Data Analysis

The interviews were recorded, except for a couple of interviews where recording was not or only partly possible due to technical problems and notes had to be taken which were transcribed more extensively immediately afterwards. The recordings have been transcribed and the answers have been analysed using the framework set out in Table 5.1.

This resulted in the following structure for the results subchapters:

  • 0. Commodification constraints faced by the universities
  • 1. Awareness of competition law
  • 2. Economic Activity
  • 3. Full costing
  • 4. Market foreclosure
  • 5. Refusal to enter into contractual relations and preferred partners
  • 6. Economically unjustified or discriminatory contract conditions
  • 7. Anti-competitive use of IPRs
  • 8. Anti-competitive research co-operation
  • 9. Market division
  • 10. Limiting markets
  • 11. Commissioning of research
  • 12. State aid through staff knowledge
  • 13. Exemptions
  • 14. SGEIs
  • 15. Interim conclusion

As mentioned above, an attempt was made to achieve a balanced sample of universities. As regards the topic of this study, this did not, however, lead to largely different results between the individual universities. If any peculiarities have been detected this has been made clear in the results chapters.

 
Source
< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >