Technology strategy for enhancing the public-to-private technology transfer: Evidence from the duration of patent

Applied Economics

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 229-240

  Lee, Yoon Jun ^a   Lee, Jeong Dong ^a  

^a Science and Technology Policy Institute   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL INDUSTRY; PRIVATE SECTOR; PUBLIC SECTOR; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

EID: 37549069316     PISSN: 00036846     EISSN: 14664283     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00036840600749854     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Acosta, J. and Modrego, A. (2001) Public financing of cooperative R&D projects under the national R&D plan. Research Policy, 33, pp. 625-641.
2. Austin, DH (1993) An event-study approach to measuring innovative output: The case of biotechnology. American Economic Review, 83, pp. 253-258.
3. Bishop, P. and Wiseman, N. (1999) External ownership and innovation in the United Kingdom. Applied Economics, 31, pp. 443-450.
4. Bloedon, RV and Stokes, DR (1994) Making university/industry collaboration research succeed. Research-Technology Management, 24, pp. 373-386.
5. Brockhoff, K. (1992) Instruments for patent data. Technovation, 12, pp. 451-458.
6. Brockhoff, K. and Chakrabarti, A. (1997) Take a proactive approach to negotiating your R&D budget. Research-Technology Management, 40, pp. 37-41.
7. Castello, PMP, Rojo, J., Belliodo, F., Fiore, F. and Tubke, A. (2003) Early identification and marketing of innovative technologies: A case study of RTD result valorization at the European Commission's Joint Research Centre. Technovation, 23, pp. 655-667.
8. Chan, F., Marinova, D. and McAleer, M. (2004) The relationship between R&D, investment and patents: A panel data analysis. Applied Economics, 32, pp. 1429-1437.
9. Chesbrough, H. (2003) Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creatinbg and Profiting from Technology, Harvard Business School Press, MA, US
10. Cohen, W., Nelson, R. and Walsh, J. (1996) Appropriability conditions and why firms patent and why they do not in the American manufacturing sector. Paper Presented at the Conference on New Science and Technology Indicators for the Knowledge-Based Economy
11. Collier, W. (2005) Unemployment duration and individual heterogeneity: A regional study. Applied Economics, 37, pp. 133-153.
12. Cueto, B. and Mato, J. (2006) An analysis of self-employment subsidies with duration models. Applied Economics, 38, pp. 23-32.
13. Ernst, H. (1995) Patenting strategies in the German mechanical engineering industry and their relationship to company performance. Technovation, 15, pp. 225-240.
14. Ernst, H. (2003) Patent information for strategic technology management. World Patent Information, 25, pp. 233-242.
15. Fai, FM (2005) Using intellectual property data to analyze China's growing technological capabilities. World Patent Information, 27, pp. 49-61.
16. Ford, D. and Ryan, C. (1981) Taking technology to market. Harvard Business Review, 59, pp. 117-126.
17. Friedman, J. and Silberman, J. (2003) University technology transfer: Do incentives, management and location matter?. Journal of Technology Transfer, 28, pp. 17-30.
18. Greene, WH (2003) Econometric Analysis, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, US
19. Hall, BH and Ham, RM (1999) The patent paradox revisited: Determinants of patenting in the US semiconductor industry: 1980-1994, p. 7062.
20. Henderson, RL, Jaffe, A. and Trajtenberg, M. (1998) Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965-1988. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80, pp. 119-127.
21. Hopenhayn, HM and Mitchell, MF (1999) Innovation fertility and patent design, p. 7070.
22. Jensen, R. and Thursby, M. (2001) Proofs and prototypes for sale: The licensing of university inventions. American Economic Review, 91, pp. 240-259.
23. Kanwar, S. and Evenson, R. (2003) Does intellectual property protection spur technological change?. Oxford Economic Papers, 55, pp. 235-264.
24. Kiefer, NM (1988) Economic duration data and hazard function. Journal of Economic Literature, 26, pp. 646-679.
25. Lach, S. and Schankerman, M. (2003) Incentives and invention in universities, p. 9727.
26. Lanjouw, JO, Pakes, A. and Putnam, J. (1998) How to count patents and value intellectual property: The uses of patent renewal and application data. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 46, pp. 405-432.
27. Lerner, J. (1994) The importance of patent scope: An empirical analysis. RAND Journal of Economics, 25, pp. 319-333.
28. Mansfield, E. (1986) Patents and innovation: An empirical study. Management Science, 32, pp. 173-181.
29. Mansfield, E. (1995) Academic research underlying industrial innovations: Sources, characteristics, and financing. Review of Economics and Statistics, 77, pp. 55-65.
30. Meliciani, V. (2000) The relationship between R&D, investment and patents: A panel data analysis. Applied Economics, 32, pp. 1429-1437.
31. Mora-Valentine, EM, Montoro-Sanchez, A. and Guerra-Martin, LA (2004) Determining factors in the success of R&D cooperative agreements between firms and research organizations. Research Policy, 33, pp. 17-40.
32. Palomeras, N. (2003) Sleeping patents: Any reason to wake up?, p. 506. IESE Business School
33. Pavitt, K. (1991) What makes basic research economically useful?. Research Policy, 20, pp. 109-119.
34. Schankerman, M. (1998) How valuable is patent protection? Estimates by technology field. RAND Journal of Economics, 29, pp. 77-107.
35. Sempere-Monerris, JJ and Vannetelbosch, VJ (2001) The patent holder's bargaining power and the licensing of an innovation. Applied Economics Letters, 8, pp. 765-769.
36. Shane, S. (2001) Technological opportunities and new firm creation. Management Science, 47, pp. 205-220.
37. Siegel, D., Waldman, D. and Link, A. (2003) Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32, pp. 27-48.
38. Stancanelli, E. (1999) Unemployment duration and the duration of entitlement to unemployment benefits: An empirical study for Britain. Applied Economics, 31, pp. 1043-1051.
39. Thursby, J. and Kemp, S. (2002) Growth and productive efficiency of university intellectual property licensing. Research Policy, 31, pp. 109-124.
40. Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R. and Jaffe, A. (1997) University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 5, pp. 19-50.