Cooperative Research Centers Research Articles

A step in the right direction: the potential role of smartwatches in supporting chronic disease prevention in health care.

A step in the right direction: the potential role of smartwatches in supporting chronic disease prevention in health care.

Show me the money: how do we justify spending health care dollars on digital health?

Show me the money: how do we justify spending health care dollars on digital health?

Valuing intangible outcomes from the Cooperative Research Centres‐Projects program

AbstractThe growing use of triple helix arrangements to stimulate national systems of innovation (NSIs) for broader economic benefits has largely focussed on quantifiable and compliance‐based metrics to evaluate the ‘success’ of industry‐university strategic collaborative research ventures. This metrics‐focus largely ignores secondary, and even tertiary, outcomes of the collaborative ventures that are difficult to capture by research and innovation administrators with traditional metrics. A research project conducted on the Cooperative Research Centres—Projects (CRC‐P) Program in Australia found that, in a number of cases, secondary and tertiary outcomes were highly valued by participants, and provided important but hitherto officially unacknowledged socio‐economic benefits to the Australian NSI. This discussion proposes a typology of collaborative research outcomes beyond traditional compliance‐based metrics, and challenges policy makers and research and innovation administrators to consider the development of an ‘Innovation Ecosystem Body of Knowledge’ to inform future collaborative research projects and enhance the ability of actors to access this ecosystem in an efficient and productive manner in order to ensure that potential economic gains from collaborative research are maximised.

Changes in Medicaid Enrollment During the COVID-19 Pandemic Across Six States

Background: The COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) has caused extensive job loss and loss of employer-sponsored insurance. State Medicaid programs have experienced a related increase in enrollment during the PHE. However, the composition of enrollment and enrollee changes during the pandemic is unknown. Understanding changes in the Medicaid population during the PHE may inform policy development and identify strategies to meet the rising needs for insurance coverage during public health emergencies. This study aims to examine changes in Medicaid enrollment and population characteristics during the PHE.Methods: A retrospective descriptive study documenting changes in Medicaid new enrollment and disenrollment, and enrollee characteristics between March and October 2020 compared to the same time period in 2019 using Full-state Medicaid populations from six states of a wide geographical region. The primary outcomes were medicaid enrollment and disenrollment during the PHE. New enrollment included persons enrolled in Medicaid between March and October 2020 who were not enrolled in January or February of 2020. Disenrollment included persons who were enrolled in March of 2020 but not enrolled in October 2020.Results: The study included 8.50 million Medicaid enrollees in 2020 and 8.46 million in 2019. Overall, enrollment increased by 13.0% during the PHE compared to 2019, relative enrollment growth of 1.19 million. New enrollment accounted for 24.9% of the relative increase, while the remaining 75.1% was due to disenrollment. A larger proportion of new enrollment in 2020 was among adults aged 27-44 (28.3% vs 23.6%), Hispanics (34.3% vs 32.5%) and in the financial needy (44.0% vs 39.0%) category compared to 2019. Disenrollment included a larger proportion of older adults (26.1% vs 8.1%) and non-Hispanics (70.3% vs 66.4%) than in 2019.Conclusions and Relevance: Medicaid enrollment grew considerably during the PHE, and the majority of enrollment growth was attributed to decreases in disenrollment rather than increases in new enrollment. Our results highlight the impact of COVID-19 on state health programs and can guide federal and state budgetary planning.Funding: This study was supported from the Digital Health CRC (Cooperative Research Centre). The DHCRC is established and supported under the Australian Government’s Cooperative Research Centres Program. Funding for Antonia Chan was provided by the Stanford Medical Scholars Fellowship Program.Declaration of Interest: None to declare.

