The use and development of indicators for the commercialisation of university research in a national support programme

Technology Analysis and Strategic Management

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 481-495

  Gulbrandsen, Magnus ^a   Rasmussen, Einar ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^b NORD UNIVERSITY   (Norway)

Author keywords

additionality; commercialisation; indicators; university technology transfer

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC RESEARCH; COMMERCIALIZATION; GOVERNMENT; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER; UNIVERSITY SECTOR;

EID: 84861142511     PISSN: 09537325     EISSN: 14653990     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09537325.2012.674670     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Arundel, A., and C. Bordoy. 2007. Developing internationally comparable indicators for the commercialization of publicly-funded research. UNU-MERIT Working Paper No. 18. Maastricht, The Netherlands: UNU-MERIT.
2. Bolkesjø, T., and K. Vareide. 2004. Evaluering av kommersialiseringsenhetene i FORNY-programmet, 225. Bø: Telemarksforsking.
3. Borlaug, S.B., L. Grünfeld, M. Gulbrandsen, E. Rasmussen, L. Rønning, O.R. Spilling, and E. Vinogradov. 2009. Between entrepreneurship and technology transfer: Evaluation of the FORNY programme. Report 19/2009. Oslo: NIFU STEP.
4. Bozeman, B. 2000. Technology transfer and public policy: A review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29: 627-655.
5. Clausen, T. and Rasmussen, E. 2011. Open innovation policy through intermediaries: The industry incubator programme in Norway. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23: 75-85.
6. Cozzens, S. E. and Melkers, J. E. 1997. Use and usefulness of performance measurement in state science and technology programs. Policy Studies Journal, 25: 425-35.
7. Falk, R. 2007. Measuring the effects of public support schemes on firms' innovation activities-survey evidence from Austria. Research Policy, 36: 665-79.
8. Geuna, A. and Muscio, A. 2009. The governance of university knowledge transfer: A critical review of the literature. Minerva, 47(1): 93-114.
9. Geuna, A. and Nesta, L. J.J. 2006. University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence. Research Policy, 35: 790-807.
10. Godin, B. 2003. The emergence of S&T indicators: Why did governments supplement statistics with indicators?. Research Policy, 32: 679-91.
11. Gorman, G. and McCarthy, S. 2006. Business development support and knowledge-based businesses. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(1): 131-43.
12. Hervik, A., Arnestad, M. and Wicksteed, B. 1997. Evaluering av FORNY-programmet, 92. Molde: Møreforskning.
13. Langford, C. H., Hall, J., Josty, P., Matos, S. and Jacobson, A. 2006. Indicators and outcomes of canadian university research: Proxies becoming goals?. Research Policy, 35: 1586-98.
14. Luukkonen, T. 1998. The difficulties in assessing the impact of EU framework programmes. Research Policy, 27: 599-610.
15. Melkers, J. 2004. Assessing the outcomes of state science and technology organizations. Economic Development Quarterly, 18: 186-201.
16. Molas-Gallart, J., A. Salter, P. Patel, A. Scott, and X. Duran. 2002. Measuring third stream activities: Final report to the Russell group of universities, 97. Brighton: SPRU, University of Sussex.
17. Mosey, S., Lockett, A. and Westhead, P. 2006. Creating network bridges for university technology transfer: The Medici fellowship programme. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18: 71-91.
18. Mowery, D. C. and Sampat, B. N. 1980. The Bayh-Dole Act of and university-industry technology transfer: A model for other OECD governments?. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 30: 115-27.
19. Mustar, P., Wright, M. and Clarysse, B. 2008. University spin-off firms: Lessons from ten years of experience in europe. Science and Public Policy, 35(2): 67-80.
20. Nosella, A. and Grimaldi, R. 2009. University-level mechanisms supporting the creation of new companies: An analysis of italian academic spin-offs. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 21: 679-98.
21. Rasmussen, E. 2006. Two models for university technology transfer operation: Patent agency and 2G. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 5: 291-307.
22. Rasmussen, E., Borch, O.J. and Sørheim, R. 2008. "University entrepreneurship and government support schemes". In The dynamic between entrepreneurship, environment and education, Edited by: Fayolle, A. and Kyrö, P. 105-30. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
23. Rasmussen, E., Moen, Ø. and Gulbrandsen, M. 2006. Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge. Technovation, 26: 518-33.
24. Salmenkaita, J.-P. and Salo, A. 2002. Rationales for government interventions in the commercialization of new technologies. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 14: 183-200.
25. Salo, A., Mild, P. and Pentikainen, T. 2006. Exploring causal relationships in an innovation program with robust portfolio modeling. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73: 1028-44.
26. Slaughter, S. and Leslie, L. L. 1997. Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
27. Sorensen, J. and Chambers, D. 2008. Evaluating academic technology transfer performance by how well access to knowledge is facilitated-defining an access metric. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33: 534-47.
28. Wright, M., B. Clarysse, P. Mustar, and A. Lockett, eds. 2007 Academic entrepreneurship in Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.