Collaborative research and development (R&D) activities between public universities and industry are of importance for the sustainable development of the innovation ecosystem. However, policymakers especially in developing countries show little knowledge on the issues. In this paper, we analyse the level of university–industry collaboration in Malaysia. We further examine the fundamental conditions that hinder university–industry collaboration despite the government’s initiatives to improve such linkages. We show that the low collaboration is a result of an R&D gap between the entities. While (...) the universities engage in basic and fundamental R&D, the private sectors involved in incremental innovation that requires less R&D investments. The different nature of the industries’ R&D requires closer cooperation between firms namely buyers, suppliers and technical service providers and not the universities. Among others, the lack of an intermediary role, absorptive capacity and collaborative initiative by the industry also contribute to the problem. The study suggests that the collaborative activities can benefit both if deliberate and effective efforts on reducing the R&D mismatch are made between the universities and industry. Likewise, proper institutional arrangements in coordinating these activities are required. This result seems to reflect the nature of many developing countries’ national innovation systems, and therefore, lessons from Malaysia may serve as a good case study. (shrink)

This inclusive cross-cultural study rethinks the nexus between engineering education and context. In so doing the book offers a reflection on contextual boundaries with an overall boundary crossing ambition and juxtaposes important cases of critical participation within engineering education with sophisticated scholarly reflection on both opportunities and discontents. -/- Whether and in what way engineering education is or ought to be contextualized or de-contextualized is an object of heated debate among engineering educators. The uniqueness of this study is that this (...) debate is given comprehensive coverage – presenting both instrumentally inclined as well as radical positions on transforming engineering education. -/- In contextualizing engineering education, this book offers diverse commentary from a range of disciplinary, meta- and interdisciplinary perspectives on how cultural, professional, institutional and educational systems contexts shape histories, structural dynamics, ideologies and challenges as well as new pathways in engineering education. Topics addressed include examining engineering education in countries ranging from India to America, to racial and gender equity in engineering education and incorporating social awareness into the area. -/- Using context as “bridge” this book confronts engineering education head on. Contending engineering ideologies and corresponding views on context are juxtaposed with contending discourses of reform. The uniqueness of the book is that it brings together scholars from the humanities, the social sciences and engineering from Europe – both East and West – with the United States, China, Brazil, India and Australia. (shrink)

Social studies of science and technology are dominated by action and macro approaches. This has led to a neglect of institutions and institutional arrangements at the meso level, which are important, in particular to the student of technology. The transfer of concepts and methods from social studies of science to technology studies has conserved this lack of concern with the meso level. This article suggests a more critical evaluation of this transfer, along with a review of the now popular assumption (...) of a high degree of similarity between science and technology. Two case studies show how meso-level considerations are important to an understanding of the nature of technological innovation and illustrate the lack of similarity between scientific and technological development. (shrink)