跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(100.26.176.111) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/07/16 14:31
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:陳柔蓁
研究生(外文):Jou-chen Chen
論文名稱:國家競爭力與產學合作:以芬蘭、瑞典、丹麥為例
論文名稱(外文):A Study of National Competitiveness and University-Industry Collaboration on Finland, Sweden and Denmark
指導教授:戴曉霞戴曉霞引用關係
指導教授(外文):Hsiou-Hsia Tai
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立交通大學
系所名稱:教育研究所
學門:教育學門
學類:綜合教育學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2008
畢業學年度:96
語文別:中文
論文頁數:125
中文關鍵詞:國家競爭力產學合作國家創新系統
外文關鍵詞:national competitivenessuniversity-industry collaborationnational innovation systems
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:11
  • 點閱點閱:2708
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:713
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:7
全球化與知識經濟促使全球經濟模式逐漸由資源密集型產業轉變為知識密集型產業。面對此一轉變,大學不僅要扮演知識傳遞者與創造者的角色,更需為國家創新系統中一重要的社會創新研發單位,擔負起增進國家創新能量之責,日漸與產業在教學、研究與服務上有密切的合作與互動。近年如芬蘭、瑞典和丹麥等蕞爾小國透過大量投資教育與創新研發,整合國家內外部資源與人力來建構其國家創新系統,因而在WEF和IMD等國際評比組織中獲得良好之國家競爭力排名。本研究係利用理論分析法、文件分析法和歷史研究法,從國家競爭力的角度探討芬蘭、瑞典與丹麥三國之產學合作,分析北歐三國產學合作模式之發展與其國家競爭力之關係,並綜合研究結果為我國以產學合作提升國家競爭力提出具體可行之建議與參考。

研究結果顯示北歐三國乃是以開放的態度,在政府政策的支持下加強產學合作之基礎建設,建立自由創新的環境,提供增進產學合作的相關中介機構,鼓勵大學與產業在教學、研究與服務等方面進行交流與合作,強化知識的創新、擴散、流通,藉以增強其國家創新能量。然卻因產學合作產出和應用之不可計量性、研究上的限制與教育難以在短時間看到成效等原因,而無法說明產學合作與國家競爭力之間的關係。我國若欲參考芬蘭、瑞典和丹麥三國以產學合作來提升國家競爭力,本研究建議應先建立國家整體發展願景,訂定明確支援產學合作之相關政策和中介機構,並因應產業的需求進行大學課程的統整。此外,後續研究則可加強產學合作與國家競爭之相關中介變項和我國產學合作之情境脈絡之探討,以俾進一步了解產學合作對我國國家競爭力促進之可能性。
The thesis primarily concentrates on national competitiveness and university-industry collaboration, with studies of Finland, Sweden and Denmark. As the coming of globalization and knowledge-based economy, universities not only have to play an important role in creating and delivering knowledge, but also a R&D institution in National Innovation Systems. Therefore, universities have interacted with industry more frequently in the aspects of teaching, research and service. Recently, some small countries like Finland, Sweden and Denmark have built up their National Innovation Systems with greater investment in education and R&D, together with resource integration to improve their position in the WEF and IMD national competitiveness rankings. The thesis employs qualitative method to analyze the development of University-Industry collaboration in Finland, Sweden and Denmark, the relationship between the University-Industry collaboration in the three Nordic countries, and the consequent changes in their national competitiveness rankings to provide useful suggestions to Taiwan's related policies.

The findings of this study reassert that the open attitude and support of relevant policies from Finland, Sweden and Denmark did help to construct University-Industry collaboration infrastructure and innovative environment, provide University-Industry collaboration intermediaries, and encourage universities to cooperate with industry in teaching, research and service. Thus, the three Nordic countries improved production, diffusion and interaction of knowledge, and enhanced their National Innovation Systems. Due to research limitations, the causal relationships between University-Industry collaboration and national competitiveness ware not fully explored. The research suggests that Taiwan should enlarge its country visions, conduct University-industry collaboration policy and intermediaries, and offer interdisciplinary education. Effects brought by intervening variable on University-Industry collaboration and national competitiveness remain for future exploration. Future research may hopefully discuss how to enhance national competitiveness by university-industry collaboration in Taiwan.
