Abstract
Theoretical and empirical research on cooperation networks has been progressively incorporated into the processes of knowledge generation. Moreover, research groups that support their own development via networking have a greater potential to strengthen research capabilities and to increase their institutional presence. However, studies that analyze the establishment of networks as a broader process for the development and institutional projection of a specific group are limited. This chapter presents the case of the research groups in Veterinary Sciences at the National University of Central Buenos Aires (UNCPBA) in Argentina, showing how these groups have developed a scheme of diversified networks with international, national, provincial, and regional players from academic and extra-academic fields, according to the specificities of the thematic area and the particular trajectory of the relevant research centers. As an exploratory case, the intention is to achieve a rapprochement between the theory and reality. Thus, academic and extra-academic networks were identified and addressed in terms of participating players and the objective on which the relations of exchange and respective flows were based. Particularly, networks were analyzed by “research core” according to the type of player, geographical scope (national and international), and considering the purpose of the network, namely scientific collaboration, generation of joint research projects, and the training of human resources. Finally, findings suggest that these networks have had international, national and local impacts in different fields, according to specificities and requirements of the knowledge area at issue. Nevertheless, research is continuing and it is just this area that appears to hold great promise for contributing to a productive future findings.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
SeCAT regulations state that Cores of Scientific–Technological Activities (NACT) must submit their academic memories in which their research, teaching, and extension activities developed over a 1-year period are reported. Within these activities, bonds with academic and extra-academic cooperation are also reported.
- 2.
The concept of NACT refers to the set of researchers and assistants who articulate, plan, and implement scientific and technological activities in a specific subject, sharing physical spaces, facilities, and technical and administrative services under guidelines (Resolution No. 2254/2003) stipulated in university regulations.
- 3.
The Argentinean university system has both national and private universities. National universities are considered public entities because they depend on state funds. Universities are considered autonomous and self-governing, as they elect their own authorities (with on government involvement) and set their own regulations and study programs.
- 4.
Marquis (1996) stated that considering the time in which they were created, national universities may be organized into three large groups: (i) nine “mature” universities, created in the first half of the twentieth century and with clear expectations at national and regional levels; (ii) 17 “young” universities, created in the 1970s and with a more restricted geographic scope, clearly provincial, and (iii) 10 “new” universities created in the 1990s, with a scope restricted to the municipality or local community. According to the author, the terms mature, young, and new are far from being clear-cut definitions; instead, they are groups that share a number of characteristics. Universities created in recent years should also be included in this classification.
- 5.
Researchers, research fellows, R&D technical staff, and R&D support staff.
- 6.
Exclusive commitment: implies a commitment to R&D of more than 30 h per week.
- 7.
More than 400 projects linking Argentinian higher education institutions to 160 institutions from over 20 countries have been implemented (Pérez Lindo 2005).
- 8.
The Framework for Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Argentina and the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany for the constitution of an Argentinean-German University Center (CAA-DAHZ) was signed in 2010, with the following signatories: the SPU from the Ministry of Education (ME), the National Direction of International Relationships (DNRI) of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Productive Innovation (MINCYT), the German Service of Academic Exchange (DAAD), and the Argentinean-German Association of Science and Technology (ACTAA).
- 9.
According to founding Law No. 20.753, enacted by the National Congress in 1974, UNCPBA covers 19 municipalities located in the center of the province, with three categories of cities: “large towns” (from 2,000 to 20,000 inhabitants), “small cities” (20,000 to 50,000 inhabitants) and “medium-sized agglomerations” (ATI), in which Tandil, Olavarría, Azul, and Necochea are included.
- 10.
The Incentive Program (IP) for professors–researchers from national universities in Argentina was created by Decree No. 2427 of the National Executive Power (NEP) in November 1993 and implemented in 1994 under the ME; IP is managed by the SPU.
- 11.
The number of professors–researchers participating in the IP increased from 11,200 in 1994 to 30,000 in 2009 (SPU 2009).
- 12.
In the early 1990s, SeCAT began registering Researchers and Research Projects based on five categories: Institutional Research Program, Consolidated Research Cores, Developing Research Cores, Small groups, and Current projects. Ordinance No. 1209/1993 (Recognition of Consolidated Research Cores) and No. 1224/1993 (Recognition of Developing Research Cores) were the fundamental documents of the period (Araya et al. 2006). From 2001, with the growth of the UNCPBA scientific system, the way in which NACT were grouped was simplified by the Secretariat of Science, Art and Technology (ex-SeCAt) into just two categories: Consolidated Cores and Developing Cores. Finally, in 2009, a new regulation differentiated NACT into Centers for Scientific–Technological Activities and Groups for Scientific–Technological Activities. Consolidated Cores become Centers, whereas those undergoing the formation process were designated as Groups.
- 13.
