Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Annamária Inzelt x
  • Primary Language: English x
Clear All

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 Human capacity problems, outdated infrastructure and an ageing workforce are significant barriers in scientific organisations.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.

JEL Classification: 03; 05

In: Triple Helix

This study offers a contribution to our existing knowledge of the impacts of Hungarian social science and humanities PhDs on the graduates themselves and on their own personal and social environments. We employ new empirical findings—gained from an e-survey and from structured interviews—in an attempt to understand and explain impacts and lacks. Empirical analysis allowed us to identify certain differences in terms of usefulness in several respects, such as the specific sector of employment, mobility or the actual level of impact. The PhD education process and the degree itself have a more positive impact on personal satisfaction and on an individual’s career than on the employing organisation. A PhD degree in Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) fields seems to generate more in the way of benefit and impact in the academic field than in non-academic jobs—a difference which reflects on the academic orientation of Hungarian PhD education. All stakeholders need to devote further major efforts into developing the “dual” form of PhD education, so clearly benefitting the whole of the Hungarian economy and society.

In: Triple Helix