第一章 緒論.............................................1
第一節 研究問題與背景..................................1
第二節 研究動機與目的..................................6
第三節 研究方法與研究步驟.............................11
第四節 名詞釋義.......................................14
第五節 研究範圍與限制.................................15

第二章 國家競爭力與產業、大學之關係....................17
第一節 國家競爭力.....................................17
第二節 國家競爭力與產業發展...........................25
第三節 國家競爭力與大學之關係.........................35

第三章 國家競爭力與產學合作............................45
第一節 產業與大學之合作...............................45
第二節 國家競爭力與產學合作之關係.....................61

第四章 北歐三國之國家競爭力與產學合作.................69
第一節 北歐三國產業發展...............................69
第二節 芬蘭產學合作...................................83
第三節 瑞典產學合作...................................86
第四節 丹麥產學合作...................................91
第五節 北歐三國產學合作對國家競爭力之貢獻.............96

第五章 結論與建議 ......................................105
第一節 結論..........................................105
第二節 建議..........................................109

參考文獻 111
中文部分
大專校院產學合作實施辦法(2006)。
大學法(2005)。
工業技術研究院產業經濟與趨勢研究中心、資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心(2007)。2015台灣產業發展願景與策略 v1.0。檢索日期:2008.05.06。取自http://www.taiwan2015.org/files/Download/20076115338.pdf
中華經濟研究院(2001)。經濟部九十年度主要國家經貿政策制度與法令之調查研究:主要國家發展知識經濟與知識產業之政策研究。台北市:經濟部。
中華經濟研究院(2002)。經濟部九十一年度主要國家經貿政策制度與法令之調查研究:北歐國家發展科技產業之策略及成效分析。台北市:經濟部。
方元宏(2005)。高等教育趨勢之探索性研究—以促進創意、創新為導向。國立交通大學科技管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,新竹市。
王如哲(2002)。知識經濟與教育。台北市:五南。
王曉輝(2007)。教育決策:國際比較的視野。台北市:高等教育。
司徒達賢(2004)。打造未來領導人:管理教育與大學發展。台北市:天下。
左峻德(1997)。國家競爭力和經濟成長率之互動關係—兼論我國競爭力之評比。台灣經濟研究月刊,20,4,15-21。
行政院研究發展考核委員會編(2004)。運用國家競爭力評比指標強化施政績效管理。台北市:作者。
行政院國家科學委員會(2005)。科學技術統計要覽。台北市:作者。
行政院國家科學委員會(2007)。科學技術統計要覽。台北市:作者。
行政院經濟建設委員會(2001)。新世紀人力發展方案。檢索日期:2007.05.06。取自http://find.cepd.gov.tw/manpower/ManpPlan/Plan.pdf
江雪嬌(2004)。從國家創新系統探討大學推動研發服務業的推動。經濟情勢暨評論,10,3,19-34。
江雪嬌(2005)。從大學知識產業化之觀點探討基礎科學與產業科技之連結。行政院國家科學委員會94 年度自行研究計畫成果報告。台北市:行政院國家科學委員會。
江雪嬌(2006)。從知識產業化之觀點探討大學研發成果之移轉:以美、日及我國大學技術移轉中心為例。經濟情勢暨評論,12,2,42-67。
江雪嬌(2007)。從國家創新系統與智慧資本的觀點探討大學研發投入、產出與運用。行政院國家科學委員會94 年度自行研究計畫成果報告。台北市:行政院國家科學委員會。
羊憶蓉(1994)。教育與國家發展:台灣經驗。台北市:桂冠。
余序江、許志義、陳澤義(1998)。科技管理導論:技術預測與規劃。台北市:五南。
吳清基(1998)。技職教育轉型與發展─提升國家境之力的作法。台北市:師大書苑。
吳榮義、林秀英(2003)。台灣產業科技創新之國際競爭力。發表於「2003產業科技創新:關鍵年代的科技政策與挑戰」國際研討會。台灣經濟研究院、財團法人工業技術研究院、中華經濟研究院主辦。2003.10.30-31。台北:國家圖書館國際會議廳。
李秋緯(2003)。我國產學合作的影響因素之實證研究。國立政治大學科技管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
沈宗瑞(2004,11月)。全球化論述下的高等教育發展。發表於國立新竹師範學院舉辦之「流變•重塑與再現;多元視角下的全球與地方」,新竹市。
周春彥譯(2005)。H. Etzkowitz著。三螺璇:大學、產業、政府三元一體的創新戰略(Triple Helix: A New Model of Innovation)。北京市:東方出版社。
林玉体(1995)。西洋教育史(第十一版)。台北市:文景。
林欣吾、林秀英(2005)。「我國產業科技創新競爭力與產學互動研究計畫」子計畫三:推動大學與產業研發創新接軌之研究。經濟部技術處委託研究計畫(94-EC-17-B-31-R2-0736)。台北市:臺灣經濟研究院。
林炳中、林佳慧(2003)。主要國家研發服務推動之比較與分析。台北市:經濟研究院。
林郁華(2002)。大學與社會的新契約—產學關係的制度變遷。國立清華大學社會學研究所碩士論文,未出版,新竹市。
林海清(2002)。知識管理與教育發展。元照:台北。
邱宣智(2004)。瑞典成人教育系統及其補助方案之研究。國立暨南國際大學比較教育學系博士論文,未出版,南投縣。
姜麗娟(2004)。全球化、知識經濟與教育:重新檢視與省思。台南市:供學。
洪裕宏(2004),學術資本主義與學術人文主義-台灣學術卓越政策的深層省思。當代,203,16-27。
