Governments and universities as the main drivers of enhanced Australian university research commercialisation capability

Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 153-169

  Harman, Grant ^a   Harman, Kay ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 3042734368     PISSN: 1360080X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1360080042000218230     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Australian Centre for Innovation Howard Partners & Carisgold. (2003). Best practice processes for university research commercialisation: Final report. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training.
2. Australian Institute for Commercialisation. (2003). About the AIC. Brisbane. 〈http://www.ausicom.com.au/01_about/index.htm〉.
3. Australian Research Council. (2000). Research in the national interest: Commercialising university research in Australia. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
4. Australian Research Council, Australian Tertiary Institutions Commercial Companies Association, Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee, DETYA, DISR, IP Australia & NHMRC. (2001). National principles of intellectual property management for publicly funded research. Canberra.
5. Batterham, R. (2000). The chance to change: Final report by the Chief Scientist. Canberra: Department of Industry, Science and Resources.
6. Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: A review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29, 627-655.
7. Christie, A. F., d'Aloisio, S., Gaita, K. L., Howlett, M. J., & Weber, E. M. (2003). Analysis of the legal framework for patent ownership in publicly funded research institutions. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training.
8. Geiger, R. (2003). Beyond technology transfer: New state policies for economic development for U.S. universities. Paper presented at 16th CHER Annual Conference, Porto, September.
9. Gittelman, M. (2002). The institutional origins of national innovation performance: Careers, organisations, and patents in biotechnology in the United States and France. Unpublished manuscript, New York University.
10. Goldfarb, B., & Henrekson, M. (2003). Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialisation of university intellectual property. Research Policy, 32(4), 639-658.
11. Henrekson, M., & Rosenberg, N. (2001). Designing efficient institutions for science-based entrepreneurship: Lessons from the US and Sweden. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(3), 207-231.
12. Jones, A., Hunt, D., & Sharp, D. (2003). Commonwealth and state government programs supporting innovation in firms at January 2003. Canberra: Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources.
13. Kemp, D. (1999). Knowledge and innovation: A policy statement on research and research training. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
14. Lambert Review of Business-Industry Collaboration. (2003). Summary of consultation responses and emerging issues. London: HM Treasury Public Relations Enquiry Unit.
15. Melbourne Consulting Group. (1999). University research: Technology transfer and commercialisation practices. Canberra: Australian Research Council.
16. Miles, D. (Chair). (2000). Innovation: Unlocking the future: Final report of the Innovation Summit Implementation Group. Canberra: Department of Industry, Science and Resources.
17. National Survey of Research Commercialisation Year 2000. (2003). Canberra: Australian Research Council, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, and National Health and Medical Research Council.
18. Nelson, B. (2002). Higher education at the crossroads: An overview paper. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training.
19. Prime Minister's Science, Engineering and Innovation Council. (2001). Commercialisation of public sector research. Canberra.
20. Ross, H. (2001). Supporting high technology startups - The Scottish experience. Paper presented to High Technology Small Firms Conference, Manchester Business School, May.
21. Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27-48.
22. Sizer, J. (2002). Research and the knowledge age. Tertiary Education and Management, 7, 227-242.
23. Tornatzky, L., Waugaman, P., & Gray, D. (1999). Innovation U: New university roles in a knowledge economy. Research Park Triangle, NC: Southern Growth Policies Board, USA.
24. University of Melbourne. (2000). Introducing the University's new policy on intellectual property. 〈http://www.research.unimelb.edu.au/ridg/ip/ ip_policy.doc〉.