CC BY
11
УДК 378:334:364.22
doi 10.24411/2221-0458-2021-72-35-43
WHY ENTREPREUNERAL UNIVERSITY FAILS TO SOLVE POVERTY
ERADICATION?
Samrat Ray Indian Institute of Management, Ranchi, India.
ПОЧЕМУ ВЫСШИМ УЧЕБНЫМ ЗАВЕДЕНИЯМ В ОБЛАСТИ ПРЕДПРИНИМАТЕЛЬСТВА НЕ УДАЕТСЯ ИСКОРЕНИТЬ ПРОБЛЕМУ
БЕДНОСТИ?
Самрат Рэй
Индийский университет менеджмента, г. Ранчи, Индия
Knowledge has seen a vast change in form and structure linked to economic growth and advancement. Recent entrepreneurial ideas are carved out of innovative measures which drive its central tendencies out of Schumpeterian beliefs that academics can be harnessed for human upliftment as well as promote resilience in economic activities. Whereas the Max Plank Institute propounded theories of Knowledge spillover theories of entrepreneurship greatly focus on industry university localization with great tests and rigor portraying development of entrepreneurial university structure benefitting humanity, less research work has been done for eradication of global poverty through sustained entrepreneurial university model and subsequent utilization through social inclusion and social innovation which are beneficial to global humanity at large. The subaltern belief of taking actions rather than mere theoretic models in econometrics has grossly failed to apply triple helix model of entrepreneurial university towards social entrepreneurship mission, this paper studies at large various literature and university structure to understand the gap and try to procure new policies which can help understand social justice, innovation, entrepreneurship growth in a fast changing polarized economic world order.
Keywords: Entrepreneurial University; Innovation; Poverty; World Economy; Development Economics
В структуре и форме знания в последнее время произошли значительные изменения, связанные с экономическим ростом и прогрессом. Недавние идеи в сфере предпринимательства являются результатом новаторских мер, которые вытесняют базовые
понятия института предпринимательства, основанные на убеждениях Шумпетера в том, что ученых можно использовать для улучшения жизни людей, а также в целях повышения устойчивости экономической деятельности. В то время, как Институт Макса Планка выдвигал теории распространения знаний, Теории предпринимательства в значительной степени сосредоточены на локализации отраслевых университетов с высоким конкурсом и сложными вступительными испытаниями, отражающими развитие предпринимательской университетской структуры на благо человечества. Не так много исследовательских работ, посвященных теме искоренения глобальной бедности с помощью устойчивой предпринимательской университетской модели, было проведено. Также и не достаточно эти исследования были впоследствии апробированы через социальную интеграцию и социальные инновации, которые приносят пользу всему человечеству в целом. Одной веры в действия, а не в теоретические модели в эконометрике, недостаточно в применении модели тройной спирали предпринимательского университета в миссии социального предпринимательства. В данной статье проведен обзор литературы и рассмотрена структура высших учебных заведений в области предпринимательства с целью понять причину того, почему университеты предпринимательства не могут решить проблему бедности, а также попытаться разработать новую политику, которая может помочь понять социальную справедливость, принять определённые инновации, которые могут привести к росту предпринимательства в быстро меняющемся поляризованном мировом экономическом порядке.
Ключевые слова: Entrepreneurial University; Innovation; Poverty; World Economy; Development Economics
1. Introduction
"There's enough on this planet for everyone's needs but not for everyone's greed."Mahatma Gandhi There are very few answers to the idea of global poverty. It is infact a great disease more prolonged and deepened by vast scale disruptive capitalism than even the recent pandemic. Why few people are poor or why few nations tend towards a declining GDP?