范文昇(2005)。論美國專利法及拜杜法案對生技產業發展之影響―兼論我國專利法及科學技術基本法。私立東吳大學法律學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
原山優子(2003)。日本之產學合作。發表於「2003年產業科技創新∼關鍵年代的政策與挑戰」國際研討會。台灣經濟研究院、財團法人工業技術研究院、中華經濟研究院主辦。2003.10.30-31。台北:國家圖書館國際會議廳。
孫智麗(2000)。國家創新系統:知識經濟體系下創新政策的新思維。亞太經濟合作評論,6,113-123。
孫福全、陳寶明、王文岩編著(2008)。主要發達國家的產學研合作創新:基本經驗及啟示。北京市:經濟管理出版社。
徐作聖(1999a)。國家創新系統與競爭力。台北市:聯經。
徐作聖(1999b)。科技政策與國家創新系統。台北市:華泰。
徐作聖、邱奕嘉、許有耕(2003)。高科技產業策略與競爭。台北市:全華。
徐作聖、張維邦、蔡昕翰(2002)。瑞典大學與資訊科技產業間的產學合作模式。科技發展政策報導,SR9105,327-330。
徐作聖、陳仁帥(2003)。產業分析。台北市:全華。
徐宗林(1991)。西洋教育史。台北市:五南。
耿筠、陳娟娟(2005)。美國大學產學合作合約條款之研究。政大智慧財產評論,3,1,63-90。
袁建中、張建清、邱泰平(2004)。科技管理觀念與案例。台北市:聯經。
袁建中等編著(2003)。二十一世紀資訊科技前瞻專題。台北縣:空中大學。
高一菁(2001)。專訪陳伯璋:迎向新的知識工程—知識經濟與教育改革。教育研究月刊,89,5-8。
高子羽(2004)。Nokia的極地反撲。數位時代,95,86-89。
高希均、石滋宜編(1996)。競爭力手冊。台北市:天下。
馬維揚(2005)。世界各國發展生技聚落的經驗與啟示。行政院國家科學委員會九十四年度科技行政研究發展報告。新竹市:行政院國家科學委員會科學工業園區管理局。
商務部投資事務促進局(2006)。投資瑞典。檢索日期:2008.04.06。取自http://big5.ec.com.cn/gate/big5/fec.mofcom.gov.cn/accessory/200702/ruidian.pdf
國家科學委員會科學技術資料中心編(1998)。產學合作創新與國家競爭力。台北市:作者。
國家科學委員會科學技術資料中心編(1999)。論以全球電子商務提升我國的全球競爭力:1998年IMD全球競爭力報告的分析與啟示。台北市:作者。
張元杰、史欽泰、沈宗毅(2006,12月)。研發國際化的組織與策略:以多國籍企業在台半導體研發中心為例。論文發表於中華民國科技管理學會舉辦之「2006中華民國科技管理年會暨研討會」,新竹市。
康自立(1985)。建教合作原理。台北市:全華。
康來詠(2004)。芬蘭策略性產業之發展方向評析:知識經濟時代的全球化國家產業政策與跨群的產業躍昇模式。經濟情勢暨評論,10,3,75-88。
張芳全(2007)。教育在國家發展的貢獻。台北市:五南。
梁宏、姜波(2002)。歐盟高等教育發展趨勢及其特性。高等理科教育,4,90-94。
許瓊文、劉尚志、蔡千姿、龍仕璋(2005)。科技管理。台北市:智勝。
許麗嬋 (1999)。丹麥民眾高等學校之研究。國立中正大學成人及繼續教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義縣。
連戰(1996)。從「動態競爭」中厚植「國家競爭優勢」—推薦哈佛大學波特教授的重要著作。載於李明軒、邱如美(譯)(1996)。Michael E. Porter(1990)著。國家競爭優勢(上)(The Competitive Advantage of Nations)。台北市:天下。
陳松柏、謝龍發(2001)。產業競爭力衡量之實證研究。競爭力評論,3,13-31。
陳達仁、耿筠(2007)。95年度大專校院產學合作績效評量結果公布。評鑑雙月刊,10,7-15。
郭為藩(2004)。轉變中的大學:傳統、議題與前景。台北市:高等教育。
郭書祥(2004)。乘風破浪的北海小英雄—北歐全力發展生醫產業。生物科技,16,檢索日期:2008.05.30。取自http://www.bioweb.com.tw/feature_content.asp?ISSID=400&chkey1=%A5%CD%C2%E5%B2%A3%B7~&chkey2=%A5_%BC%DA&chkey3=%B7%E7%A8%E5&chkey4=%A4%A6%B3%C1&chkey5=Medicon+Valley
陳智凱(2005)。知識經濟之衡量與國家競爭力分析。正修學報,18,243-264。
陳照雄(2005)。丹麥教育制度:鼓勵創新、奮進與獨立的文化。台北市:心理。
陳照雄(2007)。芬蘭教育制度:培養高品質之國民,建立平等、安全、福利之社會。台北市:心理。
陳精芬(2005)。歐洲國家兒童閱讀活動之探討:以芬蘭、愛爾蘭、英國、瑞典及奧地利為例。淡江大學資訊與圖書館學系碩士論文,未出版,台北縣。
陳慧棻(2007)。台灣政府競爭力之國際評比研究:IMD與WEF報告。國立政治大學公共行政研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
陳聰勝(2002)。人力資源開發運用的理念與實施:提升國家競爭力的策略。台北市:五南。
曾孝明(2004a)。台灣教育的宏觀與微觀。台北市:御書房。
曾孝明(2004b)。台灣產業的失焦與對焦。台北市:御書房。
黃文谷、張文龍(2004)。知識密集產業服務業對國家創新系統發展之影響。經濟情勢暨評論,10,3,1-18。
黃伯威(2001)。丹麥民眾高等學校與台灣社區大學課程之比較研究。國立暨南國際大學比較教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,南投縣。
楊佳翰、徐作聖(2007,3月)。高科技產業專業化策略之模式分析。論文發表於台灣電子商務學會舉辦之「第二屆台灣策略管理研討會」,台北市。
楊國樑、劉漢榆(2005)。知識經濟理論與實證。台北市:五南。
楊國賜(2006a,3月)。新世紀高等教育的分類、定位與功能。論文發表於淡江大學高等教育研究與評鑑中舉辦之「分類、評鑑與品質保證學術研討會」,台北縣。
楊國賜(2006b)。新世紀高等教育政策規劃與改革動向。國立教育資料館教育資料集刊,31,157-179。
經濟部技術處(2004)。2004產業技術白皮書。台北市:財團法人台灣經濟研究院。
經濟部投資業務處(2003)。丹麥投資環境簡介。台北市:經濟部。
經濟部投資業務處(2004)。丹麥投資環境簡介。台北市:經濟部。
經濟部投資業務處(2006)。瑞典投資環境簡介。台北市:經濟部。
經濟部投資業務處(2007a)。丹麥投資環境簡介。台北市:經濟部。
經濟部投資業務處(2007b)。芬蘭投資環境簡介。台北市:經濟部。
詹棟樑(2001)。知識經濟與教育。台北市:師大書苑。