Embedding SMEs in national systems of innovation: Participant perceptions of Australia's CRC‐P program

AbstractGovernments throughout the world employ a variety of policy mechanisms to promote economy‐enhancing innovation, although the embedding of SMEs in national systems of innovation has generally proved problematic. The Australian Cooperative Research Centres – Projects Program represents a recent attempt to do precisely this. Interviews with participants in the first two rounds of the Program report high levels of satisfaction, but also highlight potential for friction between SMEs and research providers, together with the opportunity for strategic manipulation. This study provides government officials and other stakeholders with preliminary recommendations regarding where the Program is succeeding, and where further vigilance may be required.

Transforming Built Environments: Towards Carbon Neutral and Blue-Green Cities

In the 21st century, the creation of built environments that are carbon neutral and water sensitive is critical for addressing sustainable urban development challenges. Both require transformative change: Decarbonisation to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and incorporation of green-blue water sensitive solutions to adapt to climate change impacts. Transition pathways in both arenas involve combinations of new technology, innovative urban design, enabling policies and regulations, new processes for planning and managing urban development, and demand-side changes in consumer attitudes and practices for urban living related to energy and water use. In this paper, we present new knowledge, concepts and frameworks developed for application in Australia, as well as internationally, through research by the national Cooperative Research Centres for Low Carbon Living (CRCLCL) and Water Sensitive Cities (CRCWSC) between 2012 and 2020. These findings and outputs illustrate common features of the research strategies and initiatives that were central to the activities of the CRCs, and highlight promising directions for collaborative interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research that drives urban sustainability transformations towards carbon neutral and blue-green cities.

A policy mix experiment to promote start-up success: exploratory evaluation of the NSF Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Industry University Cooperative Research Center (IUCRC) membership supplement

This paper investigates the outcomes of a policy experiment, the NSF SBIR/IUCRC Membership Supplement, designed to promote the success of small high-tech entrepreneurial ventures by providing subsidized memberships in university-based cooperative research centers (IUCRCs). Data collected via semi-structured interviews with representatives of 61 Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) firms indicated that SBIR firms who used the supplement to join an IUCRC reported multiple R&D benefits including research cost avoidance, research savings, and access to expensive equipment. A vast majority of SBIR firms also reported realizing or anticipated realizing commercial benefits (e.g., new investors, new products, and improvements to existing products). As suggested by social capital theory, SBIR firms reported that the policy mix experiment helped them make new connections with faculty and industry. Following our qualitative results, a structural equation model was applied to test the effect of social capital as an antecedent of SBIR firm R&D and commercialization outcomes. Results suggested that the SBIR firms who developed more social capital through interactions with faculty and industry members realized significantly more R&D and commercialization benefits. Further, commercialization benefits mediated the relationship between social capital and the SBIR firm’s perceived return on investment. Overall, this study demonstrates the feasibility of subjecting mixed policy interventions to evaluative scrutiny and provides evidence that such instruments can have substantive and positive effects on small high-tech entrepreneurial ventures. We discuss implications for social capital theory, policy mix initiatives and entrepreneurship policy.

Ralph Owen Slatyer 1929–2012

Ralph Slatyer (16 April 1929–26 July 2012) had a distinguished career in the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation and the Australian National University, in plant-water relations and plant succession, leading the development of physiological plant ecology. He was the founding Professor of Environmental Biology at the Research School of Biological Sciences, at the Australian National University and then Director of the Research School of Biological Sciences, 1984–9. He was Australian Ambassador to United Nations Educational and Scientific Cultural Organisation (1978–81), and as Australia’s first Chief Scientist (1989–92), he set up the Cooperative Research Centres.