These are the very foundations of human actions and subsequent enquiries which still keep unaltered in our daily lives which change the course of human destiny. Moving away from the dichotomy of classical economic thoughts and diverging into a more libertarian viewpoint of economics substituted by free market policies and lesser governmental control and flexible mobility of money is what few economic agents prescribe in the
aftermath of global crisis points dating back to the Great Depression which brought in Keynesian values and ethics. It is important to quote that the knowledge economy surrounding us are changing vastly due to few externalities and demands of the future generation. There lies a gap wherein global fund management and venture capitalist organizations globally can diverge funds towards rising demands of under privileged community by imparting skills at grassroots levels. Though Keynesian ethics and morality of economics have grossly failed to answer economic fallacies of post liberal policies globally aftermath of 1992,the dotcom bubbles and the crash of Lehman brothers have once again put forth a big question mark to Keynesian monetary policies and income distribution. Among this widely held beliefs are the global paradox of wealth inequality, poverty and of course the recent pandemic situation which has greatly disrupted economic theories and policies of national banks. Academic institutions irrespective of regional imbalances have tried to forge new ideas despite the occasional booms and burst with changing strategies towards global academic capitalism. This new idea of academic capitalism has also seen disruption during the pandemic and has learnt from its own mistakes despite changing paradoxes and beliefs across various facets of human actions. Poverty is in itself a trap where social disgrace, injustice
daily deprivations are borne by human sufferings. Such actions are cyclical in practice as evidenced by high level of corruption, drug abuse and women torture have been the yardstick of global practices in underdeveloped countries. The knowledge machine transgressing humanity arose from the old testaments and scholarly discourses from Asian countries like India and China which saw great adventures in trades and industry bringing forth the advancement of science and culture across various dialects of humanity.Wherein on one part there was a great belief in human knowledge and transgression that belief was left unaltered by subaltern beliefs which could not speak out post colonial economic collapses and the birth of newer dimensions in academic pursuits and the rise of "Elites" in society. Post colonial structure saw rise of academic interests which were consolidated in the few and the elitist movements which left poverty untouched. Newer dimensions of global entrepreneurship is not a recent one but a culmination of scientific and academic thought process mixed with different notions of enlightenment which brought forth newer dimensions of educational practices. It is of course mandatory to have a good knowledge and background of economic history and theories to understand the volatility in entrepreneurial activities and gaps in innovation which has greatly stalled the process of social inclusion and excluded the
poor from the developmental agenda. The World Bank Agenda and Educational Framework have grossly failed to understand poverty and make entrepreneurship in academics available towards alleviation of hunger and increase jobs and self sustenance. Before jumping into the bandwagon of Schumpeterian Innovation bandwagon it is necessary the analyze the dynamics of poverty and create a policy where the bottom up approach fostered by corporate grass root actions are remodeled to create jobs and demand in market led economy. It is imperative to understand that one pill of economic recovery will not suit everyone on earth, because the economic geography is quite different in different regions of the global order where the advanced countries too are facing gross inequality in preaches and practices. Mere hysterics and histiographical indexes are also not sufficient to answer economic hypothesis in entrepreneurial models targeted towards academic capitalism. Ethical concerns are forerunners wherein industry government participation in education may also lead to widespread corruption amidst need for profiteering and balance sheet maintenance. Knowledge is a great cradle for human intellectual development and hence needs to be nurtured at ease in places where there is great scope for mutual as well as overall human developments and growth. Knowledge and scientific discourses have
from time innumerable has seen paths of developments from vastly prehistoric ages in emerging countries like India as well as China where mutual trades and scriptures point towards a thriving university culture where internationalization of education was supported by holistic training and growth of human personifications. The early age scholars were diversified and preferred education to be a barrier less propaganda irrespective of class and religion. Henceforth education saw vast advancement in structure and content meeting the needs of both the formal and informal sector and branching out into diversified domains of knowledge and extracurricular activities. Education has been linked to trade and commerce where Chinese sailors from across the Indian Ocean have traversed to bring in new lights into scientific advancement and economic wellbeing of the people in general. Such an expansion of thought process has in itself changed the course of education in universities which have been witness to a large spectrum of enlightenments and schools of thoughts. Ethical balances drove education sector towards vast accreditations in various scientific faculties bringing in innovation and entrepreneurship maneuver into its existence and policy making. Recent challenges includes the mould of business creation practices in daily works of universities with unparalleled notions of innovation and entrepreneurial flavors in its existence which are thoroughly
necessary for an university to thrive and prosper as ethical and moral values judge the notion by which the university functions and delivers. There are various definition of entrepreneurship directed towards knowledge economy. Being rational in choices of development is also infact a paradox where praxeological shifts can be encountered with great aversion to social justice and required moral values and ethics. Such judgments' can also be petrified by falsification according to Popperian theories and epistemological studies underlying economic shifts. The development economics idea has been revisited with greater force and analysis which is both rational and self prejudice inflicted catering towards a wider audience in reach and fauna. As professor Amartya Sen often quotes that rational is also a thought process in economics to being irrational. Kantian philosophies have always been rhetoric to economic judgments which can always hinder Adam Smith's philosophies regarding research carried out innovatively for higher pursuits. Such rhetoric brought forward Adam Smith led innovation in his epic creation "Wealth of Nations" wherein multifunctional roles can bring in revolution in industry.Such idea can be put into rhetoric for entrepreneurial university wherein networked roles and functionaries can create innovation.Carland (1995) highlights that entrepreneur is definitely a great risk taker with logical bend of mind directed towards
innovative ideas. The term academic capitalism in its right connotation justly implies the notion of fostering knowledge capitalism and knowledge communism in its hybrid model fauna (Munch, 2015).Academic capitalism notion gained momentum after the monumental work post 1990 "Academic Capitalism" book written by S.Slaughter and L.Lestie.Bell (1974) propounded the hybrid model of entrepreneurial universities in his research work where he devised that universities would be the future yardstick of knowledge economy.
