Search results

This chapter describes the changing nature of Japanese science production. The author explains Japan’s rise to prominence as the country with the second largest number of annual research publications in the world, followed by its subsequent decline to fifth in the world. The chapter highlights implications for Japanese universities of shifts in research policy.

The author examines bibliometric data as well as contextual data from Japan’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology to analyze the contributions of Japanese universities in STEM+ research from 1975 to 2010. The chapter examines changes in higher education funding policies and their relationship to university-based production of STEM+ research articles in recent decades. The chapter also includes brief comparative analyses with selected other countries, including highly productive countries in Asia (China, Korea, and Taiwan), Western Europe (France, Germany, and the United Kingdom), as well as the United States.

Bibliometric data show that Japan’s second-tier research universities contributed to Japan’s rise to the second largest producer of STEM+ scientific research. When these second-tier research universities received less money from the government, their scientific output declined and aggregate national research output declined relative to other countries.

The chapter uses more recent and comprehensive data than other studies of research output of Japanese universities and offers several implications for research policy and higher education funding. Indeed, the chapter argues that second-tier universities are the “unsung heroes” of Japanese science production. The chapter also suggests that Japanese policymakers may need to reconsider their reliance on competitive funding over block grants that sustain research universities.

This study applies D3.js and social network analysis (SNA) to examine the impact of collaboration patterns, research productivity patterns and publication patterns on the Ministry of Education (MOE) evaluation policies across all Management Information Systems (MIS) departments in Taiwan.

This study first retrieved data from the Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan (MOST) website from 1982 to 2015, the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) website, the Web of Science (WOS) website and Google Scholar. Then it applied power-law degree distribution, cumulative distribution function, weighted contribution score, exponential weighted moving average and network centrality score to visualize the MIS collaborations and research patterns.

The analysis concluded that most MIS professors focused primarily on SCIE-/SSCI-/TSSCI-/core indexed journals after 2005. Professors from public universities were drawn to collaboration and publishing in high-quality-based journals, while professors from private universities focused more on quantity-based publications. Female professors, by contrast, have a slightly higher single-authorship publication rate in SCIE-/SSCI-/TSSCI-indexed journals than do male professors. Meanwhile, professors in northern Taiwan emphasized quantity-based journal publications, while a focus on quality was more typical in the south. Furthermore, National Cheng Kung University has the most single-authorship or intrauniversity publications in SCIE-/SSCI-/TSSCI-/core journals, and National Sun Yat-Sen University published more SSCI-indexed articles than SCIE-indexed articles. All of these findings show that there is an explicit relation between MOE evaluation policies and MIS faculty members' collaboration/publication strategies.

The above findings explain how MOE evaluation policies affected MIS faculty members' collaboration and publication strategies in Taiwan, and the authors hope that such findings can constitute a resource for understanding and characterizing networking with MIS departments in Taiwan.

The purpose of this paper is to clarify how university‐industry (U‐I) collaboration differs by technology fields in Japan.

An analysis of the research resource allocation in the Japanese national universities in the Japanese national innovation system is followed by the analysis of U‐I collaboration by technology fields. The fields analyzed are life science, information and communication technology (ICT), environment science, nanotechnology and material science, which have been designated as strategically important fields by the Second Japanese Science and Technology Basic Plan. The analysis was conducted in a quantitative way using government data of R&D expenditure, researchers, patent application, joint research, contract research and university spin‐offs.

Some characteristics of U‐I collaboration have been quantitatively found by technology fields. Though the national universities occupy large R&D expenditure shares in life science and nanotechnology/material science in the Japanese national innovation system, their joint research and contract research are fairly active in environment science as well as in life science and in nanotechnology/material science. For university spin‐offs, the national universities are active in life science and ICT.

This paper quantitatively clarifies U‐I collaboration by technology fields showing relative importance of U‐I collaboration by technology fields. The results provide information input to policy makers when they formulate policies to promote U‐I collaboration by technology fields and to corporate managers when they make U‐I collaboration strategies by technology fields as a part of open innovation strategies.

This paper aims to assess the functions of the National Archives of South Africa regarding universities’ records and archives by comparing the University of the Witwatersrand (Wits) and the University of Venda’s (Univen) implementation of the National Archives and Records Service of South Africa Act, No. 43 of 1996 (NARSSA) provisions 11 and 13, with the view of recommending best practice.

The quantitative research methodology was adopted. The data collection tool was a questionnaire completed by 34 heads of divisions, departments and units from the Wits and Univen, supplemented by a document review. Thus, the study population comprised universities’ heads of divisions, departments and units.

The National Archives of South Africa is not playing a role in providing advice to universities on how to manage their records and archives to fulfil their teaching, learning and research mandate, protect them from litigation and preserve their corporate memory such as records with national and international significance. Most of the respondents were not aware of the NARSSA provision 11 on the custody and preservation of records, and provision 13 on the management of public records. NARSSA lacks provision specifically for the management of university records. NARSSA appears vague about the management of university records, as it does not explain the legal definition of university records.

