Movers and shakers of Canadian innovation policy – recognizing the influence of university vice-presidents as policy advocates

References

• Atkinson-Grosjean, J. (2002). Science policy and university research: Canada and the USA, 1979–1999. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 2, 102–124.10.1504/IJTPM.2002.001761
   Google Scholar
• Atkinson-Grosjean, J., House, D., & Fischer, D. (2001). Canadian science policy and the public research organisations in the 20th century. Science & Technology Studies, 1, 3–25.
   Google Scholar
• Audretsch, D. B. (2014). From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the entrepreneurial society. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(3), 313–321.10.1007/s10961-012-9288-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benneworth, P., & Charles, D. (2005). University spin-off policies and economic development in less successful regions: Learning from two decades of policy practice. European Planning Studies, 13(4), 537–557.10.1080/09654310500107175
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beyers, J. (2008). Policy issues, organisational format and the political strategies of interest organisations. West European Politics, 31(6), 1188–1211.10.1080/01402380802372654
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beyers, J., Eising, R., & Maloney, W. (2008). Researching interest group politics in Europe and elsewhere: Much we study, little we know? West European Politics, 31(6), 1103–1128.10.1080/01402380802370443
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blackmore, P. (2016). The role of prestige in UK universities. London: Leadership Foundation for Higher Education.
   Google Scholar
• Borrás, S., & Edquist, C. (2014). Innovation policy for knowledge production and R&D: The investment portfolio approach (No. 2014/21). Lund University, CIRCLE-Center for Innovation, Research and Competences in the Learning Economy. Retrieved from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/lucirc/2014_021.html
   Google Scholar
• Börzel, T. A., & Heard-Lauréote, K. (2009). Networks in EU multi-level governance: Concepts and contributions. Journal of Public Policy, 29(2), 135–151.10.1017/S0143814X09001044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bramwell, A., & Wolfe, D. A. (2008). Universities and regional economic development: The entrepreneurial University of Waterloo. Research Policy, 37(8), 1175–1187.10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breznitz, S. M., & Feldman, M. P. (2012). The engaged university. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(2), 139–157.10.1007/s10961-010-9183-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canada First Research Excellence Fund [Website]. (2017). Retrieved from http://www.cfref-apogee.gc.ca/home-accueil-eng.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Cleverley-Thompson, S. (2016). The role of academic deans as entrepreneurial leaders in higher education institutions. Innovative Higher Education, 41(1), 75–85.10.1007/s10755-015-9339-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clowater, G. B. (2012). Canadian science policy and the retreat from transformative politics: The final years of the science council of Canada, 1985–1992. Scientia Canadensis: Canadian Journal of the History of Science, Technology and Medicine, 35, 107–134.10.7202/1013983ar
   Google Scholar
• Cram, L. (2011). The importance of the temporal dimension: New modes of governance as a tool of government. Journal of European Public Policy, 18(5), 636–653.10.1080/13501763.2011.586793
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Dill, D. D., & van Vught, F. A. (2010). National innovation and the academic research enterprise: Public policy in global perspective. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Doern, G. B. (2007). Red tape, red flags: Regulation for the innovation age. Ottawa: Conference Board of Canada. Retrieved from http://www.brenderwriting.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2007-SIR-Book_RedTapeRedFlags_web.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Doern, G. B., Castle, D., & Phillips, P. W. (2016). Canadian science, technology, and innovation policy: The innovation economy and society nexus. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Edler, J., & Kuhlmann, S. (2008). Coordination within fragmentation: Governance in knowledge policy in the German federal system. Science & Public Policy, 35(4), 265–276.
