University Industry Collaboration and Innovativeness of Firms: Evidence from Kenya Innovation Survey

Main Article Content

Alice Wairimu Gakio Dr. Peter Gakio Kirira Dr. George Ngondi Michuki


Knowledge driven economies have been recognized as the next frontier in developing and developed world. Universities are important institutions in the creation, dissemination, growth and preservation of knowledge from all sectors. This paper aims to provide an analysis and contribute to the discourse on the effect of University – Industry interaction on firms’ innovative performance. Firm innovativeness is hereby measured as the degree of use or implementation of new or significantly improved method of production (Process Innovation); novelty of product (Product Innovation); and implementation of new organizational methods in the firms’ business practices (Organizational Innovation). This study draws from data obtained from the Kenya Innovation Survey (2012) based on the Oslo Manual (which provides the guidelines on the methods and questions to be included in innovation surveys) and it was designed to measure the innovation activity based on a set of core indicators to inform policies that will help the country configure the national system of innovation in order to respond to socio-economic challenges. The analysis of the results is based on a sample of 296 enterprises located in Kenya which were randomly selected by ISIC sector from an entire sampling frame. A total of 194 firms were selected in Nairobi and its environs while 102 firms were selected upcountry as follows: Mombasa (25 firms), Kisumu (25 firms), Eldoret (24 firms) and Nakuru (25 firms). The results of this study indicate that universities are an important knowledge partner for firms to develop innovations. Most of the sectors indicate that the interaction between them and the universities has significant effect on product as well as process innovations.

Article Details

How to Cite
GAKIO, Alice Wairimu; KIRIRA, Dr. Peter Gakio; MICHUKI, Dr. George Ngondi. University Industry Collaboration and Innovativeness of Firms: Evidence from Kenya Innovation Survey. International Journal for Innovation Education and Research, [S.l.], v. 5, n. 3, p. 1-10, mar. 2017. ISSN 2411-2933. Available at: <>. Date accessed: 26 apr. 2017.


Abramovsky, L., Kremp, E., López, A., Schmidt, T., Simpson, H. (2009). Understanding Cooperative innovative activity: evidence from four European countries. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 18(3), 243–265.

Aissaoui, S. (2012). University-industry collaboration and firms’ innovative performance: evidence from French Data. University of Safoie.

Aschoff, B., Schmidt, T. 2008. Empirical evidence on the success of R&D cooperation - Happy together? Review of Industrial Organization 33, 41–62.

Amara, N. and R. Landry. 2005. Sources of Information as Determinants of Novelty of Innovation in Manufacturing Firms: Evidence from the 1999 statistics Canada innovation Survey. Technovation 25, 245-259.

Aschoff, B., Schmidt, T. 2008. Empirical evidence on the success of R&D cooperation - Happy together? Review of Industrial Organization 33, 41–62.

Bayona, C., García, T., Huerta, E. 2002. Collaboration in R&D with universities and Research centers: an empirical study of Spanish firms. R&D Management 32, 321- 341.

Belderbos, R., Carree, M., Diederen, B., Lokshin, B., Veugelers, R. (2004a). Heterogeneity in R&D Co-operation Strategies. International Journal of Industrial Organization 22, 1237-1263.

Belderbos, R., Carree, M., Lokshin, B. (2004b). Cooperative R&D and firm performance. Research Policy 33, 1477-1492.

Gumport, P. & Snydman, S. (2002). The Formal Organization of Knowledge: An Analysis of Academic Structure, Journal of Higher Education 73 (May/June) 3: 375-408.

Hagedoorn, J,L., Albert N., & Nicholas S. (2000). Research partnerships. Research Policy 29, 567– 586.

Harley, S. (2003). Research selectivity and female academics in UK universities: From gentleman’s club and barrack yard to smart macho? Gender & Education, 15(4), 377- 392. Halilem, N. (2010). Inside the Triple Helix: An Integrative Conceptual Framework of the Academic Researcher’s Activities, a Systematic Review. Journal of Research Administration, 41 (3) pp 23 – 50.

Jaffe, A-B., (1989), “Real effect of academic research”, The American Economic Review, vol. 79, pp. 957-969 Klevorick, A.K., Levin, R.C., Nelson, R.R., Winter, S.G.(1995). On the sources and significance of inter - industry differences in technological opportunities. Research Policy 24, 185–205.

Laursen, K., Salter A. (2004). Searching high and low: what types of firms use universities as a source of innovation? Research Policy 33, 1201-1215.

Lööf, H., Broström., A. (2008). Does Knowledge Diffusion Between University and Industry Increase Innovativeness? Journal of Technological transfer 33, 73-90.

March, J.G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organization learning. Organization Science 2, 71–87.

Miotti, L., Sachwald, F. (2003). Co-operative R&D: why and with whom? An integrated framework of analysis. Research Policy 32, 1481-1499.

Mohnen, P., Hoareau, C. (2003). What type of enterprise forges close links with universities and government labs? Evidence from CIS 2. Managerial and Decision Economics 24, 133–146.

Mowery D-C. & Sampat B-N., (2005), Universities in national innovation systems in Fagerberg, J., Mowery D-C. and Nelson R. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford

OECD (1981), “The measurement of scientific and technical activities - Frascati Manual 1980”, Paris : OECD.

Teece, D.J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy 15, 285–305.

Tumuti, D., Wanderi, P., & Langat - Thoruwa, P. (2013). Benefits of University - Industry Partnerships: The case of Kenyatta University and Equity Bank. International Journal of Business and Social Science .

Vega-Jurado, J., Manjarrés-Henríquez,L., Gutiérrez-Gracia, A., & Fernández-de-Lucio, I. (2010).Interaction With Universities And Firm’s Innovative Performance: Evidence From The Spanish Innovation Survey