Universities, entrepreneurship, and local economic development

Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurship and Regional Development: National and Regional Perspectives

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 252-333

  Åstebro, Thomas ^a   Bazzazian, Navid ^a  

^a HEC PARIS   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84881892180     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4337/9780857936493.00013     Document Type: Chapter

References (214)

1. Acs, Z.J., D.B. Audretsch and M.P. Feldman (1992), ‘Real effects of academic research –comment’, American Economic Review, 82 (1), 363–7.
2. Acs, Z.J., D.B. Audretsch and M.P. Feldman (1994), ‘Research and development spillovers and recipient firm size’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 76 (2), 336–40.
3. Adams, J.D. (2002), ‘Comparative localization of academic and industrial spillovers’, Journal of Economic Geography, 2 (3), 253–78.
4. Ajzen, I. (1987), ‘Attitudes, traits, and actions – dispositional predictions of behavior in personality and social psychology’, in Leonard Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 20, New York: Academic Press, pp. 1–63.
5. Ajzen, I. (1991), ‘The theory of planned behavior’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2), 179–211.
6. Allen, David N. and Frederick Norling (1991), ‘Exploring perceived threats in faculty commercialization of research’, in Alistair M. Brett, David V. Gibson and Raymond W. Smilor (eds), University Spin–off Companies: Economic Development, Faculty Entrepreneurs, and Technology Transfer, Savage, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 85–102.
7. Anderson, T.R., T.U. Daim and F.F. Lavoie (2007), ‘Measuring the efficiency of university technology transfer’, Technovation, 27 (5), 306–18.
8. Andersson, R., J.M. Quigley and M. Wilhelmsson (2004), ‘University decentralization as regional policy: the Swedish experiment’, Journal of Economic Geography, 4 (4), 371–88.
9. Andersson, R., J.M. Quigley and M. Wilhelmsson (2009), ‘Urbanization, productivity, and innovation: evidence from investment in higher education’, Journal of Urban Economics, 66 (1), 2–15.
10. Arrow, K. (1962), ‘Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention’, in Richard R. Nelson (ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 609–26.
11. Åstebro, T. (2003), ‘The return to independent invention: evidence of unrealistic optimism, risk seeking or skewness loving?’, Economic Journal, 113 (484), 226–39.
12. Åstebro, T. and Y. Gerchak (2001), ‘Profitable advice: the value of information provided by Canada’s inventor’s assistance program’, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 10 (1), 45–72.
13. AUCC (2003), Action File: Commercialization, Ottawa, Canada: AUCC Publications.
14. Audretsch, D., T. Aldridge and A. Oettl (2005a), ‘The knowledge filter and economic growth: the role of scientists entrepreneurs’, Discussion Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Jena.
15. Audretsch, D. and M. Feldman (1996), ‘R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production’, American Economic Review, 86 (3), 630–40.
16. Audretsch, D.B. and E.E. Lehmann (2005), ‘Does the knowledge spillover theory of entre-preneurship hold for regions?’, Research Policy, 34 (8), 1191–202.
17. Audretsch, D.B., E.E. Lehmann and S. Warning (2005b), ‘University spillovers and new firm location’, Research Policy, 34 (7), 1113–22.
18. AUTM (1996) to AUTM (2007), The AUTM Licensing Survey: Fiscal Year 1996–2007, Norwalk, CT.
19. Azoulay, P., W. Ding and T. Stuart (2006), ‘The impact of academic patenting on the rate, quality, and direction of (public) research output’, NBER Working Paper Series, w11917, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
20. Azoulay, P., W. Ding and T. Stuart (2007), ‘The determinants of faculty patenting behavior: demographics or opportunities?’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 63 (4), 599–623.
21. Bagozzi, R.P., J. Baumgartner and Y. Yi (1989), ‘An investigation into the role of intentions as mediators of the attitude behavior relationship’, Journal of Economic Psychology, 10 (1), 35–62.
22. Balconi, M., S. Breschi and F. Lissoni (2004), ‘Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data’, Research Policy, 33 (1), 127–45.