蓋浙生(2002)。教育經營與管理。台北市:師大書苑。
劉之怡(2004)。國家競爭力之排序與分群。國立交通大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,新竹市。
劉聰德、高秋芳、楊蕙琪、林紫妦、羅愛雁、陳君華(2006)。進行系統化標竿各國科技人才政策計畫。行政院國家科學委員會委託計畫成果報告(NSC95-3011-I-492-005)。台北市:財團法人國家實驗研究院科技政策研究與資訊中心。
賴士葆、謝龍發、陳松柏(2005)。科技管理。台北市:華泰。
戴曉霞(2000)。高等教育的大眾化與市場化。臺北市:揚智。
戴曉霞(2005,4月)。學術卓越的追求與世界級大學之特質。發表於高等教育研究與評鑑中心暨教育政策與領導研究所共同舉辦之「大學評鑑、進退場機制與提升國際競爭力」學術研討會, 台北縣。
戴曉霞(2006)。世界一流大學之卓越與創新。台北市:高等教育。
戴曉霞、潘秀櫻(2006)。全球化或區域化?主要地區及國家之外國學生來源分析。教育政策論壇,9,4,21-48。
薛立敏、錢玉蘭(1996)。生活品質與國家競爭力。經濟前瞻,48,60-63。
蘇耿賢(2001)。國家創新系統之動態分析與應用。國立中山大學財務管理學系研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。

英文部分
Ahlbäck, J. (2005). The Finnish national innovation system. Retrieved, May 8, 2008, from http://www.helsinki.fi/euoffice/suomi/tiedotteet/system.pdf.
Aldrich, R. (Ed). (2002). A century of education. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Altbach, P. G. & Forest, J. J. F. (2006). Introduction. In P. G., Altbach & J. J. F., Forest (Eds.), International handbook of higher education (pp.1-4). Netherland: Springer.
AOF & Tekes (2006). FinnSight 2015 - The Outlook for Science, Technology and Society. Retrieved April, 17, 2008, from http://www.tekes.fi/julkaisut/Finnsight_2015_EN.pdf
Arkko, T. (2002). A distance learning network in Finnish Lapland development of an environment for sustainable, effective and individual lifelong learning in continuing engineering education. Industry and Higher Education, 16(5), 321-324.
Barnett, R. (1990). The idea of higher education. Milton Keynes, England: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University.
Bergman, U. M. (2008). Finnish and Swedish business cycles in a global context. International Economics and Economic Policy. Retrieved April, 17, 2008, from http://www.springerlink.com/content/510218m07u153632/?p=45c23509d4d94b2eb05df7d855532c39&pi=1
Beta, F. (2003). Managing technological innovation: competitive advantage from change. NJ: John Wiley.
Bok, D. (2003). Universities in the marketplace: the commercialization of higher education. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University
Boyes, W. & Melvin, M. (2005). Economics. (6th ed.). New York: Houghton Mifflin.
Bradley, H. (1992). Changing social divisions: Class, gender and race. In R. Bocock & K. Thompson (Eds.), Social and Cultural Forms of Modernity (pp.26-44). Oxford: Blackwell.
Browne, K.(1998). An introduction to sociology (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity press.
Business-higher Education Forum [BHEF]. (2008). About us. Retrieved March 21, 2008, from http://www.bhef.com/about/index.asp
Calhoun, C., Light, D., & Keller, S. (1994). Sociology (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Carlsson, B. (2006). Internationalization of innovation systems: A survey of the literature. Research Policy, 35, 56-67.
Carrington, D., Strooper, P. A., Newby, S. & Stevenson, T. (2005). An industry-university collaboration to upgrade software engineering knowledge and skills in industry. The Journal of Systems and Software, 75(1-2), 29-39.
