The learning mechanisms through public procurement for innovation: The case of government‐funded basic research organizations

Abstract

We investigate how the procurement activity of government‐funded science organizations support the performance of the firms involved in their supply chain. Specifically, the aim of the paper is to identify the mechanisms and disentangle the channels driving this process. Our testing ground is the Italian Institute for Nuclear Physics (INFN). We frame our study as a mixed‐methods research project: three distinct but complementary methodologies are employed, which combine quantitative and qualitative evidence. Firstly, econometric and Bayesian Network analyses are performed, using the information collected through an online survey to suppliers as well as balance‐sheet data extracted from online databases. Then, five case studies are investigated in depth, carrying out direct interviews with company staff. Our findings suggest that four types of benefits stem from suppliers’ cooperation with INFN: learning, innovation, market penetration, and networking. These gains represent “intermediate outputs” which in turn impact on suppliers’ socio‐economic performance. We provide evidence that suppliers involved in innovative procurement usually experience the greatest benefits. This is mainly explained by the new technical competencies acquired, which are exploited to develop new products that support company business development and sales. In contrast, reputational gains, leading to the acquisition of new clients, are experienced also by companies involved in regular procurement.

Big science and innovation: gestation lag from procurement to patents for CERN suppliers

“…Fernandes et al (2014) examined the impact of the European Southern Observatory procurement, uncovering technological benefits that they impute to technical challenges posed by collaborations. Castelnovo and Dal Molin (2020) investigated the benefits for 150 suppliers of the Italian Institute of Nuclear Physics (INFN), confirming the existence of technological learning. Several studies analysed the economic impacts of Danish companies' involvement and cooperation with the European Space Agency (see e.g.…”

Technology transfer from procurement relationships in big science contexts

“…Collaboration of both universities and public research centres with industry has gained attention from scholars and policy makers (Cheng et al, 2020; OECD, 2014; Perkmann and Walsh, 2009; Perkmann et al, 2011; Scandura, 2016; Schaeffer et al, 2020; Steimno and Rasmussen, 2018; Tseng et al, 2020). Studies in this field mainly focus on applied research (for example, He et al, 2021) and university–industry collaborations (Bruneel et al, 2010; Freitas et al, 2013; Isaeva et al, 2021; Lee 2000; Mascarenhas et al, 2018; Siegel et al, 2003), while interactions between Big Science centres (BSCs) which carry out curiosity-driven research and suppliers have received less attention (Castelnovo and Dal Molin, 2021; Li-Yin et al, 2022; Rådberg and Löfsten, 2022; Scarrà and Piccaluga, 2020).…”

“…Of the various kinds of collaborations that BSCs establish with suppliers (e.g., contract research, joint research, training, conferences and the creation of physical infrastructures) (D’Este and Patel, 2007), procurement relationships act as a powerful tool to support suppliers’ innovation through the exchange of technology and tacit knowledge (Autio et al, 2004; Bastianin et al, 2022; Bastianin and Del Bo, 2021; Castelnovo and Dal Molin, 2021; Castelnovo et al, 2018; Dal Molin and Previtali, 2019; Florio et al, 2018; Ghisetti, 2017). Such procurement favors technological spillovers and innovation impacts from BSCs to suppliers (Castelnovo and Dal Molin, 2021; Dal Molin and Previtali, 2019; Castelnovo et al, 2018; Autio et al, 2004). BSCs are thus “learning environments'” (Autio et al, 2003) with different characteristics from university contexts, in which such large-scale and capital-intensive RIs are rare (Florio, 2021).…”

“…However, as pointed out by Florio et al (2018), it would be inappropriate to consider the impact of BSCs only in terms of their scientific dimension. In fact, these RIs develop large, capital-intensive and cutting-edge technologies that are often the result of collaborative procurement relationships between them and suppliers, involving technological spillovers and knowledge diffusion (Autio et al, 2003; Bastianin et al, 2022; Bastianin and Del Bo, 2021; Castelnovo and Dal Molin, 2021; Castelnovo et al, 2018; Dal Molin and Previtali, 2019; Florio et al, 2018).…”

“…To explore the characteristics of the procurement relationship between BSCs and suppliers we adapted various dimensions from the literature, looking mainly at a framework used to study interorganizational relationships between research and industry (Bonaccorsi and Piccaluga, 1994), other studies on university–industry relationships (Lee, 2000) and specific cases of BSCs and suppliers (Autio et al, 2003, 2005; Castelnovo and Dal Molin, 2021; Dal Molin and Previtali, 2019). We adopted the following dimensions:1.…”