2. Research Methodology: We
use both exploratory as well as qualitative inputs to analyze both entrepreneurial university, academic capitalism and how it can help eradicate poverty through education and training. We also study historical cases of interest which has proved time again knowledge spill over theory is beneficial and how great scientists were bearer of this torch and idea symptomatically. Institutional beliefs in economics have also changed which has made it mandatory to prepare a thorough analysis of historical perspective of cases pertaining to entrepreneurial university foundations.
Historical Case Studies:
1) Louis Pasteur has been long credited with development of vaccination against Anthrax and also deducting the
procedure of pasteurization which at the Paris University. Later it is believed that he left to create his own laboratory thus taking alongside him his creativity and innovation.
Such a case study is important in the sense that those days hardly saw any business activity or academic capitalism which can benefit society at large. University industry participation can be beneficially handled if required for a greater cause. The Triple Helix Innovation model can be rightly used for humanity.This particular case study also coins the notion of age old innovation in university platform.
Global Case Study: Indian Scenario:
SRISTI:The premier Indian B School has been witnessing a change in academic capitalism from its inception wherein professors like Dr Anil Gupta launched an initiave SRISTI in the year 1993 which carries ahead age old traditional practices at grassroot levels in honey bee farming activity empowering bottom of the pyramid structure for pollination. Such creativity is unmatched as it nurtures local knowledge and has the capacity for economic trajectory.
Entrepreneurship Development Institute, India: This institute was founded in India to nurture entrepreneurial flavor to a select few in Indian subcontinent which was first in employing the spirits of interconnected players of industry-academicia-university for playing pivotal role in poverty eradication. Recent
researches has shown economic outflow to bottom of the pyramid at 75% of the total venture funds flowing into the institute incubation process. Statistically 34% of the total companies funded externally in regions of Ahmadabad were benefitted through Knowledge spillover with 20% of the residual crowd sourced companies targeted towards rural employment generation.20% of the total rural population nearby had access to technology whereas university led training process catered to nearly 80% growth rate in literacy and social development projects. The university started 30 or more short training programmers funded by local industry to gain value from spillover which had reciprocal values in putting labor forces into government jobs thus jumping the poverty trap with nearly small amount invested. The minimum capital inflow stand at 15,000 rupees with annual turnover at 1 lakh in a region where per capita income was below 7 dollars. During pandemi8c situation like COVID, household training program were instituted to fight the pandemic and create resilience in times of crisis. Such actions were modeled on World Bank project of model villages. The Global Educational Framework of OECD which also plays the humanity first notion has also catered to such belief of social entrepreneurship.
3. Analysis: Where on one dimension the historical cases and dialects
have proved that scientific discourses can be interlinked to entrepreneurial university model there has been a notion that such interactive networks can be beneficially targeted towards top down approach by involving bottom of the pyramid into entrepreneurial ideas and social innovation. Because poverty can only be understood by field experimentation as from the studies of Nobel laureate Abhijit Banerjee (Poor Economics) where he employed randomized control trials to understand the myth behind poverty. It is imperative to make the subaltern speak by forging training at university structures for social empowerment and incubating start ups which foster self help groups and industries locally.Rise of crony capitalism has intact paralyzed the notion of free markets. Do free markets exist?Are we really free or it is an illusion in itself because we are always regulated as such. The analysis draws its merits from the rise of innovation led universities like MIT and Harvard which has seen rise of a innovation culture in Silicon Valley. We may also draw lines from EU led Horizon 2020 project and US led National Science Fund project. Historically speaking many innovations have been fostered through necessity and push and pull culture leading to rise of internet and rocket science technology. Future directions would also mean proper analysis of entrepreneurial finance domain wherein gender gaps in economic growth perspectives of entrepreneurship also needs to
study if we are head bound towards global poverty solution. This research work skillfully answers 1) Why few people choose to be different in poverty? 2) What is poverty trap in totality? 3) How rationally Triple Helix Model of innovation can include social entrepreneurship? 4) How economic growth can be achieved through subaltern communication?