CDIO (2008). Collaborators. Retrieved, May 9, 2008, from http://www.cdio.org/cdio_partners.html
Chakrabarti, A. (2003). Role of universities in the product development process: strategic considerations for the telecommunications industry. In T. Korhonen & A. Ainamo (Eds.), Handbook of Product and Service Development in Communication and Information Technology (pp. 235-254). Boston, MA, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Chakrabarti, A. & Rice, M. (2004). Changing roles of universities in developing entrepreneurial regions: The case of Finland and the US. In: A. Soenke (Ed.), Cross-functional Innovation Management. Perspectives from different disciplines (pp. 453-468). Wiesbaden, Germany, Gabler Verlag.
CIA (2008). The world factbook. Retrieved, February 19, 2008, from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html
Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: organizational pathways of transformation. New York: Pergamon.
Commission on Oil Independence. (2006). Making Sweden an OIL-FREE Society. Retrieved, April 30, 2008, from http://www.sweden.gov.se/content/1/c6/06/70/96/7f04f437.pdf
Connell, W. (1980). A history of education in the twentieth century world. New York: Teachers College Press.
Danish Agency for Science Technology and Innovation [FIST]. (2008). The Industrial PhD - An effective tool for innovation and knowledge sharing. Retrieved, May 28, 2008, from http://fi.dk/site/english/publications/publications-2007/the-industrial-phd---an-effective-tool-for-innovation-and-kn/FIST_PhD_ENG_FINAL.pdf
Daun, H. (Ed). (2002). Educational restructuring in the context of globalization and national policy. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Delanty, G. (2001). Challenging knowledge: the university in the knowledge society. Buckingham: SRHE & Open University Press.
Duderstadt, J. J. (2004). Market force versus the public interest. In D.G. Stein, (Ed.), Buying or sell out? The comm.ericialization of the American research universeity (pp.56-74). New Brunswick: Rutgers University.
Duderstadt, J. J. (2005). The future of higher education in the knowledge-driven, global economy of the twenty-first century. In G. A. Jones, P. L. McCarney, & M. L. Skolnik (Eds.), Creating knowledge, strengthening nations: The changing role of higher education (pp.81-97). Toronto: University of Toronto.
Duffey, D. (1988). Competitiveness and human resources. California Management Review, 30(3), 92-100.
Etzkowitz, H. (2004). The Evolution of the Entrepreneurial University. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 1(1), 64-77.
Etzkowitz, H., Asplund, P., & Nordman, N. (2003). Beyond Humboldt: the entrepreneurial university, the third mission and the triple helix. VEST Journal for Science and Technology Studies, 16(1), 21-45.
Etzkowitz, H & Klofsten, M. (2005). The innovating region: towards a theory of knowledge based regional development. Research Management, 35(3), 244-255.
EU. (2007). Socrates - EUROPA - Education and Training. Retrieved, July 18, 2007, from http://ec.europa.eu/education/programmes/socrates/socrates_en.html
EU. (2008). European innovation scoreboard 2007. Retrieved April, 17, 2008,from http://www.proinno-europe.eu/admin/uploaded_documents/European_Innovation_Scoreboard_2007.pdf
European Commission. (2007). Eurybase: The Information Database on Education Systems in Europe- The Education System in Finland. Retrieved January 21, 2008, from http://www.eurydice.org/ressources/eurydice/eurybase/pdf/0_integral/FI_EN.pdf
European Trend Chart on Innovation. (2006a). Annual Innovation Policy Trends and Appraisal Report: Denmark. Retrieved May 28, 2008, from http://www.proinno-europe.eu/docs/reports/documents/Country_Report_Denmark_2006.pdf
European Trend Chart on Innovation. (2006b). Annual Innovation Policy Trends and Appraisal Report: Finland. Retrieved May 28, 2008, from http://www.proinno-europe.eu/docs/reports/documents/Country_Report_Finland_2006.pdf.
European Trend Chart on Innovation. (2006c). Annual Innovation Policy Trends and Appraisal Report: Sweden. Retrieved May 28, 2008, from http://www.proinno-europe.eu/docs/reports/documents/Country_Report_Sweden_2006.pdf.
Finnish Funding Angency for Technology and Innovation Center [Tekes]. (2007). Retrieved, September 3, 2007, from http://www.tekes.fi/eng/
Flaherty, T. H. (1993). (Ed.). Vikings: raider from the north. Alexandria, Virginia: Time-Life Books.
Frank, R. & Bernanke, B. (2001). Principles of economics. Boston: McGraw Hill.
Frenkel, M., Koske, I., & Swonke, C. (2003). How competitive are Europe's economies? Findings of the global competitiveness report 2002-2003. Intereconomics, 38(1), 31-37.
Gaidi K.E. (2003).Reforming engineering education: the CDIO initiative. Industry and Higher Education, 17(6), 431- 434.
Gergils, H. (2005). Dynamic Innovation Systems in the Nordic Countries? A Summary Analysis and Assessment. Sweden: SNS Förlag.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzam, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge /the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: SAGE Publications.
Giddens, A. (1993). Sociology (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gillespie, K., Jeannett, J., & Hennessey. H.D. (2007). Global marketing (2nd Ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Gjerding, A. N., Wilderom, C. P. M., Cameron, S. P. B., Taylor, A. & Scheunert, K. (2006). Twenty practices of an entrepreneurial university. Higher Education Management and Policy, 18(3), 87-114.
