Scientists' perspectives concerning the effects of university patenting on the conduct of academic research in the life sciences

Journal of Technology Transfer

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 14-37

  Davis, Lee ^a   Larsen, Maria Theresa ^b   Lotz, Peter ^a  

^a Copenhagen Business School ^*  (Denmark)

^b DAMVAD   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Academic patenting; Life sciences; Scientists' perspectives; Universities

Indexed keywords

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

ACADEMIC PATENTING; ACADEMIC RESEARCH; DENMARK; LIFE-SCIENCES; OPEN SCIENCE; SCIENTISTS' PERSPECTIVES; UNIVERSITIES;

PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

EID: 78751644993     PISSN: 08929912     EISSN: 15737047     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10961-009-9142-2     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Aghion, P., Dewatripont, M., & Stein, J. C. (2008). Academic freedom, private-sector focus, and the process of innovation. RAND Journal of Economics, 39(3), 617-635. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1756-2171. 2008. 00031. x.
2. Agrawal, A., & Henderson, R. (2002). Putting patents in context: Exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), 44-60. doi: 10. 1287/mnsc. 48. 1. 44. 14279.
3. Allen, D. N., & Norling, F. (1991). Exploring perceived threats in faculty commercializations of research. In R. W. Smilor, D. V. Gibson, & A. Brett (Eds.), University spinout corporations: Economic development, faculty entrepreneurs, and technology transfer. Savage, MD: Rowan and Littlefield.
4. Andrews, F. M., & Farris, G. F. (1972). Time pressure and performance of scientists and engineers: A five-year panel study. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 8, 185-200. doi: 10. 1016/0030-5073(72)90045-1.
5. Argyres, N. S., & Liebeskind, J. P. (1998). Privatizing the intellectual commons: Universities and the commercialization of biotechnology. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 35(4), 427-454. doi: 10. 1016/S0167-2681(98)00049-3.
6. Azoulay, P., Ding, W., & Stuart, T. (2006). The impact of academic patenting on the rate, quality, and direction of (public) research. NBER Working Paper No. 11917.
7. Azoulay, P., Ding, W., & Stuart, T. (2007). The determinants of faculty patenting behavior: Demographics or opportunities? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 63(4), 599-623. doi: 10. 1016/j. jebo. 2006. 05. 015.
8. Baldini, N., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2005). Motivations and incentives for patenting within universities: A survey of Italian inventors. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn. com/abstract=718481.
9. Behrens, T. R., & Gray, D. O. (2001). Unintended consequences of cooperative research: Impact of industry sponsorship on climate for academic freedom and other graduate student outcome. Research Policy, 30, 179-199. doi: 10. 1016/S0048-7333(99)00112-2.
10. Bennich-Björkman, L. (1997). Organising innovative research: The inner life of university departments. Amsterdam: Pergamon.
11. Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2008). Academic entrepreneurs: Organizational change at the individual level. Organization Science, 19(1), 69-89. doi: 10. 1287/orsc. 1070. 0295.
12. Blumenthal, D., Campbell, E. G., Anderson, M. S., Causino, N., & Louis, K. S. (1997). Withholding research results in academic life science: Evidence from a national survey of faculty. Journal of the American Medical Association, 277, 1224-1228. doi: 10. 1001/jama. 277. 15. 1224.
13. Blumenthal, D., Campbell, E. G., Causino, N., & Louis, K. S. (1996). Participation of life-science faculty in research relationships with industry. The New England Journal of Medicine, 335(23), 1734-1739. doi: 10. 1056/NEJM199612053352305.
14. Blumenthal, D., Gluck, M., Louis, K. S., Soto, M., & Wise, D. (1986). Industrial support of university research in biotechnology. Science, 231, 242-246. doi: 10. 1126/science. 3941897.
15. Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., & Montobbio, F. (2007). The scientific productivity of academic inventors: New evidence from Italian data. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 16(2), 101-118. doi: 10. 1080/10438590600982830.
16. Calderini, M., & Franzoni, C. (2004). Is academic patenting detrimental to high quality research? An empirical analysis of the relationship between scientific careers and patent application. CESPRI Working Paper No. 162.
17. Campbell, E. G., Weissman, J. S., Causino, N., & Blumenthal, D. (2000). Data withholding in academic medicine: Characteristics of faculty denied access to research results and biomaterials. Research Policy, 29, 303-312. doi: 10. 1016/S0048-7333(99)00068-2.
18. Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2002). Links and impacts: The influence of public research on industrial R& D. Management Science, 48(1), 1-23. doi: 10. 1287/mnsc. 48. 1. 1. 14273.
19. Dasgupta, P., & David, P. (1994). Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy, 23, 487-521. doi: 10. 1016/0048-7333(94)01002-1.
20. David, P. (2003). Can 'open science' be protected from the evolving regime of IPR protections? Stanford University Working Papers in Economics #03-011.
21. Di Gregorio, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy, 32, 209-227. doi: 10. 1016/S0048-7333(02)00097-5.
22. Elzinga, A. (1984). Research, bureaucracy and the drift of epistemic criteria. In B. Wittrock & A. Elzinga (Eds.), The university research system (pp. 191-220). Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell International.