23. Baltzopoulos, A. and A. Broström (2009), ‘Attractors of talent – universities and regional entrepreneurship’, Working paper, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
24. BankBoston (1997), MIT: The Impact of Innovation, Boston, MA: BankBoston.
25. Belenzon, S. and M. Schankerman (2009), ‘University knowledge transfer: private ownership, incentives, and local development objectives’, Journal of Law and Economics, 52 (1), 111–44.
26. Belenzon, S. and M. Schankerman (2010), ‘Localized university knowledge spillovers: the effects of state borders and private ownership’, working paper, Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, NC.
27. Bera, R. (2009), ‘The story of the Cohen–Boyer patents’, Current Science, 96 (6), 760–63.
28. Bercovitz, J. and M. Feldman (2008), ‘Academic entrepreneurs: organizational change at the individual level’, Organization Science, 19 (1), 69–89.
29. Berggren, E. and Å. Lindholm-Dahlstrand (2008), ‘Creating an entrepreneurial region: two waves of academic spin–offs from Halmstad University’, in Bengt Johannisson and Åsa Lindholm–Dahlstrand (eds), Bridging the Functional and Territorial Views on Regional Entrepreneurship and Development, Örebro, Sweden: FSF Publication, pp. 35–54.
30. Bird, B. (1988), ‘Implementing entrepreneurial ideas – the case for intention’, Academy of Management Review, 13 (3), 442–53.
31. Blair, D.M. and D.M.W.N. Hitchens (1998), Campus Companies – UK and Ireland, Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
32. Blundell, R., R. Griffith and J. van Reenen (1999), ‘Market share, market value and innovation in a panel of British manufacturing firms’, Review of Economic Studies, 66 (3), 529–54.
33. Breschi, S., F. Lissoni and F. Montobbio (2005), ‘From publishing to patenting: do productive scientists turn into academic inventors?’, Revue d’Économie Industrielle, 110 (2), 75–102.
34. Breschi, S., F. Lissoni and F. Montobbio (2007), ‘The scientific productivity of academic inventors: new evidence from Italian data’, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 16 (2), 108–18.
35. Bresnahan, T., A. Gambardella and A. Saxenian (2001), ‘Old economy inputs for new economy outcomes: cluster formation in the new Silicon Valleys’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 10 (4), 835–60.
36. Breznitz, S. (2009), ‘More active, less effective? University policy and the biotechnology industry in Cambridge, UK’, Working paper, University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
37. Buenstorf, G. (2009), ‘Is commercialization good or bad for science? Individual-l evel evidence from the Max Planck Society’, Research Policy, 38 (2), 281–92.
38. Calderini, M., C. Franzoni and A. Vezzulli (2007), ‘If star scientists do not patent: the effect of productivity, basicness and impact on the decision to patent in the academic world’, Research Policy, 36 (3), 303–19.
39. Chapple, W., A. Lockett, D. Siegel and M. Wright (2005), ‘Assessing the relative performance of UK university technology transfer offices: parametric and non-parametric evidence’, Research Policy, 34 (3), 369–84.
40. Charles, D. (2001), Lords of the Harvest, Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
41. Charles, D. and C. Conway (2001), Higher Education–Business Interaction Survey, Newcastle upon Tyne: University of Newcastle upon Tyne.
42. Clark, B.W., C.H. Davis and V.C. Harnish (1984), ‘Do courses in entrepreneurship aid in new venture creation?’, Journal of Small Business Management, 28 (2), 26–31.
43. Clarke, B.R. (1998), Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation, New York: IAU Press.
44. Clayman, B.P. (2004), Technology Transfer at Canadian Universities: Fiscal Year 2002 Update, Coquitlam: Canada Foundation for Innovation.
45. Clayman, B.P. and A.J. Holbrook (2003), ‘The survival of university spin-offs and their relevance to regional development’, CPROST Report to the Canada Foundation for Innovation, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver.
46. Coase, R.H. (1960), ‘The problem of social cost’, Journal of Law and Economics, 3, 1–44.
47. Cohen, W.M., R.R. Nelson and J.P. Walsh (2002), ‘Links and impacts: the influence of public research on industrial R&D’, Management Science, 48 (1), 1–23.