Executor Units are centers, institutes or research units providing scientific, technological, or developmental services in various research lines.
- 14.
The Ministry of Science, Technology and Productive Innovation conducts a scientific and technological cooperation program with the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology (MHEST) from the Republic of Slovenia, facilitating exchanges between Argentinian and Slovenian research groups within the framework of joint research projects. A joint research project refers to a program that involves two or more research groups from the two countries (Argentina and Slovenia), with clearly defined objectives to be achieved within an established timeframe, and implemented via people exchange.
- 15.
Cooperation between Argentina and Germany has been developed between the Ministry of Science, Technology and Productive Innovation and seven German counterparts: German Service of Academic Exchange (DAAD); Federal Ministry for German Education and Research (BMBF); Max Planck Society; Leibniz Institute; Fraunhofer Society; German Foundation for research (DFG); Argentinean-German University Center (CUAA).
- 16.
The SPU from the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology and the Fundação Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior de Brasil, in the framework of the Binational Program of Associated Graduate Centers of Brazil–Argentina.
- 17.
Regarding meat quality.
- 18.
Consultancy purpose: “Pre-partum food improvement and its effect on the productive and reproductive performance of grazing beef cows.”
- 19.
PICT are instruments under the Funding for the Scientific and Technological Research (FONCYT) from the National Agency of Scientific and Technological Promotion, which provides grants for the funding of scientific and technological research. The presentation of projects can be performed within the following categories: I, Open topics; II, Priority areas; III, International Cooperation; IV, Start-up; and V, Internationally consolidated research groups.
- 20.
Collaborative network on Escherichia coli.
- 21.
Member of the Argentinian Network of Toxicology (REDARTOX)
- 22.
Research Project: SECYT, UNMdP: “Utilization of natural grassland for winter feeding of beef heifers with early service.”
- 23.
Reference Center for Lactobacilli, Tucumán, Argentina.
- 24.
The Foundational Documents define the appointment of the Director and Deputy Director for each group and the mode of constitution of the Internal Council and Council of Management Control. In addition, they define topics and introduce development strategies for clustering.
References
Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 425–455.
Albornoz, M. (2009). Desarrollo y Políticas Públicas en Ciencia y Tecnología en América Latina RIPS. Revista de Investigaciones Políticas y Sociológicas, 8(1), 65–75.
Albornoz, M., & Estebánez, M. (1998). What do we mean by networking? Selected Latin American experiences in cooperation. In New approaches to science and technology cooperation and capacity building (pp. 75–112). Ginebra: UNCTAD.
Albornoz, M., & Sebastián, J. (1993). Jorge Sábato revisitado: del triángulo a las redes. Arbor, 575, 117–128.
Almuiñas Rivero, J.L., & Galarza López, J. (2010). Las redes académicas: una vía para fortalecer la gestión del conocimiento y la cooperación internacional universitaria. Conferencia Universidad La Habana.
Araya, J., Taborga, A., & Pérez, C. (2006). Análisis de las transformaciones en las políticas científico-tecnológicas de la Universidad Nacional del Centro (UNCPBA), Argentina 1974–2005. In En: VI Jornadas Latinoamericanas de Estudios Sociales de la Ciencia y la Tecnología. Bogotá: ESOCITE.
Bianco, M., & Sutz, J. (2005). Las formas colectivas de la investigación universitaria. Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad, 2(6), 25–44.
Bowen, H. P., & Wiersema, M. F. (1999). Matching method to paradigm in strategy research: Limitations of cross-sectional analysis and some methodological alternatives. Strategic Management, 20, 625–636.
Callon, M., Laredo, P., Rabeharisoa, V., Gonard, T., & Leray, T. (1992). The management and evaluation of technological programs and the dynamics of techno-economics network. Research Policy, 21, 215–236.
Casas, R. (1991). Las capacidades de investigación biotecnológica en México en el área agroalimentaria: Tendencias durante la década de 1980. Revista Sociológica, 6(16), 54–65.
Casas, R. (2001). El enfoque de redes y flujos de conocimiento en el análisis de las relaciones entre ciencia, tecnología y sociedad. Kairos, 5(8), 1–17.
Cassaigne, R. (1997). La transferencia de tecnología como caso exitoso de la vinculación Universidad-Empresa. In C. Pallan & G. Ávila (Eds.), Estrategias para el impulso de la vinculación Universidad-Empresa (pp. 98–115). México: Asociación Nacional de Universidades e Instituciones de Educación Superior.
Chetty, S. (1996). The case study method for research in small- and medium-sized firms. International Small Business Journal, 15(1), 173–185.
Di Meglio, F., & Avendaño, R. (2012). Ciencia, tecnología y producción en la Argentina reciente: alcances, límites y potencialidades para la transformación posneoliberal. In F. Piñero & J. M. Araya (Eds.), Ciencia y Tecnología en la Argentina contemporánea. Dimensiones para su análisis (pp. 85–112). Tandil: CEIPIL-UNCPBA.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.
