A baseline for the impact of academic patenting legislation in Norway

Scientometrics

Volumn 70, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 393-414

  Iversen, Eric J ^a,b   Gulbrandsen, Magnus ^a   Klitkou, Antje ^a  

^a NORDIC INSTITUTE FOR STUDIES IN INNOVATION   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846344931     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-007-0209-2     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. BALCONI, M., BRESCHI, S., LISSONI, F. (2004), Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data. Research Policy, 33 (1): 127-145.
2. BALDINI, N., GRIMALDI, R., SOBRERO, M. (2007), To patent or not to patent: A survey of Italian inventors on motivations, incentives and obstacles to university patenting. Scientometrics, 70: 333-354.
3. BASSECOULARD, E., ZITT, M. (2004), Patents and publications: the lexical connection. In: H. F. MOED, W. GLÄNZEL, U. SCHMOCH (Eds), Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 665-694.
4. BERGLUND, F., WENDT, K. (Eds) (2004), Report on Science & Technology Indicators for Norway: 2003. Oslo: The Research Council of Norway.
5. CALVERT, J., PATEL, P. (2003), University-industry research collaborations in the UK: bibliometric trends. Science and Public Policy, 30 (2): 85-96.
6. CLARK, B. R. (1998), Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation. New York: Pergamon.
7. DAVID, P. A., MOWERY, D. C., STEINMUELLER, W. E. (1994), Analyzing the economic payoffs from basic research. In: D. C. MOWERY (Ed.), Science and Technology Policy in Interdependent Economies, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 57-78.
8. DU PLESSIS, M., LOOY, B. V., DEBACKERE, K., MAGERMAN, T. (2005), Assessing academic patent activity: the case of Flanders. Paper presented at the 5th Triple Helix International Conference: The Capitalization of Knowledge, Turin, Italy.
9. ETZKOWITZ, H. (1998), The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy, 27 (8): 823-833.
10. ETZKOWTTZ, H. (2003), Research groups as 'quasi-firms': The invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32 (1): 109-121.
11. ETZKOWITZ, H., LEYDESDORFF, L. (2000), The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29 (2): 109-123.
12. ETZKOWITZ, H., WEBSTER, A., OEBHARDT, C., TERRA, B. R. C. (2000), The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29 (2): 313-330.
13. FLORIDA, R., COHEN, W. M. (1999), Engine or infrastructure? The university role in economic development. In: L. M. BRANSCOMB, F. KODAMA, R. FLORIDA (Eds), Industrializing Knowledge. University-Industry Linkages in Japan and the United States, Cambridge MA/London: MIT Press, pp. 589-610.
14. FREEMAN, C. (1987), Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Pinter.
15. GEUNA, A. (2001), The changing rationale for European university research funding: are there negative unintended consequences? Journal of Economic Issues, XXXV(3): 607-632.
16. GEUNA, A., NESTA, L. (2003), University Patenting and Its Effects on Academic Research. Brighton: SPRU-University of Sussex.
17. GIBBONS, M., LIMOGES, C., NOWOTNY, H., SCHWARTZMAN, S., SCOTT, P., TROW, M. (1994), The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage.
18. GODIN, B., GINGRAS, Y. (2000), Impact of collaborative research on academic science. Science and Public Policy, 27 (1): 65-73.
19. GULBRANDSEN, M. (2003), "Jeg gjør jo ikke dette for å bli rik av del": kommersialisering av norsk universitetsforskning - en intervjustudie. Oslo: Norsk institutt for studier av forskning og utdanning.
20. GULBRANDSEN, M., SMEBY, J.-C. (2005), Industry funding and university professors' research performance. Research Policy, 34 (6): 932-950.
21. GUSTON, D. H., KENISTON, K. (1994), Introduction: the social contract for science. In: The Fragile Contract: University Science and the Federal Government, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, pp. 1-41.
22. HENDERSON, R., JAFFE, A. B., TRAJTENBERG, M. (1998), Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965-1988. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80 (1): 119-127.
23. JAFFE, A. B., LERNER, J. (2004), Innovation and Its Discontents: How Our Broken Patent System is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What to Do about It. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