48. Colombo, M.G. and M. Delmastro (2002), ‘How effective are technology incubators? Evidence from Italy’, Research Policy, 31 (7), 1103–22.
49. Crespi, G., P. D’Este, R. Fontana and A. Geuna (2010), ‘The impact of academic patenting on university research and its transfer’, Research Policy, 40 (1), 55–68.
50. Dasgupta, P. and P.A. David (1994), ‘Toward a new economics of science’, Research Policy, 23 (5), 487–521.
51. David, P.A. (2007), ‘Innovation and Europe’s academic institutions – second thoughts about embracing the Bayh–Dole regime’, in Stefano Brusoni and Franco Malerba (eds), Perspectives on Innovation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 251–78.
52. Debackere, K. and R. Veugelers (2005), ‘The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links’, Research Policy, 34 (3), 321–42.
53. Di Gregorio, D. and S. Shane (2003), ‘Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?’, Research Policy, 32 (2), 209–27.
54. Djokovic, D. and V. Souitaris (2008), ‘Spinouts from academic institutions: a literature review with suggestions for further research’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 33 (3), 225–47.
55. Eesley, C.E., E.B. Roberts and D. Yang (2009), ‘Entrepreneurial ventures from technology-based universities: a cross-national comparison’, working paper, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
56. Egeln, J., S. Gottschalk and C. Rammer (2004), ‘Location decision of spin-offs from public research institutions’, Industry and Innovation, 11, 207–23.
57. Ensley, M.D. and K.A. Hmieleski (2005), ‘A comparative study of new venture top management team composition, dynamics and performance between university-based and independent start-ups’, Research Policy, 34 (7), 1091–105.
58. Eriksson, E.L. (1996), ‘Akademiskt Företagande – från student till företagare’, dissertation, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
59. Fayolle, A.G.B. and N. Lassas-Clerc (2006), ‘Assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education programmes: a new methodology’, Journal of European Industrial Training, 30, 701–20.
60. Feldman, M.P. and P. Desrochers (2003), ‘Research universities and local economic development: lessons from the history of Johns Hopkins University’, Industry and Innovation,10, 5–24.
61. Feldman, M.P. and P. Desrochers (2004), ‘Truth for its own sake: academic culture and technology transfer at Johns Hopkins University’, Minerva, 42 (2), 105–26.
62. Fini, R., N. Lacetera and S. Shane (2010), ‘Inside or outside the IP-system? Business creation in academia’, Research Policy, 39 (8), 1060–69.
63. Foltz, J., B. Barham and K. Kwansoo (2000), ‘Universities and agricultural biotechnology patent production’, Agribusiness, 16 (1), 82–95.
64. Franklin, S., M. Wright and A. Lockett (2001), ‘Academic and surrogate entrepreneurs in university spin-out companies’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 26 (1–2), 127–41.
65. Friedman, J. and J. Silberman (2003), ‘University technology transfer: do incentives management, and location matter?’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 28 (1), 17–30.
66. Furman, J. and M. MacGarvie (2007), ‘Academic science and the birth of industrial research laboratories in the US pharmaceutical industry’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 63, 756–76.
67. Galasso, A. and M.A. Schankerman (2010), ‘Patent thickets, courts and the market for innovation’, The RAND Journal of Economics, 41 (3), 472–503.
68. Gans, J.S. and S. Stern (2000), ‘Incumbency and R&D incentives: licensing the gale of creative destruction’, Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 9 (4), 485–511.
69. Gault, F. and S. McDaniel (2004), ‘Summary: joint statistics Canada–University of Windsor workshop on intellectual property commercialization indicators’, Science, Innovation and Electronic Information Division Working Papers, Windsor, 6, 38.
70. Giuri, P., M. Mariani, S. Brusoni, G. Crespi, D. Francoz, A. Gambardella, W. Garcia-Fontes, A. Geuna, R. Gonzales, D. Harhoff, K. Hoisl, C. Lebas, A. Luzzi, L. Magazzini, L. Nesta, O. Nomaler, N. Palomeras, P. Patel, M. Romanelli and B. Verspagen (2007), ‘Inventors and invention processes in Europe: results from the PatVal–EU survey’, Research Policy, 36 (8), 1107–27.