Google. (2008). Corporate Information. Retrieved, January 8, 2008, http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/history.html
Hagel III, J. & Brown, J. S., (2005). The only sustainable edge: Why business strategy depends on productive friction and dynamic specialization. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Hill, C. W. L. & Jones, G. R. (2007). Strategic Management Theory (7th Ed.). New York: Houghton Mifflin.
International Institute for Management Development [IMD]. (1998). The World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne. Switzerland: International Institute for Management Development.
International Institute for Management Development [IMD]. (1999). The World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne. Switzerland: International Institute for Management Development.
International Institute for Management Development [IMD]. (2000). The World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne. Switzerland: International Institute for Management Development.
International Institute for Management Development [IMD]. (2001). The World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne. Switzerland: International Institute for Management Development.
International Institute for Management Development [IMD]. (2002). The World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne. Switzerland: International Institute for Management Development.
International Institute for Management Development [IMD]. (2003). The World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne. Switzerland: International Institute for Management Development.
International Institute for Management Development [IMD]. (2004). The World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne. Switzerland: International Institute for Management Development.
International Institute for Management Development [IMD]. (2005). The World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne. Switzerland: International Institute for Management Development.
International Institute for Management Development [IMD]. (2006). The World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne. Switzerland: International Institute for Management Development.
International Institute for Management Development [IMD]. (2007). The World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne. Switzerland: International Institute for Management Development.
James, F. (2007, Jan 18). Rich man, poor man: Globalisation and the rise of inequality. The Economist. Retrieved, February 1, 2007, from http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=8554819
Kalpazidou Schmidt, E. (2006). Higher education in Scandinavia. In Altbach, P. G. & Forest, J. J. F. (Eds.), International handbook of higher education (pp.517-537). Netherland: Springer.
Knowledge Assessment Methodology[KAM].(2008). KEI and KI Indexes Retrieved, April 11, 2008, from http://info.worldbank.org/etools/kam2/KAM_page5.asp
Khalil, T. M. (2000). Management of technology: The key to competitiveness and wealth creation, Boston: McGraw Hill.
Klein, J. T. (2004). Interdisciplinarity and complexity: An evolving relationship. E:CO, 6(1-2), 2-10.
Klofsten, M. (2000). Training entrepreneurship at universities: a Swedish Case. Journal of European industrial Training, 24 (6), 337-344.
Kotler, P., Jatusripitak, S., & Maesincee, S. (1997). The marketing of nations: a strategic approach to building national wealth. NY: The Free Press.
Kuemmerle, W. (1999). Harvard Business Review On Managing High-tech Industries. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Kyrö, M. & Nyyssölä, K. (2006). Attitudes towards Education in Finland and other Nordic countries. European Journal of education, 41(1), 59-70.
Laine, Kari T. (2004). Regional development and proactive interaction: a Finnish application. Industry and Higher Education, 18(5), 321-327.
Lee, J. & Win, H. N. (2004). Technology transfer between university research centers and industry in Singapore. Technovation, 24, 433-442.
Lee, Y. S. (1996). Technology transfer and research university: A search for boundaries of university-industry collaboration, Research policy, 25(6), p843-863.
Leliūgienė, I. & Baršauskienė, V. (2006). The role of university in community development: responding to the challenges of globalization. In D. Bridges, P. Juceviciene, & R. Jucevicius (Eds.), Higher education and national development: universities and societies in transition (pp.225-236). New York: Abingdon, Oxon & Routledge.
Leslie, L. L., Oaxaca, R. L. & Rhoades, G. (2000, April). Technology transferr and academic capitalism. Paper presented at the AAAS Colloquium on Science and Technology Policy, Washington, DC.
Leth, S. & Sriskandarajah, N. (2004). Incorporating Sustainability in the Education of Natural Resource Managers Curriculum Innovation at the Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University of Denmark. In Corcoran, P., B. & Wals, A., E.J. (Eds.) Higher Education and the Challenge of Sustainability: Problematics, Promise, and Practice (pp. 335-345). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Light, D. & Keller, S. (1985). Sociology (4th Ed.). New York: Knopf.
Lind, I. (1999). Organizing fore interdisciplinarity in Sweden: The case of Linköping
Manninen J. & Hobrough J. (2002). Skills gaps and overflows? Industry and Higher Education, 14(1), 51-57.
Mauri, P. (1997). New universities and their cities, the case of Vaasa, Finland. GeoJournal, 41(4), 311-318.
Mazzarol, T. & Soutar, G.N. (2001). The global market for higher education: Sustainable competitive strategies for the new millennium. Edward Elgar.
McMahon, W. W. (2000). Externalities, non-market effect, and trends in returns to educational invests. In The appraisal of investments in educational facilities (pp.51-71). Paris: OECD.
Medicon Valley (2008). About Medicon Valley. Retrieved May, 29, 2008, from http://www.mediconvalley.com/Medicon%20Valley
Metcalfe, S. & Ramlogan, R. (2008). Innovation systems and the competitive process in developing economies. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 48(2), 433-446.
Meyer, C. & Davis, S. (2003). It's Alive: The Coming Convergence of Information, Biology, and Business, Crown Business. New York: Crown Business.
Microsoft Research (2008). About Microsoft Research. Retrieved, January 8, 2008, from http://research.microsoft.com/aboutmsr/overview/default.aspx.