23. Elzinga, A. (1997). The science-society contract in historical transformation: With special reference to 'epistemic drift. Symposium: Revisiting the theory of 'Finalization in Science' Social science Information (pp. 411-455). London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi: Sage Publications.
24. Etzkowitz, H. (1998). the norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy, 27, 823-833. doi: 10. 1016/S0048-7333(98)00093-6.
25. 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, 109-123. doi: 10. 1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4.
26. Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, 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, 313-330. doi: 10. 1016/S0048-7333(99)00069-4.
27. Fabrizio, K., & DiMinin, A. (2005). Commercializing the laboratory: Faculty patenting and the open science environment. Goizueta Business School Paper Series GBS-OM-2005-004.
28. Feller, I. (1990). Universities as engines of R& D-based economic growth: They think they can. Research Policy, 19, 335-348. doi: 10. 1016/0048-7333(90)90017-Z.
29. Ferné, G. (1995). Science and technology in the new world order. In A. Schwartzman (Ed.), Science and technology in Brazil: A new policy for a global world. Rio de Janeiro: Fundacao Getulio Vargas.
30. Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2009). Factors fostering academics to start up new ventures: An assessment of Italian founders' incentives. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(4), 380-402. doi: 10. 1007/s10961-008-9093-z.
31. Florida, R., & Cohen, W. M. (1999). Engine or infrastructure? The university's 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 and London: MIT Press.
32. Geuna, A., & Nesta, L. J. J. (2006). University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence. Research Policy, 35, 790-807. doi: 10. 1016/j. respol. 2006. 04. 005.
33. Gluck, M., Blumenthal, D., & Stoto, M. (1987). University-industry relationships in the life sciences: Implications for students and post-doctoral fellows. Research Policy, 16, 327-366. doi: 10. 1016/0048-7333(87)90018-7.
34. Göktepe-Hulten, D., & Mahagaonkar, P. (2009). Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: In the expectation of money or reputation? The Journal of Technology Transfer, published with open access at Springerlink. com. doi: 10. 1007/s10961-009-9126-2.
35. Gulbrandsen, M., & Smeby, J. C. (2005). Industry funding and university professors' research performance. Research Policy, 34, 932-950. doi: 10. 1016/j. respol. 2005. 05. 004.
36. Heller, M. A., & Eisenberg, R. S. (1998). Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science, 280, 698-701. doi: 10. 1126/science. 280. 5364. 698.
37. Henderson, R., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (1998). Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of university patenting, 1956-1998. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(1), 119-127. doi: 10. 1162/003465398557221.
38. Jacobsen, B., Madsen, M. B., & Vincent, C. (2001). Danish research environments: A study of the current state of university research [in Danish: Danske Forskningsmiljoeer: En undersoegelse af universitetsforsknings aktuelle situation]. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzel.
39. Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. (2001). Proofs and prototypes for sale: The licensing of university inventions. The American Economic Review, 91(1), 240-259.
40. Krimsky, S. (2003). Science in the private interest. Oxford: Rowan and Littlefield.
41. Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
42. Lee, Y. S. (1996). Technology transfer' and the research university: A search for the boundaries of university-industry collaboration. Research Policy, 25, 843-863. doi: 10. 1016/0048-7333(95)00857-8.
43. Lee, Y. S. (2000). The sustainability of university-industry research collaboration: An empirical assessment. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 25(2), 111-133. doi: 10. 1023/A: 1007895322042.
44. Levin, R. C., Klevorick, A., Nelson, R. R., & Winter S. (1987). Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 1987 (No): 783-831.
45. Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14(Special Issue), 95-112. doi: 10. 1002/smj. 4250141009.
46. Louis, K. S., Blumenthal, D., Gluck, M. E., & Stoto, M. A. (1989). Entrepreneurs in academe: An exploration of behaviors among life scientists. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34(1), 110-131. doi: 10. 2307/2392988.
47. Mansfield, E. (1995). Academic research underlying industrial innovations: Sources, characteristics, and financing. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(1), 55-65. doi: 10. 2307/2109992.
48. Martinelli, A., Meyer, M., & von Tunzelmann, N. (2008). Becoming an entrepreneurial university? A case study of knowledge exchange relationships and faculty attitudes in a medium-sized, research-oriented university. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), 259-283. doi: 10. 1007/s10961-007-9031-5.
49. Mazzoleni, R., & Nelson, R. R. (1998). The benefits and costs of strong patent protection: A contribution to the current debate. Research Policy, 27, 273-284. doi: 10. 1016/S0048-7333(98)00048-1.
50. Merton, R. (1973). Sociology of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
51. Metcalfe, J. S. (1998). Evolutionary economics and creative destruction. London and New York: Routledge.
