Reforming National Research Governance: Strategies to Enhance the Adoption of Research Outputs by Industry

Tiurma Melissa Rakhel

doi:10.59141/jiss.v7i8.2525

Authors

Tiurma Melissa Rakhel Badan Riset dan Inovasi Nasional

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59141/jiss.v7i8.2525

Keywords:

research governance, research commercialization, innovation ecosystem, industry collaboration, technology transfer

Abstract

The increasing production of scientific outputs, patents, and technological innovations in Indonesia has not been accompanied by a commensurate level of adoption by the industrial sector. This condition indicated the existence of a research commercialization gap, which can be attributed to fragmented national research governance, limited coordination among stakeholders, and weak alignment between research agendas and industrial needs. This research aims to formulate strategic policy recommendations for reforming national research governance to increase the utilization and commercialization of research outputs by industry. The study employed a descriptive qualitative approach using the USG (Urgency, Seriousness, Growth) method to prioritize key problems and the 5 Whys analysis to identify the root causes of low research adoption. The findings reveal that the main problem lies in the absence of an integrated and binding coordination mechanism among government institutions, research organizations, universities, and industry stakeholders. A comparative analysis of innovation governance practices in South Korea, Japan, China, Australia, and Singapore demonstrates that successful innovation ecosystems are supported by strong institutional coordination, industry-oriented research planning, co-funding mechanisms, and long-term collaboration frameworks. Based on a policy evaluation using William N. Dunn’s criteria, the National Research Programming Mechanism, established through a Joint Steering Committee (JSC) and a National Research, Innovation, and Industry Master Plan, is identified as the most viable policy alternative. This policy reform is expected to strengthen research commercialization pathways, increase industry participation, and shift national research governance from a supply-driven model toward an innovation ecosystem oriented toward industrial needs and economic impact.

References

Agency for Science and Technology of Japan. (n.d.). About AIST. AIST.

Agency for Science, Technology and Research. (n.d.). About ASTAR*. A*STAR Singapore.

Borrás, S., & Edler, J. (2020). The roles of the state in the governance of socio-technical systems’ transformation. Research Policy, 49(5), 103971.

Borrás, S., & Edquist, C. (2019). The design of innovation policy: A knowledge-based approach. Science and Public Policy, 46(2), 191–202.

Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: A review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29(4–5), 627–655.

Braun, D., Benninghoff, M., & Ramuz, R. (2021). The rise of cross-sectoral research funding: How joint programming transforms the governance of science. Science and Public Policy, 48(5), 694–706.

Calof, J., & Smith, J. E. (2021). Integrating foresight into the national innovation system: A comparative analysis. Futures, 128, 102714.

Chinese Academy of Sciences. (n.d.). About CAS. CAS.

Cunningham, J. A., Menter, M., & O’Reilly, P. (2019). The role of co-funding in university-industry collaborations: A configurational analysis. Technovation, 86–87, 1–13.

Dhewanto, W., Prasetio, E. A., & Fauzi, A. M. (2021). The role of innovation consortium in developing countries: A case study of Indonesia. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7(1), 72.

Dunn, W. N. (1999). Public policy analysis: An introduction (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall.

Edler, J., & Fagerberg, J. (2017). Innovation policy: What, why, and how. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(1), 2–23.

Freitas, I. M. B., Marques, R. A., & Silva, E. M. de P. (2020). University-industry collaboration and innovation in emergent economies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 158, 120157.

Georghiou, L., & Keenan, M. (2017). Evaluation of national foresight activities: Assessing rationale, process and impact. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 119, 27–36.

Gulbrandsen, M., & Thune, T. (2017). The effects of non-academic work experience on academic interaction and collaboration. Science and Public Policy, 44(4), 487–500.

Janssen, M. J., Bogers, M., & Chesbrough, H. (2021). A systemic approach to innovation policy: The role of institutional design in promoting open innovation. Research Policy, 50(4), 104206.

Japan Science and Technology Agency. (n.d.). About JST. JST.

Kuhlmann, S., Shapira, P., & Smits, R. (2022). The governance of systemic innovation: A comparative analysis of national research and innovation strategies. Research Policy, 51(4), 104489.

Lee, K., & Yoo, T. (2019). The role of government-funded research institutes in the Korean national innovation system. Science, Technology and Society, 24(2), 247–268.

Liu, X., & Lundin, N. (2022). China’s innovation system: From catching up to moving ahead. Research Policy, 51(4), 104501.

Mazzucato, M., & Penna, C. C. R. (2019). Beyond market failures: The market creating and shaping roles of state investment banks. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 22(4), 299–314.

Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. (n.d.). Industrial science and technology policy. METI Japan.

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (n.d.). Science and technology policy. MEXT Japan.

Ministry of Science and ICT. (n.d.). R&D policy and budget. MSIT Korea.

National Natural Science Foundation of China. (n.d.). About NSFC. NSFC.

National Research Council of Science and Technology. (n.d.). About NST. NST Korea.

Nishimura, J., & Okamuro, H. (2018). Does participation in R&D consortia increase firms’ innovation performance? Evidence from Japanese manufacturing firms. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 27(7), 571–590.

OECD. (2019a). OECD science, technology and innovation outlook 2018: Adapting to technological and societal disruption. OECD Publishing.

OECD. (2019b). University-industry collaboration: New evidence and policy options. OECD Publishing.

O’Kane, C., Mangematin, V., Geoghegan, W., & Fitzgerald, C. (2020). The role of cooperative research centres in bridging science and industry: A case study of the Australian CRC program. Technovation, 94–95, 102102.

Rampersad, G., Quester, P., & Troshani, I. (2018). Managing innovation networks: A conceptual framework. Journal of Business Research, 84, 35–45.

RIKEN. (n.d.). About RIKEN. RIKEN Japan.

Scandura, A. (2019). The role of R&D consortia in the innovation process: A longitudinal analysis of the effects of collaborative research on firm innovation performance. Industry and Innovation, 26(5), 509–534.

Siegel, D. S., Veugelers, R., & Wright, M. (2007). Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: Performance and policy implications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 640–660.

Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Link, A. N. (2003). Commercial knowledge transfers from universities to firms: Improving the effectiveness of university–industry collaboration. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14(1), 111–133.

UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2023). How much does your country invest in R&D? UNESCO.

Wong, P. K., Ho, Y. P., & Singh, A. (2020). Singapore as an innovation hub: The role of government policies and institutions. Journal of Southeast Asian Economies, 37(2), 187–205.

World Intellectual Property Organization. (2022–2025). Global innovation index. WIPO.