Ministry of Education & Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation [Denmark]. (2004a). Enhanced Internationalisation of Danish Education and Training. Retrieved May 27, 2008, from http://pub.uvm.dk/2004/internationalisation/enhanced_internationalisation.pdf
Ministry of Education & Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation [Denmark]. (2004b). Innovation, entrepreneurship and a culture of indpendence in the Danish education system. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from http://eng.uvm.dk/publications/innovation/
Ministry of Education [Finland]. (1999). Education, Training and Research in the Information Society: A national strategy for 2000-2004. Retrieved, December 4, 2007, from http://www.minedu.fi/OPM/Julkaisut/1999/liitteet/englishU/index.html
Ministry of Education [Finland]. (2005). OECD thematic review of tertiary education country background report for Finland. Retrieved, May 18, 2008, from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/14/15/36039008.pdf
Minstry of Scienece, Technology and innovation. (2007). Retrieved, September 2, 2007, http://videnskabsministeriet.dk/site/forside
Mowery, D. C. & Nelson, R. R. (1999) (Eds). Sources of industrial leadership: studies of seven industries. Cambridge, UK. : Cambridge University Press.
Mowery, D. C. & Ziedonis A. A. (2002). Academic patent quality and quantity before and after the Bayh-Dole act in the United States. Research Policy, 31(3), 399-418,
Neuman, S. (2005). Creating knowledge, strengthening nations: The role of research and education in humanities and social science in government agendas for innovation. In G. A. Jones, P. L. McCarney, & M. L. Skolnik (Eds.), Creating knowledge, strengthening nations: The changing role of higher education (pp.81-97). Toronto: University of Toronto.
Niosi, J.(2002). National systems of innovations are “x-efficient” (and x-effective): Why some are slow learners. Research Policy: 291-302.
Nordic Council of Ministers (2007).The Nordic countries in figures 2007. Retrieved March 18, 2008, from http://www.norden.org/pub/ovrigt/statistik/sk/ANP2007732.pdf
Odin, J. K. & Manicas, P. T.(Eds.) (2004). Globalization and higher education. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
OECD. ( 1997). National Innovation System. Paris. OECD.
OECD. (2004). OECD science, technology and industry outlook 2004 country response to policy questionnaire - Denmark. Retrieved March 18, 2008, from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/31/25/34241948.pdf
OECD. (2006). Selected statistics on higher education - Background report for meeting of OECD ministers of education in June 2006. Retrieved, January 30, 2007, from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/30/7/36960580.pdf
OECD. (2007). Main science and technology indicators. Paris, OECD.
Ohmae, K.(2005). The Next Global Stage. New Jersey: Wharton School Publishing.
Pink, D. H. (2005). A whole new mind: moving from the information age to the conceptual age. New York: Riverhead Books.
Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. New York: The Free Express.
Porter, M. E. (1998). On competition. Boston, MA: Harvard Businesses School Publishing.
Rasmussen, E. A. & Sørheim, R. (2006). Action-based entrepreneurship education. Technovation, 26, 185-194.
Riis, J. O. (2001). Stimulating manufacturing excellence through university-industry interaction: problem-based learning at Aalborg University, Denmark. Industry and Higher Education, 15(6), 385-392.
Saxenian, A. (1994), Regional advantage: Culture and Competition in silicon valley and route 128. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
Slaughter, S. & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic Capitalism and the new economy: Market, states, and higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University.
Sporn, B. (1999). Adaptive university structures: An analysis of adaptation to socioeconomic environments of US and European Universities. London & Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Stanford Center for Internet and Society. (2008). About the Stanford Center for Internet and Society. Retrieved, January 8, 2008, from http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/about/
Steinbock D. (2001). The Nokia Revolution: The Story of an Extraordinary Company that Transformed an Industry. New York: American Management Association.
Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems [VINNOVA]. (2007). Retrieved, September 1, 2007, from http://www.vinnova.se/misc/menyer-och-funktioner/Global-meny/In-English/
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education. (2006). OECD thematic review of tertiary education country background report for Sweden. Retrieved, May 18, 2008, from www.oecd.org/dataoecd/21/11/37525620.pdf
Symes, C. (2000). ‘Real world’ education: the vocationalization of the university. In C. Symes & J. McIntyre(Eds.), Working knowledge: The new vocationalism and higher education(pp.30-46). Philadelphia, Pa.: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University.
Tapscott, D. & Williams, A. D. (2006). Wikinomics: how mass collaboration changes everything. New York: Penguin Group.
Taylor, S., Rizvil, F., Lingard, B. & Henry, M. (1997). Educational policy and the politics of change. London: Routledge.
Teichler, U. (1996). Higher education and new socio-economic challenges in Europe. In A., Burgen (Eds.), Goals and purposes of higher education in the 21st century (pp96-111). London and Bristol, Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Teitelman, R. (1994). Profits of science: The American marriage of business and technology. New York: HarperCollins.
The Academy of Finland [AOF] (2007). Retrieved, September 6, from http://www.aka.fi/index.asp?id=eb9a8e15a46244d989ac56c132e8d13a
The Danish Government. (2002). Better education action plan. Retrieved, May 28, 2008, from http://pub.uvm.dk/2002/better1/hel.pdf.
