Material transfer agreements and collaborative publication activity: The case of a biotechnology network

Research Evaluation

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 123-136

  Rodriguez, Victor ^a   Janssens, Frizo ^b   Debackere, Koenraad ^a   De Moor, Bart ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^b Katholieke Universiteit Leuven   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548583452     PISSN: 09582029     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/095820207X227510     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Allen, T 1985. Managing the Flow of Technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2. Bailyn, L 1985. Autonomy in the industrial R&D lab. Human Resource Management, 24, 129-146.
3. Barabási, A 2002. Emergence of scaling in complex networks. In Handbook of Graphs and Networks: From the Genome to the Internet, eds. S Bornholdt and H Schuster. Berlin: Wiley-VCH.
4. Barabási, A and R Albert 1999. Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286, 509-512.
5. Barton, J and W Siebeck 1994. Material transfer agreements in genetic resources exchange: the case of the international agricultural research centres. Rome: International Plant Genetic Resources Institute.
6. Batagelj, V and A Mrvar 2006. Pajek: Reference Manual. Ljubljana. 〈http://vlado.fmf.uni-lj.si/pub/networks/pajek/doc/pajekman.pdf〉, last accessed 16 July 2007.
7. Beaver, D de B 2004. Does collaborative research have greater epistemic authority? Scientometrics, 60, 399-408.
8. Burt, R 1992. Structural Holes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
9. Burt, R 2000. Decay functions. Social Networks, 22, 1-28.
10. Callon, M 1990. Society in the making: the study of technology as a tool for sociological analysis. In The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, eds. W Bijker, T Hughes and T Pinch. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11. Cohen, W and D Levinthal 1990. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128-152.
12. Cook, K 1977. Exchange and power in networks of inter-organisational relations. Sociological Quarterly, 18, 62-82.
13. Crane, D 1972. Invisible Colleges. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
14. Debackere, K and B Clarysse 1998. Advanced bibliometric methods to model the relationship between entry behavior and networking in emerging technological communities. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49, 49-58.
15. Eisenberg, R 2001. Bargaining over the transfer of proprietary research tools. In Expanding the Boundaries of Intellectual Property, eds. R Dreyfuss, D Zimmerman and H First. New York: Oxford University Press.
16. Ensenrik, M 1999. NIH proposes rules for material exchange. Science, 284, 1445.
17. Etzkowitz, H and L Leydesdorff 2000. The dynamic of innovation: from national systems and mode 2 to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109-123.
18. Feld, S 1981. The focused organization of social ties. American Journal of Sociology, 86, 1015-1035.
19. Fleming, L, C King and A Juba 2004. Small worlds and regional innovative advantage. Working Paper. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
20. Fountain, J 1997. Social capital: a key enabler of innovation in science and technology. In Investing in Innovation: Toward a Consensus Strategy for Federal Technology Policy, eds. L Branscomb and J Keller. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. Frame, J and M Carpenter 1979. International research collaboration. Social Studies of Science, 9, 481-497.
22. Freeman, C 1995. The national system of innovation in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19, 5-24.
23. Glänzel, W 2001. National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics, 51, 69-115.
24. Glänzel, W 2002. Co-authorship patterns and trends in the sciences (1980-1998): a bibliometric study with implications for database indexing and search strategies. Library Trends, 50, 461-473.
25. Glänzel, W and C de Lange 1997. Modelling and measuring multilateral co-authorship in international scientific collaboration: a comparative study on the extent and change of international scientific collaboration. Scientometrics, 40, 605-626.
26. Glänzel, W, M Meyer, B Schlemmer, M du Plessis, B Thijs, T Magerman, K Debackere and R Veugelers 2003. Biotechnology: an Analysis Based on Publications and Patents. Leuven: Steunpunt O&O Statistieken.
27. Goffman, W and K Warren 1980. Scientific Information Systems and the Principle of Selectivity, New York, NY: Praeger.
28. Gómez, I, M Fernández and A Méndez 1995. Collaboration patterns of Spanish scientific publications in different research areas and disciplines. In Proceedings of the Biennial Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and lnformetrics, eds. M Koenig and A Bookstein. Medford, NJ: Learned.
29. Grupp, H and U Schmoch 1992. Perception of scientification as measured by referencing between patents and papers. In Dynamics of Science-Based Innovation, ed. H. Grupp. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
30. Hagstrom, W 1965. The Scientific Community. New York, NY: Basic Books.
31. Hicks, D and J Katz 1997. Corporate publishing in life sciences. Biofutur, 168, 78-79.
32. Jarillo, J 1988. On strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 9, 31-41.
33. Krackhart, D and J Hanson 1993. Informal networks: the company behind the chart. Harvard Business Review, 71, 104-111.
34. Kunin, S, M Nagumo, B Stanton, L Therkorn and S Walsh 2002. Reach-through claims in the age of biotechnology. American University Law Journal, 51, 608-638.
