of
the network
The above translates into high degree
centrality and/or high betweeness centrality
STYLIZED 3A PARTNERSHIP
NETWORK
This is a stylized
model of Network
3a (Alliances)
Give intuition
behind the concept
of a Partnership Hub
A Hub is defined as a
node exhibiting high
value of betweenness
and degree
The node labelled “HUB 3a” is the designated Hub for this
network.
STYLIZED 3A PARTNERSHIP
NETWORK
Yellow nodes
indicate
organizations
participanting in
Framework
Programme.
STYLIZED 1A PARTNERSHIP
NETWORK
This is a stylized
model of Network
1a (FP
Participants)
The blue node is
the 3a network
relevant Hub
The yellow node represents the relevant Hub in the stylized 1a
partnership network
Links Between 1a Hubs and 3a Hubs
Blue nodes are the
3a network Hubs
Yellow nodes
represent the
1a network Hubs
1a Hubs are strongly
inter-connected and
they are also connected
with 3a Hubs
3a Hubs are NOT hubs in network 1a, BUT are gateways that
connect FP organizations to the global network
1A FP6 (TA1) PARTNERSHIP
NETWORK
Blue nodes are the
3a network Hubs
Red nodes are other
3a network
participants within
distance 1 from 3a
Hubs
Yellow nodes
represent 1a
network Hubs
1A FP6 (TA1) PARTNERSHIP
NETWORK (no IP)
This is the TA1
Network without the
links related to IP
The network is
substantially different,
with many isolated
nodes and diminished
complexity
Subject 2: Effectiveness of
KNOWLEDGE HUBs
Effectiveness of Knowledge Hubs
Hubs as knowledge depositories
• Number of Patents
• Number of Citations Received
• Number of Highly Cited Patents
Hubs at the cross-road of information and
ideas
• Degree Centrality
• Betweeness Centrality
Effectiveness of Knowledge Hubs:
Hypothetical Example
KH IIIa
degree IIIb
KH Ia
OTHER Ia
0,12
0,1
0,08
0,06
highly cited
patent
0,04
betweenness
IIIb
0,02
0
patent
citation/patent
Effectiveness of Knowledge Hubs:
Hypothetical Example
• closely matches that of global KHs in terms of three variables
(number of patents, network centralities);
• lags seriously behind in terms of the remaining two variables
that approximate the quality and the importance of their patent
portfolios;
the FP KHs seem to perform better in diffusing knowledge
through their centrality roles in the networks than in creating
powerful and influential portfolios of new ideas.
Subject 3: Leadership
Leadership
Two different definitions of Leadership:
• Technology Leadership: the role played by each
organisation in the innovative process
• Market leadership: the share of revenues in ICT
among EU25
Technology Leadership
Technology leadership is defined in terms of two
concepts:
• Niche overlap concerns the crowdedness of the
technological area explored by organisations. Its
measure is based on similarity of technological
antecedents (i.e. co-citation).
• Prestige deriving from the direct technological ties
between actors (i.e. direct patent citations)
Technology Leadership
Four different kinds of actors:
• Technology Leaders: a key source of knowledge
spillovers for many other organizations in the industry.
Their research activity is focused on the exploitation of
opportunities in relatively mature and therefore highly
crowded fields
• Technology Brokers: sources of knowledge in
relatively new and unexplored fields
Technology Leadership
• Technology Followers: they do not contribute
significant spillovers to other organizations and engage
into relatively mature and crowded technological
subfields
• Isolate Organisations: they do not receive direct
citations from many other organizations and are
exploring relatively untapped technological subfields.
Technology Leadership:
Hypothetical Example
0.1
0.08
Technology leaders
0.06
0.04
Prestige
0.02
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
-0.02
-0.04
EU-Non FP
EU-FP KH
EU-FP Non KH
Global KH
Average prestige
Average alfa
-0.06
Technology isolates
-0.08
-0.1
Crowding
10
Technology Leadership:
Hypothetical Example
This analysis might suggest:
• The number of identified leaders and brokers that
participate in the Framework Programme
• The number (and identity) of those who not only
participate but they can also be characterized as
Partnership HUBs in the Framework Programme.