Journal of Scientometric Research, 2020, 9, 2s, s24-s36.
Published: November 2020
Type: IndiaLics Issue
Shilpa1,2 and Sujit Bhattacharya1,2,*
1CSIR-National Institute of Science Technology and Development Studies, Dr. K.S. Krishnan Marg, New Delhi-110012, INDIA.
2Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research (AcSIR), Ghaziabad- 201002, INDIA.
Different theoretical models and empirical studies increasingly highlight the importance of networks and strategic linkages in research and innovation and commericalisation process. This has motivated policy action at different levels for creation of organisations that can facilitate the varied types of networks and linkages among the actors in the innovation system. These organisations are expected to perform various types of activities that bridge user needs and supply side, skill and human resources, financial support, business and innovation strategy, knowledge about new technology and in implementation. These varied types of organisations now are defined under ‘Innovation intermediary’. Innovation intermediary is contextualised within the national, regional or sector innovation systems. These systems are influenced by global innovation networks, production and innovation value chains and through varied types of formal and informal linkages. One of the ways a country develops formal linakges with other countries are through bilateral organisations. Bilateral S&T organisations is generally seen as a long term strategic partnership between countries that can positively contribute towards strengthening innovation ecosystem of each of the partnering countries. Can the innovation intermediary thesis help us to understand the bilateral organisations in this context? Or in other words, can a bilateral S&T organisation be seen as an innovation intermediary between two partnering countries? The paper investigates this proposition by examining the influence of Indo-French Cell for Water Sciences (IFCWS) in strengthening the water innovation ecosystem of the two countries namely India and France. A singular case study can be too limited to draw any strong conclusion. However, within this limitation we argue that this study can be useful for policy makers in looking at bilateral organisations as an innovation intermediary between two countries and for innovation scholars to examine this organization more deeply within innovation systems studies