Emiliozzi, S. (2011). Políticas en ciencia y tecnología, definición de áreas prioritarias y universidad en Argentina. Revista Sociedad, 29(30), 120–128.
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1997). Universities in the global knowledge economy: A triple helix of university-industry-government relations. London: Cassell.
Garcia Fanelli, A. (2005). Universidad, organización e incentivos: desafíos de la política de financiamientos frente a la complejidad institucional. Buenos Aires: Miño y Dávila.
Garcia Fanelli, A. (2011). Financiación de la educación superior argentina, Revista Educación Superior y Sociedad. Venezuela: IESALC- UNESCO.
García Hernández, A. (2013). Las redes de colaboración científica y su efecto en la productividad. Un análisis bibliométrico. Investigación Bibliotecológica, 27(59), 159–175.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzmann, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge. London: Sage.
Láredo, P. (2003). Six major challenges facing public intervention in higher education, science, technology and innovation. Science and Public Policy, 30(1), 4–12.
MINCYT (2012) Indicators of Science and Technology Argentina, 2012 Edition. Secretary of Planning and Policies in Science, Technology and Innovation. www.mincyt.gob.ar/publicaciones. Accessed 27 September 2015.
Muro, P. (2009). El sentido de las redes. In S. Didou Aupetit & E. Gérard (Eds.), Fuga de cerebros, movilidad académica, redes científicas. Perspectivas latinoamericanas. Mexico: IESALC-CINVESTAV-IRD.
Pelkonen, A., Teravainen, T., & Waltari, S. (2008). Assessing policy coordination capacity: Higher education, science, and technology policies in Finland. Science and Public Policy, 35(4), 241–252.
Pérez Lindo, A. (2005). Políticas de investigación en las universidades argentinas, IESALC-UNESCO. http://eco.mdp.edu.ar/cendocu/repositorio/00105.pdf. Accessed 25 May 2014.
Pirróe Longo, W., Rocha, I., & Costa Telles, M. (2000). Reengineering’ engineering research and education in Brazil: Cooperative networks and coalitions. Science and Public Policy, 27(1), 37–44.
RICYT (2010) Indicators of Science and Technology Ibero-American Annual Report 1996–2010. www.ricyt.org/indicadores. Accessed 27 September 2015.
RICYT (2012) Indicators of Science and Technology Ibero-American. Annual Report 1996-2012. www.ricyt.org/indicadores. Accessed 27 September 2015.
Royero, J. (2005). Las redes de investigación y desarrollo (I + D) en América Latina. Departamento de Tecnología Administrativa, 1(2), 1–19.
Sábato, J., & Botana, N. (1968). La ciencia y la tecnología en el desarrollo futuro de América Latina. Revista de la Integración, 1(3), 15–36.
Sebastián, J. (2000). Las redes de cooperación como modelo organizativo y funcional para la I + D. Redes, 7(15), 97–111.
Sebastián, J. (2003). Estrategias de cooperación universitaria para la formación de investigadores en Iberoamérica. España: Organización de Estados Iberoamericanos para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura (OEI).
Stoeker, R. (1991). Evaluating and rethinking the case study. The Sociological Review, 39(1), 88–112.
SPU (2009) University Statistics Report, Secretary of Research and University, Statistics. www.me.gov.ar/spu/Publicaciones/publicaciones.html. Accessed 27 September 2015.
Vacarezza, L. (2000). Las estrategias de desempeño de la profesión académica. Ciencia periférica y sustentabilidad del rol de investigador universitario. Redes, 7(015), 15–43.
Venkatraman, N., & Grant, J. H. (1986). Construct measurement in organizational strategy research: A critique and proposal. Academy of Management Review, 11(1), 71–87.
Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods, applied social research methods series. Newbury Park: Sage.
Zarur, M. (2008). Integración regional e internacionalización de la educación de la educación superior en América Latina y el Caribe. In A. Gazzola & A. Didriksson (Eds.), Tendencias de la Educación Superior en América Latina y el Caribe (pp. 179–240). Caracas: IESALC-UNESCO.
Zirene, J., & Mejias, A. (2011). Las redes científicas en los grupos de investigación de la Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana Sede Medellín-Colombia. Revista Ciencias Estratégicas, 19(26), 25–37.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Di Meglio, M.F., Mayoral, L., Araya, J.M. (2016). Research Networks and the Relevance of Higher Education: Lessons Learned from Veterinary Sciences in Argentina, 2006–2010. In: Horta, H., Heitor, M., Salmi, J. (eds) Trends and Challenges in Science and Higher Education. Knowledge Studies in Higher Education, vol 3. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20964-7_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20964-7_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-20963-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-20964-7
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)