P2RY12 expression at different time‐points in a mouse model of experimental glaucoma

AbstractPurposeDown‐regulation of P2RY12 after injury constitutes a sensitive marker for the transition from resting to activate microglia. P2RY12 is expressed by microglia but not by monocytes, infiltrating macrophages or dendritic cells, thus can used to identify resident microglia. Thus, the aims of the study is to determine the P2RY12 expression on retinal Iba‐1+ cells after unilateral laser‐induced ocular hypertension (OHT) in OHT‐eyes and their contralateral eyes, at different time points (1, 3, 5, 8 and 15 days) and in the different retinal layers such as outer segments (OS), outer plexiform layer (OPL), inner plexiform layer (IPL) and the complex nerve fiber layer‐ganglion cell layer (NFL‐GCL)), after unilateral laser‐induced ocular hypertension (ULOHT) in OHT‐eyes and their contralateral eyes.MethodsAlbino Swiss mice were divided into two groups, naïve and lasered. In this last group OHT, eyes and their contralateral eyes were studied. Retinal whole‐mounts were double‐immunostained with Iba1 and P2RY12 antibodies.ResultsIn naïve eyes, Iba‐1+ cells expressed P2RY12, with the exception of perivascular microglia and dendritic‐like Iba‐1+ cells in all retinal layers analyzed. In OHT eyes, at 24 h and 15 d after laser induction, most Iba‐1+ cells showed high P2RY12 expression in the OS, OPL, IPL and NFL‐GCL, except some rounded cells in the OS and NFL‐GCL and very few ramified cells in the IPL and NFL‐GCL. At intermediate times (3 d and 5 d), P2RY12 expression was dramatically lower than at 1d in all retinal layers. Expression increased weakly at 8 d, reaching values similar to those in naïve eyes at 15 d. In contralateral eyes, as in naïve ones, Iba‐1+ cells were intensely labelled with anti‐P2RY12 in all retinal layers at all‐time points analyzed.ConclusionMost of Iba‐1+ cells in the OHT eyes and contralateral eyes at the different time‐points were microglia, as demonstrated by their P2RY12 expression. P2RY12 expression is reduced after microglial activation indicating that 3 d and 5 d were the point‐times in which the microglial activation was maximal.AcknowledgementThis work was supported by Ophthalmological Network OFTARED (RD12‐0034/0002 and RD12/0034/0014. Prevención, Detección Precoz y Tratamiento de la Patología Ocular Prevalente Degenerativa y Crónica), the Institute of Health of Carlos III of the Spanish Ministry of Economy; PN I+D+i 2008‐2011; ISCIII, General Subdirection of Networks and Cooperative Research Centers; by the FEDER European program. Grants to J.A. Fernández‐Albarral are currently supported by a Predoctoral Fellowship (FPU) from the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and University.

Release of cytokines/myokines by retinal tissue at different times in a mouse model of glaucoma

AbstractDiverse cytokines released by retinal glial cells (IL‐1β, IL‐4, IL‐6, IL‐10, IL‐17, IFN‐, BDNF, VEGF and Fractalkine) were analyzed in order to determine the changes in the expression, at different times after unilateral laser‐induced ocular hypertension (OHT), both in OHT eyes and their contralateral eyes respect to naïve eyes.At each of time point after OHT induction (days 1, 3, 5, 7 and 15), 12 OHT retinas, 12 contralateral retinas and 12 naïve retinas (lasered group n = 60, naïve n = 12) from Albino Swiss mice were analyzed. The samples obtained were processed and multiarray kits (MILLIPLEX MAP Mouse Cytokine/Myokine Magnetic Bead Panel) were used to quantify the expression of cytokines.In OHT eyes, the expression of the following cytokines: BDNF (1, 3, 7 and 15 days), VEGF (1 day), IL‐4 (at all‐time points except day 15), IL‐6 (1, 3 and 5 days), IFN‐ (3, 5 and 15 days), IL‐10 (3 and 5 days), and Fractalkine (1 day) were significant higher than in naïve. In contralateral eyes, the following cytokines: IL‐6 (1, 5 and 7 days), IL‐1β (1 and 3 days), IL‐4 (7 and 15 days), IL‐10 (7 days) and IL‐17 (15 days) showed a significant increase in comparison with naïveAfter unilateral laser‐induced ocular hypertension, OHT eyes and contralateral eyes showed changes in the expression of the anti‐ and pro‐inflammatory cytokines associated with inflammatory process, mainly 3 days after OHT induction. These factors, which may be released by activated macroglia and microglia, may exert neuroprotective and neurodegenerative effects.This work was supported by Ophthalmological Network OFTARED (RD12‐0034/0002 and RD12/0034/0014. Prevención, Detección Precoz y Tratamiento de la Patología Ocular Prevalente Degenerativa y Crónica), the Institute of Health of Carlos III of the Spanish Ministry of Economy; PN I+D+i 2008‐2011; ISCIII, General Subdirection of Networks and Cooperative Research Centers; by the FEDER European program. Grants to J.A. Fernández‐Albarral are currently supported by a Predoctoral Fellowship (FPU) from the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and University.