The Danish Government. (2003). The Danish Government's Knowledge Strategy - knowledge in growth. Retrieved, May 28, 2008, from http://videnskabsministeriet.dk/site/forside/publikationer/2003/the-danish-governments-knowledge-strategy---knowledge-in/UK_videnstrategi_staten.pdf
The Danish Government. (2005). The Danish Reform Strategy: Contribution to EU’s Growth and Employment Strategy (The Lisbon Strategy). Retrieved May 20, 2008, from http://www.um.dk/NR/rdonlyres/C3EBB8C9-77BB-4A8E-A377-D1D515491A7D/0/TheDanishNationalReformProgramme_Annex.pdf
The Danish National Research Foundation (2008). The Foundation. Retrieved May 20, 2008, from http://www.dg.dk/
Torres, C. A. & Schugurensky, D. (2002). The political economy of higher education in the era of neoliberal globalization: Latin America in comparative perspective. Higher Education, 43: 429–455.
United States Patent and Trademark Office [USPTO]. (2008). USPTO Patent Database. Retrieved, January 8, 2008, from http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=ACN%2Ffi&d=PTXT
Vedovello, C. (1998). Firms’ R&D Activity and Intensity and the University - Enterprise Partnerships. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 58(3), p.215-226
Villadsen C. (2002). Clusters crossing borders: Aalborg University and regional development in Northern Jutland, Denmark. Industry and Higher Education, 16(2), 117-121.
Wagner, N. & Vocke, M. (2001). Finland: Selected issues. Washington: International Monetary Fund.
Wallgren, Lillemor & Dahlgren, Lars Owe. (2005). Doctoral education as social practice for knowledge development: Conditions and demands encountered by industry PhD students. Industry and Higher Education, 19 (6): 433-443.
Werner, R. (2003). Finland: A European Model of Successful Innovation. The Chazen Web Journal of International Business, 2003, fall. Retrieved May 21, 2008, from http://www2.gsb.columbia.edu/journals/files/chazen/finland_proof_2.pdf
White, A. (2007). A Global Projection of Subjective Well-being: A challenge to positive psychology? Psychtalk, 56, 17-20.
Whitty, G. (1992). Education, economy and national culture. In R. Bocock & K. Thompson (eds.) Social and Cultural Forms of Modernity (pp.268-282). Oxford: Blackwell.
World Economic Forum [WEF]. (1998). The Global Competitiveness Report 1997-1998. Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
World Economic Forum [WEF]. (1999). The Global Competitiveness Report 1998-1999. Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
World Economic Forum [WEF]. (2000). The Global Competitiveness Report 1999-2000. Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
World Economic Forum [WEF]. (2001). The Global Competitiveness Report 2000-2001. Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
World Economic Forum [WEF]. (2002). The Global Competitiveness Report 2001-2002. Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
World Economic Forum [WEF]. (2003). The Global Competitiveness Report 2002-2003. Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
World Economic Forum [WEF]. (2004). The Global Competitiveness Report 2003-2004. Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
World Economic Forum [WEF]. (2005). The Global Competitiveness Report 2004-2005. Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
World Economic Forum [WEF]. (2006). The Global Competitiveness Report 2005-2006. Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
World Economic Forum [WEF]. (2007). The Global Competitiveness Report 2006-2007. Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
World Intellectual Property Organization [WIPO]. (2008). Foundation for Finnish Inventions - Promoting innovation. Retrieved May 22, 2008, from http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/best_practices/finland.htm
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 江雪嬌(2004)。從國家創新系統探討大學推動研發服務業的推動。經濟情勢暨評論,10,3,19-34。
2. 江雪嬌(2006)。從知識產業化之觀點探討大學研發成果之移轉:以美、日及我國大學技術移轉中心為例。經濟情勢暨評論,12,2,42-67。
3. 洪裕宏(2004),學術資本主義與學術人文主義-台灣學術卓越政策的深層省思。當代,203,16-27。
4. 孫智麗(2000)。國家創新系統:知識經濟體系下創新政策的新思維。亞太經濟合作評論,6,113-123。
5. 耿筠、陳娟娟(2005)。美國大學產學合作合約條款之研究。政大智慧財產評論,3,1,63-90。
6. 高子羽(2004)。Nokia的極地反撲。數位時代,95,86-89。
7. 康來詠(2004)。芬蘭策略性產業之發展方向評析:知識經濟時代的全球化國家產業政策與跨群的產業躍昇模式。經濟情勢暨評論,10,3,75-88。
8. 陳松柏、謝龍發(2001)。產業競爭力衡量之實證研究。競爭力評論,3,13-31。
9. 陳達仁、耿筠(2007)。95年度大專校院產學合作績效評量結果公布。評鑑雙月刊,10,7-15。
10. 陳智凱(2005)。知識經濟之衡量與國家競爭力分析。正修學報,18,243-264。
11. 黃文谷、張文龍(2004)。知識密集產業服務業對國家創新系統發展之影響。經濟情勢暨評論,10,3,1-18。
12. 楊國賜(2006b)。新世紀高等教育政策規劃與改革動向。國立教育資料館教育資料集刊,31,157-179。
13. 薛立敏、錢玉蘭(1996)。生活品質與國家競爭力。經濟前瞻,48,60-63。