52. Meyer, M. (2006). Academic inventiveness and entrepreneurship: On the importance of start-up companies in commercializing academic patents. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(4), 501-510. doi: 10. 1007/s10961-006-0010-z.
53. Mitroff, I. I. (1974). Norms and counter-norms in a select group of the Apollo moon scientists: A case study of the ambivalence of scientists. American Sociological Review, 39(4), 579-595. doi: 10. 2307/2094423.
54. Moutinho, P., Fontes, M., & Godinho, M. (2007). Do individual factors matter? A survey of scientists' patenting in Portuguese public research organisations. Scientometrics, 70(2), 355-377. doi: 10. 1007/s11192-007-0207-4.
55. Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., Sampat, B. N., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2001). The growth of patenting and licensing by US universities: An assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. Research Policy, 30, 99-119. doi: 10. 1016/S0048-7333(99)00100-6.
56. Murray, F., Aghion, P., Dewatripont, M., Kolev, J., & Stern, S. (2008). Of mice and academics: Examining the effect of openness on innovation. MIT Sloan Working Paper.
57. Murray, F., & Stern, S. (2007). Do formal intellectual property rights hinder the free flow of scientific knowledge? An empirical test of the anti-commons hypothesis. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 63(4), 648-687. doi: 10. 1016/j. jebo. 2006. 05. 017.
58. Nelson, R. R. (1959). The simple economics of basic scientific research. The Journal of Political Economy, 67, 297-306. doi: 10. 1086/258177.
59. Nelson, R. R. (2001). Observations on the post-Bayh-Dole rise of patenting at American universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1/2), 13-19. doi: 10. 1023/A: 1007875910066.
60. Nelson, R. R. (2004). The market economy, and the scientific commons. Research Policy, 33(3), 455-471. doi: 10. 1016/j. respol. 2003. 09. 008.
61. O'Gorman, C., Byrne, O., & Pandya, D. (2008). How scientists commercialise new knowledge via entrepreneurship. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(1), 23-43. doi: 10. 1007/s10961-006-9010-2.
62. O'Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of US universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994-1009. doi: 10. 1016/j. respol. 2005. 05. 011.
63. Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2001). To patent or not: Faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1/2), 99-114. doi: 10. 1023/A: 1007892413701.
64. Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2003). The expanding role of university patenting in the life sciences: Assessing the importance of experience and connectivity. Research Policy, 32(9), 1695-1711. doi: 10. 1016/s0048-7333(03)00045-3.
65. Pelz, D. C. (1964). Freedom in research. International Science and Technology, 26, 54-66.
66. Pelz, D. C., & Andrews, F. M. (1966). Autonomy, coordination, and stimulation in relation to scientific achievement. Behavioral Science, 11(2), 89-97. doi: 10. 1002/bs. 3830110202.
67. Renault, C. S. (2006). Academic capitalism and university incentives for faculty entrepreneurship. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(2), 227-239. doi: 10. 1007/s10961-005-6108-x.
68. Shane, S. A. (2004). Encouraging university entrepreneurship? The effect of the Bayh-Dole Act on university patenting in the United States. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1), 127-151. doi: 10. 1016/S0883-9026(02)00114-3.
69. Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27-48. doi: 10. 1016/S0048-7333(01)00196-2.
70. Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69(1), 99-118. doi: 10. 2307/1884852.
71. Simon, H. A. (1979). Rational decision making in business organizations. The American Economic Review, 69, 493-513.
72. Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
73. Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2000). The neo-liberal university. New Labor Forum, (Spring), 23-42.
74. Stephan, P. E., Gurmu, S., Sumell, A. J., & Black, G. (2007). Who's patenting in the university? Evidence from the survey of doctorate recipients. Economics of innovation and New Technology, 16(2), 71-99.
75. Stephan, P. E., & Levin, S. G. (1992). Striking the mother lode in science: The importance of age, place, and time. New York: Oxford University Press.
76. Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur's quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington D. C.: The Brookings Institution.
77. Thursby, J. G., Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: A survey of major US universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1/2), 59-72. doi: 10. 1023/A: 1007884111883.
78. Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2002). Who is selling the ivory tower? Sources of growth in university licensing. Management Science, 48(1), 90-104. doi: 10. 1287/mnsc. 48. 1. 90. 14271.
79. van Dierdonck, R., Debackere, K., & Engelen, B. (1990). University-industry relationships: How does the Belgian academic community feel about it? Research Policy, 19, 551-566. doi: 10. 1016/0048-7333(90)90012-U.
80. Verspagen, B. (2006). University research, intellectual property rights and European innovation systems. ECIS Working Paper No. 06. 05.
81. Vohora, A., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy, 33(1), 147-175. doi: 10. 1016/S0048-7333(03)00107-0.
82. Zucker, L. G., & Darby, M. R. (1996). Star scientists and institutional transformation: Patterns of invention and innovation in the.... Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 93(23), 12709. doi: 10. 1073/pnas. 93. 23. 12709.