Animal science Down Under: a history of research, development and extension in support of Australia’s livestock industries

This account of the development and achievements of the animal sciences in Australia is prefaced by a brief history of the livestock industries from 1788 to the present. During the 19th century, progress in industry development was due more to the experience and ingenuity of producers than to the application of scientific principles; the end of the century also saw the establishment of departments of agriculture and agricultural colleges in all Australian colonies (later states). Between the two world wars, the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research was established, including well supported Divisions of Animal Nutrition and Animal Health, and there was significant growth in research and extension capability in the state departments. However, the research capacity of the recently established university Faculties of Agriculture and Veterinary Science was limited by lack of funding and opportunity to offer postgraduate research training. The three decades after 1945 were marked by strong political support for agricultural research, development and extension, visionary scientific leadership, and major growth in research institutions and achievements, partly driven by increased university funding and enrolment of postgraduate students. State-supported extension services for livestock producers peaked during the 1970s. The final decades of the 20th century featured uncertain commodity markets and changing public attitudes to livestock production. There were also important Federal Government initiatives to stabilise industry and government funding of agricultural research, development and extension via the Research and Development Corporations, and to promote efficient use of these resources through creation of the Cooperative Research Centres program. These initiatives led to some outstanding research outcomes for most of the livestock sectors, which continued during the early decades of the 21st century, including the advent of genomic selection for genetic improvement of production and health traits, and greatly increased attention to public interest issues, particularly animal welfare and environmental protection. The new century has also seen development and application of the ‘One Health’ concept to protect livestock, humans and the environment from exotic infectious diseases, and an accelerating trend towards privatisation of extension services. Finally, industry challenges and opportunities are briefly discussed, emphasising those amenable to research, development and extension solutions.

The Way I Saw It; the Way It Was: The Making of National Agricultural and Natural Resource Management Policy, John C.Kerin Published by APO, Melbourne, VIC, 2017, 713 pages.

The Way I Saw It; the Way It Was: The Making of National Agricultural and Natural Resource Management Policy, John C.Kerin Published by APO, Melbourne, VIC, 2017, 713 pages.

The role and function of cooperative research centers in entrepreneurial universities

Purpose The purpose of this paper is a micro-level examination of the role and function of cooperative research centers (CRCs) in entrepreneurial universities from a principal investigator (PI) perspective. Design/methodology/approach This study uses a qualitative research design and is based on 38 semi-structured interviews with PIs who are publicly funded at the Centre for Research in Medical Devices (CÚRAM) based in Ireland. CÚRAM has a multiple mission focus of supporting scientific excellence, industry engagement, educational and public engagement that supports the Irish medical device sector. Findings The findings reveal that CRCs’ role and function at the micro level constitute a necessary and functional organization architecture that supports PIs who are required to meet multiple scientific, commercialization, educational and public engagement objectives. Specifically, from the micro-level PI perspective, the role and function of CRCs focus on research quality enhancement, brokerage, networks and collaborations, addressing research impact and resource enhancement and appropriation. Practical implications This research emphasizes the importance and necessity for the creation of CRCs as part of the entrepreneurial architecture of entrepreneurial universities that provides the necessary appropriate local environmental conditions and enhanced supports to enable micro-level actors to fulfill multiple mission objectives with respect to research excellence, industry, educational and public engagement and impact. Originality/value This study contributes to the limited literature on new institutional configurations that support entrepreneurship and addresses recent calls for further research. In taking a micro-level focus, the authors identify the role and function of CRCs from a PI perspective in an entrepreneurial university setting.