4. Deduction: We all know and face the definition of poverty in our daily environment but few of us are having courage to move towards a more equivocal global order. Even advanced economies like America have failed to answer wealth inequality with widening gaps in income and wealth distribution and a gleam Gini coefficient furthering the cause of poverty eradication. Moreover the subaltern notion of dumb to situation has widened the gap between socially well paced and the deprived community at large. Academics has always been a pillar of human intelligentsia and advancement of race irrespective of creed and caste .If this particular pillar can be utilized for social entrepreneurship such entrepreneurial university model can be a just practice in forgetting human hunger and deprivation which has rocked economics and world business community and large. If social innovation and training be a part of this Triple Helix Model of innovation in academic
capitalism substantiated with governmental coordination in identifying the bottom of the pyramid, it will change the landscape of human suffering and knowledge management. It is also imperative to point out that World organizations like UN as well as World Banks are not doing enough for poverty and has become mere spectators to increasing inequality in a vast world economy. If Socialism has grossly failed then what is capitalism? Are we heading for another failure or we are shying away from Marxian ideological economic upheaval where equality can be achieved at ease.
5. Policy Implications and Future Directions: Poverty in itself is a global illusion which has seen downfall of human economic mobility in even advanced countries. It is therefore imperative to fight
References
1. Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The Triple Helix: university -industry -government relations. A laboratory for knowledge based economic development. EASST Review. European Society for the Study of Science and Technology, 15(1): 19-36.
2. Howells, J., Nedeva, M. and Georghio, L. (1998). Industry-academic links in the United Kingdom, PREST, and University of Manchester.
poverty not only via theoretical judgments but working and understanding poverty at grass root levels. It is not by virtue of mere research but a solid foundation of social entrepreneurship where in we can study the bottom of the pyramid in localized economies and forge a policy towards self help groups and microcredit which can create a different in economic sustainability and create a jump in university modeling which can include poor and the deprived with a mixed format of Triple Helix model of entrepreneurial university judged with Keynesian and free market paradox. The following research work opens new ideas and scientific discourse towards future researchers and frontline activists irrespective of class and region to move ahead with the belief of power in equality and freedom of thoughts in economic judgments.
3. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/01/ 4-ways-universities-are-driving-innovation/ (Accessed on 1.02.2021)
4. Etzkowitz.H.2003. 'Innovation in Innovation: The Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations'. Social Science Information: 43(3).pp 11-33.
5. Saxenian, Anna Lee. 2000. 'Brain Drain or Brain Circulation? The silicon Valley-Asia Connection'. Modern Asia Series: Fall. Harvard University Asia Center.
6. Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. "Can the Subaltern Speak?" In Marxism & the
ISSN 2072-8980
Interpretation of Culture. Cary Nelson and Lawrence Grossberg, eds. London: Macmillan, 1989. pp. 270-312.
7. Singh, Sangeeta, et. al. "Subaltern Studies II: A Review Article," Social Scientist 136, vol. 12, 8 (October 1985) pp. 5-41.
8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZHH4 ALRFHw (Accessed on 2.02.2021)
9. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0y6fg9t 22C4 (Accessed on 2.02.2021)
10. Polyana de Almeida Borges, Livia Pereira de Araujo, Larisse A. Lima, Grace Ferreira Ghesti, Talita Souza Carmo , The triple helix model and intellectual property: The case of the University of Brasilia, World Patent Information, Volume
60,2020,101945,ISSN 0172-2190
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2019.101945.
11. https://community.nasscom.in/commun ities/erd/triple-helix-model-of-innovation-an-overview-and-perspectives-on-india.html (Accessed on 3.02.2021)
12. SEN, A. (2000) Social Exclusion: concept, application and scrutiny. Social Development Papers No.1. Asian Development Bank, Office of Environment and Social Development.
13. Sen A. Choice, Welfare and Measurement. Oxford: Basil Blackwell; 1982.
Самрат Рэй - Индийский институт менеджмента, г. Ранчи, Индия, e-mail: samratray@rocketmail .com
Samrat Ray - Indian Institute of Management, Ranchi, India, e-mail: samratray@rocketmail .com
Статья поступила в редакцию 22.02.2021