35. Law, J 1990. Technology and heterogeneous engineering: the case of Portuguese expansion. In The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, eds. W Bijker, T Hughes and T Pinch. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36. Lawton Smith, H 1997. Adjusting the roles of national laboratories: some comparison between UK, French, and Belgian institutions. R&D Management, 27, 319-331.
37. Liebeskind, J, A Oliver, L Zucker and M Brewer 1996. Social networks, learning, and flexibility: sourcing scientific knowledge in new biotechnology firms. Organization Science, 7, 428-443.
38. Melin, G 2000. Pragmatism and self-organization: research collaboration on the individual level. Research Policy, 29, 31-40.
39. Merton, R 1973. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
40. Milgram, S 1967. The small world. Psychology Today, 2, 60-67.
41. Mirowski, P and R van Horn 2005. The contract research organization and the commercialization of scientific research. Social Studies of Science, 35, 503-548.
42. Murray, F 2006. The Oncomouse that Roared: Resistance and Accommodation to Patenting in Academic Science. Working Paper. Cambridge, MA: MIT Sloan School of Management.
43. Murray, F and S Stern 2006. When ideas are not free: the impact of patents on scientific research. NBER Conference on Innovation Policy and the Economy, Washington, DC.
44. Narin, F, K Stevens and E Whitlow 1991. Scientific cooperation in Europe and the citation of multinationality authored papers. Scientometrics, 21, 313-323.
45. Newman, M 2001. The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98, 404-409.
46. Nohria, N and R Eccles eds. 1992. Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
47. Persson, O, W Glänzel and R Danell 2004. Inflationary bibliometric values: the role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies. Scientometrics, 60, 421-432.
48. Pfeffer, J and G Salancik 1978. The External Control of Organisations: a Resource Dependence Perspective. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
49. Pisano, G 1990. The R&D boundaries of the firm: an empirical analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 153-176.
50. Pisano, G 2002. Pharmaceutical biotechnology. In Technological Innovation and Economic Performance, eds. R Nelson, D Victor and B Steil. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
51. Powell, W 1990. Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organisation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 295-336.
52. Powell, W, K Koput and L Smith-Doerr 1996. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 116-145.
53. Price, de Solla D J 1965. Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149, 510-515.
54. Provan, K 1993. Embeddedness, interdependence and opportunism in organisational supplier-buyer networks. Journal of Management, 19, 841-856.
55. Rodriguez, V 2005. Material transfer agreements: Open science vs. proprietary claims. Nature Biotechnology, 23, 489-491.
56. Rodriguez, V and K Debackere 2007, Strategies for satisfying the need for research materials. Forthcoming, Les Nouvelles.
57. Rodriguez, V, F Janssens, K Debackere and B de Moor 2007. Do material transfer agreements affect the choice of research agendas? The case of biotechnology in Belgium. Scientometrics, 71, 239-269.
58. Salman, N and A Saives 2005. Indirect networks: an intangible resource for biotechnology innovation. R&D Management, 35, 203-215.
59. Scott, J 1991. Social Network Analysis: a Handbook. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
60. Steward, F, S Conway and M Overton 1993. Depicting innovation networks. In Design, Networks and Strategies: Proceedings from COSTA3 Workshop, eds. A Francis, S Hörte and J. Lindegaard-Pedersen. Grenoble: EC COST Social Science Series.
61. Streitz, W and A Bennett 2003. Material transfer agreements: a university perspective. Plant Physiology, 133, 10-13.
62. Streitz, W, I de Bear, C Calmettes and F Reinhart 2003. Material Transfer Agreements: a Win-Win for Academia and Industry. Northbrook, IL: Association of University Technology Managers.
63. Thorelli, H 1988. Networks: between markets and hierarchies. Strategic Management Journal, 7, 37-51.
64. Van Overwalle, G, E van Zimmeren, B Verbeure and G Matthijs 2006. Models for facilitating access to patents on genetic inventions. Nature Reviews Genetics, 7, 143-148.
65. Van Zimmeren, E, B Verbeure, G Matthijs and G van Overwalle 2006. A clearing house for diagnostic testing: the solution to ensure access to and use of patented genetic inventions? Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 84, 352-359.
66. Verbeure, B, E van Zimmeren, G Matthijs and G van Overwalle 2006. Patent pools and diagnostic testing. Trends in Biotechnology, 24, 115-120.
67. Walsh, J, A Arora and W Cohen 2003. Research tool patenting and licensing and biomedical innovation. In Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy, eds. W Cohen and S Merrill. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
68. Walsh, J, C Cho and W Cohen 2005. Patents, Material Transfers, and Access to Research Inputs in Biomedical Research: Final report to the National Academy of Sciences' Committee Intellectual Property Rights in Genomic and Protein-Related Inventions. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois at Chicago.
69. Watts, D 1999. Small Worlds. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
70. Wernerfelt, B 1984. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5, 171-180.
71. Whitaker, J 1994. The prior art effect of material transfer agreements. Journal of the Association of University Technology Managers, VI, 1-10.
72. White, H 1985. Agency as control. In Principal and Agents, eds. J Pratt and R Zeckhauser. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.