Evaluating university industry collaborative research centers

This research provides performance metrics for cooperative research centers that enhance translational research through partnerships formed by government, industry and academia. Centers are part of complex ecosystems and vary greatly in the type of science conducted, organizational structures and expected outcomes. The ability to realize their objectives depends on transparent measurement systems to assist in decision making in research translation. We introduce a hierarchical decision model that uses both quantitative and qualitative metrics. A generalizable model is developed based upon program goals. The results are validated through consultation with experts. The method is illustrated using data from the National Science Foundation's industry/university cooperative research center (IUCRC) program. The methodology provides a basis for a generalizable model and measurement system to compares performance of university science and engineering focused research centers supported by industry and government.

Desperately seeking innovation nirvana: Australia’s cooperative research centres

The Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) program has been one of the flagship programs of Australia’s National Innovation System (NSI) for 30 years. But compared to other members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), statistics indicate that Australia has persistent low levels of business expenditure on research and development (BERD), while World Intellectual Property Office (WIPO) reports highlight poor diffusion-of-innovation characteristics. In response to reports of this ilk, and in line with the generally evolving nature of NSIs, the CRC program, and the Australian NSI system, has developed and matured. In a wide-ranging longitudinal review of the program’s policy documentation, we discover that a number of changes have affected the language used within the program, the targeted organizations, and, crucially, the duration of the funding periods. We conclude that, within the confines of the nation’s historical and geographic context, the CRC program exhibits similar characteristics to NSIs elsewhere. In addition, there may be scope for Australia to split the CRC program into separate streams, and that even further support for integration into the Asia-Pacific markets is likely to be beneficial to the diffusion of Australian innovation.

The Research Collaboration Paradox: A Tale of Two Governance Narratives in an Australian Innovation Setting

AbstractAustralian government policy aims to exploit university–industry research collaboration to transform the nation from a ‘lucky’ country enjoying the riches of agribusiness and resource exploitation, to a ‘clever’ country, exporting ingenuity and innovation globally. The Cooperative Research Centres (CRC) program has operated for more than a quarter of a century, but successive modifications demonstrate an inherent tension between two governance narratives pertaining to university–industry collaboration. This brief discussion looks at how the gradual privileging of one of these two narratives over time could potentially compromise genuine innovation‐producing collaboration. Policy makers therefore need to find ways to reconcile these two narratives.

An examination of funding for terrestrial vertebrate fauna research from Australian federal government sources

Funding for research towards more effective conservation of Australian fauna is widely believed to be low. Publically available data were examined to determine the spread of wildlife projects supported for the period 2005–15 by Federal Government agencies responsible for research and/or environmental management funding and funding aimed at delivering innovation across relevant sectors. A word search method was used and projects categorised according to their relevance to conservation goals. Of the AU$7.2 billion invested by the Australian Research Council, 0.9% (AU$67.8 million) was in areas relevant to conservation. However, of this relatively modest funding, 40% of conservation projects addressed questions classified as highly relevant, and 11.4% dealt with Australia’s threatened terrestrial vertebrate fauna. Of the AU$2.5 billion grant investment by the Department of the Environment, 7.9% (AU$196.3 million) was relevant to fauna conservation but mainly for on-ground management (62.5%). However, 32.9% of projects were research highly relevant to conservation practice, and 18.8% dealt with Australia’s threatened terrestrial vertebrate fauna. The Cooperative Research Centres Program is a well funded system that has supported applied research relevant to wildlife conservation. However, the Program’s recent focus has been on commercial outcomes rather than the public good. The study provides support for the argument that greater investment by the Federal Government is needed if innovation in wildlife management is to have a solid evidence base.