   Google Scholar
• Etzkowitz, H. (2004). The evolution of the entrepreneurial university. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 1(1), 64–77.10.1504/IJTG.2004.004551
   Google Scholar
• Fallis, G. (2013). Rethinking higher education: Participation, research and differentiation. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fumasoli, T. (2015). Multi-level governance in higher education research. In J. Huisman, H. de Boer, D. Dill, & M. Souto-Otero (Eds.), The Palgrave international handbook of higher education policy and governance (pp. 76–94). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1007/978-1-137-45617-5
   Google Scholar
• Gornitzka, A, & Maassen, P. (2000). Hybrid steering approaches with respect to European higher education. Higher Education Policy, 13(3), 267–285.10.1016/S0952-8733(00)00012-X
   Google Scholar
• Government of Canada. (2014). Seizing Canada’s moment: Moving forward in science, technology and innovation 2014. Retrieved from https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/icgc.nsf/eng/h_07472.html
   Google Scholar
• Government of Canada. (2016). Innovation for a better Canada. Canada’s innovation agenda. Retrieved from https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/062.nsf/eng/home
   Google Scholar
• Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2001). Types of multi-level governance. European Integration Online Papers (EIoP), 5(11). Retrieved from http://eiop.or.at/eiop/pdf/2001-011.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins Report. (2011). Innovation Canada: A call to action. Review of federal support to research and development – expert panel report. Retrieved from http://rd-review.ca/eic/site/033.nsf/vwapj/R-D_InnovationCanada_Final-eng.pdf/$FILE/R-D_InnovationCanada_Final-eng.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jessop, B. (2004). Multi-level governance and multi-level metagovernance. Multi-level governance, 49–74. Retrieved from https://bobjessop.org/2014/01/10/multilevel-governance-and-multilevel-metagovernance/10.1093/0199259259.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• Jessop, B. (2017). Varieties of academic capitalism and entrepreneurial universities. Higher Education, 73(6), 853–870.10.1007/s10734-017-0120-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolsaker, A. (2008). Academic professionalism in the managerialist era: A study of English universities. Studies in Higher Education, 33(5), 513–525.10.1080/03075070802372885
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kroll, H., Dornbusch, F., & Schnabl, E. (2016). Universities’ regional involvement in Germany: How academics’ objectives and opportunity shape choices of activity. Regional Studies, 50(9), 1595–1610.10.1080/00343404.2015.1051016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhlman, S., Shapira, P., & Smits, R. (2010). A systemic perspective: The innovation policy dance. Retrieved from http://doc.utwente.nl/86353/
   Google Scholar
• Lehmann, E. E. (2015). The role of universities in local and regional competitiveness. In D. B. Audretsch, N. Albert, A. N. Link, & M. L. Walshok (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of local competitiveness (pp. 211–236). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lundvall, B. A. (2009). Innovation as an interactive process: User-producer interaction to the national system of innovation: Research paper. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 1, 10–34.
   Google Scholar
• Marks, G. (1993). Structural policy and multilevel governance in the EC. The State of the European Community, 2, 391–410.
   Google Scholar
• Metcalfe, A. S., Fisher, D., Rubenson, K., Snee, I., Gingras, Y., & Jones, G. A. (2011). Canada: Perspectives on governance and management. In W. Locke, W. K. Cummings, & D. Fisher (Eds.), Governance and management of higher education institutions: Perspectives of the academy (pp. 151–174). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Nilsson, M., & Moodysson, J. (2015). Regional innovation policy and coordination: Illustrations from southern Sweden. Science and Public Policy, 42(2), 147–161.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niosi, J. (2000). Canada’s national system of innovation. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Papadopoulos, Y. (2010). Accountability and multi-level governance: More accountability, less democracy? West European Politics, 33(5), 1030–1049.10.1080/01402382.2010.486126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters, B. G. (2015). Pursuing horizontal management: The politics of public sector coordination. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
   Google Scholar
• Piattoni, S. (2010). The theory of multi-level governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562923.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• Pilbeam, C. (2012). Pursuing financial stability: A resource dependence perspective on interactions between pro-vice chancellors in a network of universities. Studies in Higher Education, 37(4), 415–429.10.1080/03075079.2010.520696
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pilbeam, C., & Jamieson, I. (2010). Beyond leadership and management: The boundary-spanning role of the pro-vice chancellor. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38(6), 758–776.10.1177/1741143210379058
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sá, C., & Tamtik, M. (2012). Strategic planning for academic research: A Canadian perspective. Higher Education Management and Policy, 24(1), 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Salazar, M., & Holbrook, A. (2007). Canadian science, technology and innovation policy: The product of regional networking? Regional Studies, 41(8), 1129–1141.10.1080/00343400701530865
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sikkink, K. (2005). Patterns of dynamic multilevel governance and the insider-outsider coalition. Transnational Protest and Global Activism, 151–173.
   Google Scholar
• Slaughter, S., & Cantwell, B. (2012). Transatlantic moves to the market: The United States and the European Union. Higher Education, 63(5), 583–606.10.1007/s10734-011-9460-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tamtik, M. (2016). Policy coordination challenges in government’s innovation policy – The case of Ontario Canada. Science and Public Policy, 44(3), 417–427.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tandberg, D. A. (2006). State-level higher education interest group alliances. Higher Education in Review, 3, 25–49.
   Google Scholar
• Verduijn, S. H., Meijerink, S. V., & Leroy, P. (2012). How the second delta committee set the agenda for climate adaptation policy: A Dutch case study on framing strategies for policy change. Water Alternatives, 5(2), 469.
   Google Scholar
• Weber, R. (1996). Basic content analysis (6th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Zito, A. R. (2015). Multi-level governance, EU public policy and the evasive dependent variable. In E. Ongaro (Ed.), Multi-level governance: The missing linkages (critical perspectives on international public sector management, volume 4) (pp. 15–39). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
   Google Scholar