Facilitators of and barriers to collaboration between universities and the food industry in nutrition research: a qualitative study
Abstract
Background: Unhealthy food is one of the main risk factors for non-communicable diseases. Improved knowledge about healthy and sustainable food products requires nutrition research in collaboration between universities and the food industry.
Objective: To investigate the facilitators of and barriers to university–industry collaborations in nutrition research.
Design: Semi-structured, individual interviews with five researchers in universities and five employees in the food industry were conducted in the Oslo region, Norway. Interviews were thematically analysed and guided by Braun and Clark.
Results: This study showed positive experiences and attitudes towards a university–industry collaboration within nutrition research aiming for healthier food products. The main facilitators of good collaboration were common goals, the exchange of knowledge and the opportunity for research funding. Barriers to good collaboration were prejudices related to the food industry’s goals and previous experiences of time-consuming projects. Interestingly, collaboration agreements were identified as both facilitators of and barriers to good collaboration.
Conclusion: Stimulating university–food industry collaboration requires increased juridical assistance, provided that the lawyers involved understand the parties’ interests and the need to balance those interests and safeguard mutual trust. In addition, the food industry must take a clearer role in their engagement in public health to improve their trustworthiness in relation to research results.
Downloads
References
- World Health Organization Europe. Improving dietary intake and achieving food product improvement – policy opportunities and challenges for the WHO European Region in reducing salt and sugar in the diet. 2020. https://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/448761/Improving-dietary-intake-eng.pdf [cited 28 September 2021]
- Anderson CAM, Thorndike AN, Lichtenstein AH, Horn LV, Kris-Etherton PM, Foraker R, et al. Innovation to create a healthy and sustainable food system: a science advisory from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2019; 139(23): e1025–32. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000686
- United Nations. The sustainable developement goals report 2020. 2020. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2020/# [cited 28 September 2021]
- European Commission. Diversified funding streams for university-based research: impact of external project-based research funding on financial management in universities. 2008. https://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-research/pdf/download_en/external_funding_final_report.pdf [cited 28 September 2021]
- Zhu F, Hawk S. Rethinking the relationship between academia and industry: qualitative case studies of MIT and Stanford. Sci Eng Ethics 2016; 22(5): 1497–511. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9699-0
- Grossman JH, Reid PP, Morgan RP. Contributions of academic research to industrial performance in five industry sectors. J Technol Transfer 2001; 26(1): 143–52. doi: 10.1023/A:1007848631448
- Mowery DC. Ivory tower and industrial innovation: university-industry technology transfer before and after the Bayh-Dole act in the United States. Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Books; 2004.
- Muscio A, Nardone G. The determinants of university–industry collaboration in food science in Italy. Food Policy 2012; 37(6): 710–18. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.07.003
- Guilhon B. Markets for knowledge: problems, scope, and economic implications. Econ Innov New Technol 2004; 13(2): 165–81. doi: 10.1080/10438590410001628134
- Fontana R, Geuna A, Matt M. Factors affecting university–industry R&D projects: the importance of searching, screening and signalling. Res Policy 2006; 35(2): 309–23. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.12.001
- D’Este P, Patel P. University–industry linkages in the UK: what are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry? Res Policy 2007; 36(9): 1295–313. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2007.05.002
- Muscio A, Vallanti G. Perceived obstacles to university–industry collaboration: results from a qualitative survey of Italian academic departments. Indust Innov 2014; 21(5): 410–29. doi: 10.1080/13662716.2014.969935
- Bekkers R, Bodas Freitas IM. Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: to what degree do sectors also matter? Res Policy 2008; 37(10): 1837–53. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2008.07.007
- Mohnen P, Hoareau C. What type of enterprise forges close links with universities and government labs? Evidence from CIS 2. Manag Decis Econ 2003; 24(2/3): 133–45. doi: 10.1002/mde.1086
- Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research. Food and industry 2017 – status and developement in Norwegian industry. 2017. https://nibio.no/nyheter/okt-verdiskaping-i-norges-matindustri/_/attachment/inline/ebd23a74-6ad9-4096-843c-8adca5883d47:d942be4e8bb12d9175526e134d448d29d9d2aeba/Mat%20og%20industri%202017%20presentasjon.pdf [cited 28 September 2021]
- Norwegian Government. Long-time strategy for research and higher education 2019–2028. Research MoEa, editor. Oslo; 2018. Ministry of Education and Research. https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/meld.-st.-4-20182019/id2614131/
- Hillerbrand R, Werker C. Values in university-industry collaborations: the case of academics working at Universities of Technology. Sci Eng Ethics 2019; 25(6): 1633–56. doi: 10.1007/s11948-019-00144-w
- Ehrismann D, Patel D. University – industry collaborations: models, drivers and cultures. Swiss Med Wkly 2015; 145: w14086. doi: 10.4414/smw.2015.14086
- Rasmussen K, Bero L, Redberg R, Gøtzsche PC, Andreas. L. Collaboration between academics and industry in clinical trials: cross sectional study of publications and survey of lead academic authors. BMJ 2018; 363: k4298. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k4298
- Sacks G, Swinburn BA, Cameron AJ, Ruskin G. How food companies influence evidence and opinion – straight from the horse’s mouth. Critical Public Health 2018; 28(2): 253–6. doi: 10.1080/09581596.2017.1371844
- Serodio P, Ruskin G, McKee M, Stuckler D. Evaluating Coca-Cola’s attempts to influence public health ‘in their own words’: analysis of Coca-Cola emails with public health academics leading the Global Energy Balance Network. Public Health Nutr 2020; 23(14): 2647–53. doi: 10.1017/S1368980020002098
- Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2006; 3(2): 77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
- Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care 2007; 19(6): 349–57. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
- Vest CM. Three questions in search of answers. 1999. http://web.mit.edu/president/communications/rpt98-99.html
- Serôdio PM, McKee M, Stuckler D. Coca-Cola – a model of transparency in research partnerships? A network analysis of Coca-Cola’s research funding (2008–2016). Public Health Nutr 2018; 21(9): 1594–607. doi: 10.1017/S136898001700307X
- Jack MM. Do sugar-sweetened beverages cause obesity and diabetes? Ann Intern Med 2017; 167(1): 72. doi: 10.7326/L17-0192
- Miozzo M, Desyllas P, Lee H-f, Miles I. Innovation collaboration and appropriability by knowledge-intensive business services firms. Res Policy 2016; 45(7): 1337–51. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.018
- van Wee B. The need for a code of conduct for research funders: commentary on values in university-industry collaborations: the case of academics working at universities of technology. Sci Eng Ethics 2019; 25(6): 1657–60. doi: 10.1007/s11948-019-00145-9
- Crouch M, McKenzie H. The logic of small samples in interview-based qualitative research. Soc Sci Inform 2006; 45(4): 483–99. doi: 10.1177/0539018406069584
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright of their work, with first publication rights granted to SNF Swedish Nutrition Foundation. Read the full Copyright- and Licensing Statement.