This is a comparative case study limited to Wits and Univen. The shortcoming of this study is that the author did not provide relevant and detailed information for the article reader to fully understand the functions of the NARSSA provisions 11 and 13 regarding university records and archives at Wits and Univen, respectively.

The study recommends the South Africa legislature to review the NARSSA regarding records and archives’ role in the university. The researcher’s view is that reviewing existing NARSSA provisions 11 and 13 would provide universities with the responsibility of managing some of their national and international records. This might improve the management of records and this, in turn, would enhance the preservation of records.

This paper appears to be the first to review the functions of the National Archives of South Africa regarding the South African university’s records and archives.

The purpose of this chapter is to illustrate the role of higher education establishments in Middle Eastern countries specifically Saudi Arabia. The contributions of higher education establishments are particularly significant in relation to regional and national innovation system, which have been earmarked as engine for growth of the local economy across the region. Our study has chartered the dynamic nature of higher education in the region and their networking capabilities in order to be recognized as key stakeholders of the emerging economy. The study is informed by theoretical dimensions of “open innovation” and how the framework can accommodate the dynamic nature of higher education establishments in order to provide further impetus to ambitious projects such as Vision 2030 in Saudi Arabia. Our study is limited by further empirical evidence but has implication for the region in offering new insights around the evolving conceptualization of entrepreneurial universities and national innovation system.

Saudi Arabia (SA) is amongst the few countries with a significant foreign workforce who are employed in the higher education sector. More specifically, 39% of SA's academic staff members are foreign nationals and 63% of that proportion occupy professorial positions. Drawing from a workforce localisation perspective, the study was framed as an exploration of equity and social justice amongst Saudi nationals and foreign nationals in a university work setting. The authors employ the lens of how human resource development (HRD) opportunities are administered.

Following the choice of an exploratory qualitative study, the authors employed a multi-case study approach where each of the six universities represented a unit of analysis.

The authors found that nationality differences influenced access to HRD opportunities. These differences are reinforced by practices associated with procedural processes, managerial discretion and selective restrictions in accessing HRD opportunities.

The findings have both practical and social implications, specifically for the SA government's strategic vision of developing local human capabilities.

The workforce localisation agenda within the higher education sector has both a compounding effect on local human capital and supports SA's 2030 Vision and human capital target. Nonetheless, perceived inequity and injustice in accessing HRD opportunities by foreign nationals potentially undermine morale, academic quality standards and research performance, which impacts the development of future human capital and the ‘Saudization’ goals.

The universal “promise of entrepreneurship” has gone far beyond the borders of countries where it emerged. Education systems might play an important role in this process by legitimizing entrepreneurship related myths, principles, and social hierarchies. Surprisingly, against the literature on the role of education in producing and allocating human capital, entrepreneurship education development on organizational, national, and global scale is only emerging as a theme of mainstream academic discussions. This paper applies multi-level approach to get insights on what role might higher education have in promoting global “entrepreneurial culture,” with a focus on post-Soviet countries. We analyze supra-national initiatives, national policies, leading universities’ practices, and the actual characteristics of entrepreneurship education programs in these universities. Our results suggest that drivers of entrepreneurship education development in national higher education systems of post-Soviet countries are not only the “concrete” and “technical” institutional factors on the national level, but also the broader cultural environment. Though institutional environment in post-Soviet countries does not always objectively meet high international standards we found many cases when official policy documents state goals related to teaching entrepreneurship in higher education and there are concrete programs devoted to entrepreneurship education sharing largely similar “entrepreneurial” worldviews. We also found that the actual perceptions and strategies of the actors directly involved in entrepreneurship education practices demonstrate much higher similarity than formally declared education policies in the related countries.

Examines the tenth published year of the ITCRR. Runs the whole gamut of textile innovation, research and testing, some of which investigates hitherto untouched aspects. Subjects discussed include cotton fabric processing, asbestos substitutes, textile adjuncts to cardiovascular surgery, wet textile processes, hand evaluation, nanotechnology, thermoplastic composites, robotic ironing, protective clothing (agricultural and industrial), ecological aspects of fibre properties – to name but a few! There would appear to be no limit to the future potential for textile applications.

This chapter explores two comparative longitudinal cases studies involving policy entrepreneurs inside and outside government in Taiwan. From 2003 to 2007, the Ministry of Education (MOE) in Taiwan played the conventional role of policy entrepreneur to initiate the “University Corporation Project.” Through this project, the MOE sought to transform all national universities in Taiwan into independent entities, gaining them more autonomy and increasing their accountability as well. From 2008 to 2014, as a policy entrepreneur outside the government, National Cheng Kung University (NCKU) took the lead and proposed the “University Autonomous Governance Project.” This project sought an alternative solution based on public universities’ needs to improve university autonomy and accountability.

The method undertaken in this study includes document analysis and participants’ observation. First, both policy entrepreneurs adopted the strategy of power sharing, but the effectiveness of the strategy is determined by the interaction between policy entrepreneurs and stakeholders. Moreover, facing a multiple-principals condition in both cases, both policy entrepreneurs should negotiated with or compete with other potential agenda competitors. Those findings will be a detailed roadmap for policy makers in East Asia once they plan to initiate policy entrepreneurship in their countries.