Abstract

Today «business-education-science» coopetition is an innovative approach to achieving sustainable development goals on different levels of economy and in various spheres of human life. In particular, there is great potential in the context of the fourth, eighth, and ninth sustainable development goals. That is why the article aims to analyze key trends and empirically prove and formalize the impact of «business-education-science» coopetition on sustainable development. The key directions of multidisciplinary study on «business-education-science» coopetition for sustainable development are determined by bibliometric analysis of 6035 documents for 38 years using the Scopus database tools and VOSviewer software. The obtained results allowed to form 7 clusters of multidisciplinary studies on this issue. A comparative analysis of Ukraine and the top 10 countries’ levels of sustainable development, innovation development, and business-education competition were conducted. Besides a dynamic analysis of sustainable and innovation development in Ukraine, a dynamic analysis of business and education coopetition in Ukraine, Finland, Denmark, and Sweden was made for 2012-2021. The sample from the top 10 countries in the Sustainable Development Rating in 2021 (Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Austria, Germany, France, Switzerland, Ireland, and Estonia) are formed for 10 past years (2012-2021) to investigate the relationship between the level of «business – education – science» coopetition and the level of sustainable development, in particular the scores of University-Industry Collaboration Indicator and Sustainable Development Index. The Shapiro-Wilk test for normal data and Pearson / Spearman correlation analysis was used at the first stage of empirical confirmation of the hypothesis about the impact of «business – education – science» coopetition on sustainable development. In the second stage, the regression model of system dynamic panel-data estimation (The Arellano–Bover / Blundell–Bond model) is built to formalize and determine this impact. Then Arellano-Bond test for zero autocorrelation in first-differenced errors is made to show that there is no present evidence that the model is misspecified. It is proved that if the level of «business – education – science» coopetition (on the example of the score of the University-Industry Collaboration Indicator) increases by 1%, the level of sustainable development (in particular, the score of the Sustainable Development Index) will increase on 0,04% too. The obtained results could be useful for business, education, science institutions, and governance for further research and strengthening sustainable and innovation development levels.

Keywords: business and education coopetition, innovation development, innovation transfer, partnership, R&D, research and development, science, SDG, sustainable development, university-industry collaboration

JEL Classification: Q01, O3, M2, I2.

Cite as: Samoilikova, A., Zhylinska, O., Pal, Z., & Kuttor, D. (2022). «Business-Education-Science» Coopetition and Innovation Transfer for Sustainable Development. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 2, 220-230. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2022.2-20

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. Anderson, T. W., & Hsiao, C. (1981). Estimation of dynamic models with error components. Journal of the American statistical Association, 76(375), 598-606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef].
2. Antonyuk, N., Plikus, I., & Jammal, M. (2021). Sustainable business development vision under the covid-19 pandemic. Health Economics and Management Review, 2(1), 37-43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
3. Arellano, M., & Bond, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. The review of economic studies, 58(2), 277-297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef].
4. Arellano, M., & Bover, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. Journal of econometrics, 68(1), 29-51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef].
5. Artyukhov, A., Krmela, J., Krmelova, V., & Volk, I. (2021a). Quality of Scientific Activity, Technology Transfer and Research Integrity: Case of Ukrainian University. Business Ethics and Leadership, 5(4), 101-109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
6. Artyukhov, A., Volk, Iu,., Krmelova, V., & Krmela, J. (2021b). Quality Of Education System As A Determinant Of Socio-Economic Development: Assessment Of Technological Level Of Readyness. SocioEconomic Challenges, 5(4), 172-182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
7. Blundell, R. W., and Bond, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87, 115-143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef].
8. GII. (n.d.) The interactive database of the GII indicators. Retrieved from: [Link]
9. Kaya, H. D. (2021). How Does The Use Of Technology In Entrepreneurial Process Affect Firms’ Growth?. SocioEconomic Challenges, 5(1), 5-12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
10. Kyrychenko, K., Laznenko, D., & Reshetniak, Ya. (2021). Green University as an Element of Forming a Sustainable Public Health System. Health Economics and Management Review, 2(4), 21-26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
11. Lopez, B., García, D., & Alcaide, A. (2019). Blockchain Technology Facing Socioeconomic Challenges. Promise versus Probability. SocioEconomic Challenges, 3(4), 13-24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
12. Makarenko, I., Plastun, A., Petrushenko, Y., Vorontsova, A., & Alwasiak, S. (2021). SDG 4 and SDG 8 in the knowledge economy: A meta-analysis in the context of post-COVID-19 recovery. Knowledge and Performance Management, 5(1), 50-67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
13. Matos, L., & Kasztelnik, K. (2021). Transformational Educational Leadership and the Innovative Strategies Engaging Online Faculty for the Excellent Teaching Performance in the United States. Business Ethics and Leadership, 5(1), 6-21. https://doi.org/10.21272/bel.5(1).6-21.2021
14. Novikov, V. (2021a). Intercept of Financial, Economic and Educational Transformations: Bibliometric Analysis. Financial Markets, Institutions and Risks, 5(2), 120-129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
15. Novikov, V. V. (2021b). Digitalization of Economy and Education: Path to Business Leadership and National Security. Business Ethics and Leadership, 5(2), 147-155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
16. Onopriienko, K., Onopriienko, V., Petrushenko, Y., & Onopriienko, I. (2021). Environmental education for youth and adults: A bibliometric analysis of research. In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 234, p. 00002). EDP Sciences. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
17. Petrushenko, Y., Vadym, A., Vorontsova, A., & Ponomarenko, O. (2020). Sustainable development goals as a tool for strategic planning in communities: A bibliometric analysis of research. In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 202, p. 03005). EDP Sciences. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
18. Pimonenko, T., Us, Ya., Myroshnychenko, Yu., Dubyna, O., & Vasylyna, T. (2021). Green Financing for Carbon-Free Growth: Role of Banks Marketing Strategy. Financial Markets, Institutions and Risks, 5(3), 71-78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
19. Sachs, J. D., Lafortune, G., Kroll, C., Fuller, G., & Woelm, F. (2022). Sustainable Development Report 2022. From Crisis to Sustainable Development: the SDGs as Roadmap to 2030 and beyond. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Retrieved from [Link]
20. Skrynnyk, O. (2021). Analysis of Corporate Investment Behaviour in Digital Technologies for Organisational Development Purposes. Financial Markets, Institutions and Risks, 5(3), 79-86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
21. STATA. (n.d.). Arellano–Bover/Blundell–Bond linear dynamic panel-data estimation. Retrieved from [Link]
22. Tenytska, I., & Palienko, M. (2021). Environmental Taxes Impact on the Population Health Protection: Cross-Country Analysis. Health Economics and Management Review, 2(4), 78-86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
23. The SDG Database. Retrieved from [Link]
24. UNDESA. (2021). The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2021. United Nations Publications, New York, United States of America. Retrieved from [Link]
25. UNDESA. (n.d.). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Retrieved from [Link]
26. WIPO. (2021). Global Innovation Index 2021. Tracking Innovation through the COVID-19 Crisis. 14th Edition. WIPO, Geneva 20, Switzerland. Retrieved from [Link]
27. World Bank. (2018). University-industry collaboration in Research & Development. Retrieved from [Link]