Australia's Cooperative Research Centre Program: A transaction cost theory perspective

Cooperative Research Centres (CRCs) in Australia are underpinned by funding from the Australian Government. Among their many goals, they are intended to lead to long-term sustainable relationships between industry and academic institutions without the need for further public funding. Yet concerns have been raised in various reports and reviews about the ability of CRCs to achieve sustainable collaboration beyond their initial seven-year life, despite the general observation that CRCs have proved beneficial to the broader Australian community and the economy in general. This study adduces Transaction Cost Theory to determine the impediments to long-term sustainable collaboration between industry and academia. It does so by examining relationships between CRC members at a member organisational level, rather than at an individual researcher or program level, as previous studies have done. The article concludes by introducing testable governance attributes that have the potential to minimise transaction costs between participants in industry-academic collaboration and therefore foster long-term research collaborations.

New Organizational Arrangements for Public-Private Research Collaboration

This paper studies Cooperative Research Centres (CRCs) as organizational platforms for Targeted Open Innovation. Specifically, the concept of Targeted Open Innovation is used to interpret the engagement of firms with other stakeholders within an innovation ecosystem in order to better collaborate and share their knowledge. The paper analyses the funding structure of CRCs in Spain using a sample of 123 CRCs. We aim to determine the effect of the degree of intersectoral collaboration on the CRCs’ funding portfolio. We characterised CRCs—“market-oriented”, “academic-oriented” and “government-oriented”—according to the degree of involvement of each sectoral actor in diverse organisational aspects, setting their objectives, executing the R&D and establishing the managerial processes and evaluation practices. We find that CRCs with market-oriented characteristics rely less on public competitive funds and CRCs with academic-oriented characteristics have a more diversified funding portfolio.

NSF Industry University Cooperative Research Center for Electrochemical Processes and Technology a Model for Open Innovation

Introduction In the path from invention to product it becomes important to consider multiple options for generation of ideas that could lead to out of the box solutions to technological problems. In the search for new ideas and solutions the concept of Open Innovation has become a new paradigm for companies [1]. Within this paradigm cooperation among industry, universities, customers, and rivals is needed for success. One model that has been successful in such approach is the National Science Foundation's (NSF's) Industry/University Cooperative Research Centers (I/UCRC) program.Over the past three decades, the I/UCRCs have led the way to a new era of partnership between universities and industry, featuring high-quality, industrially relevant fundamental research, strong industrial support of and collaboration in research and education, and direct transfer of university developed ideas, research results, and technology to U.S. industry to improve its competitive posture in world markets [2].In this talk, the implementation of the NSF I/UCRC model will be described within the context of electrochemical processes and technology. A new NSF I/UCRC: Center for Electrochemical Processes and Technology (CEProTECH) had been established [3]. CEProTECH is dedicated to the improvement of chemical and biological processes utilizing novel, electrochemically-focused approaches. Ohio University (OHIO, lead Center site) and Washington University in St. Louis (WUSTL, Center site) are the founding universities. The Center facilitates fundamental, cross-cutting process analysis and research for a diverse range of industry applications. This includes both the classical electrochemical processes - chlor-alkali and aluminum processes, batteries, etc.- as well as processes that typically would not utilize electrochemical methods -remediation, advanced synthesis, and production of specialty gases, chemicals, and materials, etc.-. This talk will discuss the process of engaging companies to partner with the center and learning about their advanced manufacturing needs that electrochemical solutions can address.This presentation will focus on the path for the creation and operation of an industry focused research center, CEProTECH, the technology roadmap, the education opportunities for the participants, as well as discussing potential ways of collaboration.