24. LUNDVALL, B.-A. (Ed.) (1992), National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Pinter Publishers.
25. MARTIN, B. R. (2003), The changing social contract for science and the evolution of the university. In: A. GEUNA, A. J. SALTER, W. E. STEINMUELLER (Eds), Science and Innovation: Rethinking the Rationales for Funding and Governance, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 7-29.
26. MARTIN, B. R., ETZKOWITZ, H. (2000), The origin and evolution of the university species. VEST Journal for Science and Technology Studies, 13 (3-4): 9-34.
27. IVERSEN, E. J. (2005), Patenter Som Indikatorer. In: MAUS, K. W., WENDT, K. (Eds) (2005), Det Norske Forsknings- og Innovasjoiissystemet - Statistikk og Indikatorer, Oslo: Norges Forskningsråd, pp. 220-235.
28. MEYER, M. (2003a), Academic entrepreneurs or entrepreneurial academics? Research-based ventures and public support mechanisms. R&D Management, 33 (2): 107-115.
29. MEYER, M. (2003b), Academic patents as an indicator of useful research? A new approach to measure academic inventiveness. Research Evaluation, 12 (1): 17-27.
30. MEYER, M., SINILÄINEN, T., UTECHT, J. T. (2003), Towards hybrid Triple Helix indicators: A study of university-related patents and a survey of academic inventors. Scientometrics, 58 (2): 321-350.
31. MOWERY, D. C., SAMPAT, B. N. (2005), Universities in national innovation systems. In: J. FAGERBERG, D. C. MOWERY, R. R. NELSON (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 209-239.
32. MOWERY, D. C., ZIEDONIS, A. A. (2002), Academic patent quality and quantity before and after the Bayh-Dole act in the United States. Research Policy, 31 (3): 399-418.
33. NELSON, R. R. (2001), Observations on the Post-Bayh-Dole rise of patenting at American universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26 (1-2): 13-19.
34. NELSON, R. R. (Ed.) (1993), National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
35. OECD (2003), Turning Science into Business: Patenting and Licensing at Public Research Organisations. Paris: OECD.
36. ROSENBERG, N., NELSON, R. R. (1994), American universities and technical advance in industry. Research Policy, 23 (3): 323-348.
37. SAMPAT, B. N., NELSON, R. R. (2002), The evolution of university patenting and licensing procedures: An empirical study of institutional change. Advances in Strategic Management, 19: 135-164.
38. SAPSALIS, E., POTTERIE, B. V. P. D. L. (2003), Insight into the patenting performance of Belgian universities. Brussels Economic Journal, 46 (3): 37-58.
39. SAPSALIS, E., LOOY, B. V., POTTELSBERGHE, B. V., CALLAERT, J., DEBACKERE, K. (2005), On the Patenting Performance of European Universities. Paper presented at the 5th Triple Helix International Conference: The Capitalization of Knowledge, Turin, Italy.
40. SARAGOSSI, S., POTTERIE, B. V. P. D. L. (2003), What patent data reveal about universities: The case of Belgium. Journal of Technology Transfer, 28 (1): 47-51.
41. SCHMOCH, U. (2004), The technological output of scientific institutions. In: H. F. MOED, W. OLÄNZEL, U. SCHMOCH (Eds), Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 717-731.
42. SLAUGHTER, S., RHOADES, G. (1996), The emergence of a competitiveness research and development policy coalition and the commercialization of academic science and technology. Science, Technology & Human Values, 21(3): 303-339.
43. STANKIEWICZ, R. (1986), Academics and Entrepreneurs: Developing University-Industry Relations. London: Pinter.
44. TRAJTENBERG, M., HENDERSON, R., JAFFE, A. B. (1997), University versus corporate patents. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 5: 19-50.
45. VALENTIN, F., JENSEN, R. L. (2003), Discontinuities and distributed innovation: the case of biotechnology in food production. Industry and Innovation, 10 (3): 275-310.
46. VAN LOOY, B., RANGA, M., CALLAERT, J., DEBACKERE, K., ZIMMERMANN, E. (2004), Combining entrepreneurial and scientific performance in academia: Towards a compounded and reciprocal Mattheweffect? Research Policy, 33 (3): 425-441.
47. VAVAKOVA, B. (1998), The new social contract between governments, universities and society: Has the old one failed? Minerva, 36 (3): 209-228.
48. WEBSTER, A. (2003), Knowledge translations: Beyond the public/private divide? Journal of Education through Partnership, 3 (2): 7-22.