71. Goldfarb, B. and J. Colyvas (2005), ‘Intellectual property rights and entrepreneurship: evidence from university technology transfer’, working paper, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
72. Goldfarb, B. and J. Colyvas (2006), ‘Tacit knowledge, uncertainty and startups’, Working paper, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
73. Goldfarb, B. and M. Henrekson (2003), ‘Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property’, Research Policy, 32 (4), 639–58.
74. Goldfarb, B., G. Marschke and A. Smith (2008), ‘Scholarship and inventive activity in the university: complements or substitutes?’, working paper, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
75. Goldman, M.I. (1984), ‘Building a Mecca for high technology’, Technology Review, 87, 6–8.
76. Goldstein, A. (2009), ‘What we know and what we don’t know about the regional economic impacts of universities’, in Attila Varga (ed.), Universities, Knowledge Transfer and Regional Development: Geography, Entrepreneurship and Policy, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar, pp. 11–25.
77. Hall, B.H., A. Jaffe and M. Trajtenberg (2005), ‘Market value and patent citations’, The RAND Journal of Economics, 36 (1), 16–38.
78. Hall, B.H. and R.H. Ziedonis (2001), ‘The patent paradox revisited: an empirical study of patenting in the US semiconductor industry, 1979–95’, The RAND Journal of Economics, 32 (1), 101–28.
79. Harhoff, D., F. Narin, F.M. Scherer and K. Vopel (1999), ‘Citation frequency and the value of patented inventions’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 81 (3), 511–15.
80. Heblich, S. and V. Slavtchev (2009), ‘The location of university spin–offs’, working paper, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Jena.
81. Heller, M.A. and R.S. Eisenberg (1998), ‘Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research’, Science, 280 (5364), 698–701.
82. Henderson, R.M., A.B. Jaffe and M. Trajtenberg (1998), ‘Universities as a source of commercial technology: a detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965–1988’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 80 (1), 119–27.
83. Hertzfeld, H.R., A.N. Link and N.S. Vonoartas (2006), ‘Intellectual property protection mechanisms in research partnerships’, Research Policy, 35 (6), 825–38.
84. Hoppe, H.C. and E. Ozdenoren (2005), ‘Intermediation in innovation’, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 23 (5–6), 483–503.
85. Hornaday, J.A. and K.H. Vesper (1982), ‘Entrepreneurial education and job satisfaction’, in Karl H. Vesper (ed.), Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, Wellesley, MA: Babson College, pp. 526–39.
86. Hounshell, D.A. and J.K. Smith (1988), Science and Corporate Strategy: Du Pont R&D, 1902–1980, New York: Cambridge University Press.
87. Hsu, D.H. and T. Bernstein (1997), ‘Managing the university technology licensing process: findings from case studies’, Journal of the Association of University Technology Managers, 9, 1–33.
88. Hsu, D.H., E.B. Roberts and C.E. Eesley (2007), ‘Entrepreneurs from technology-based universities: evidence from MIT’, Research Policy, 36 (5), 768–88.
89. Iversen, E.J., M. Gulbrandsen and A. Klitkou (2007), ‘A baseline for the impact of academic patenting legislation in Norway’, Scientometrics, 70 (2), 393–414.
90. Jacob, M., M. Lundqvist and H. Hellsmark (2003), ‘Entrepreneurial transformations in the Swedish university system: the case of Chalmers University of Technology’, Research Policy, 32 (9), 1555–68.
91. Jaffe, A.B. (1989), ‘Real effects of academic research’, American Economic Review, 79 (5), 957–70.
92. Jaffe, A., M. Trajtenberg and R. Henderson (1993), ‘Geographic localisation of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108 (3), 577–98.
93. Jensen, R. and D. Showalter (2010), ‘University inventions licensed through startups’, Working paper, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN.
94. Jensen, R. and M. Thursby (2001), ‘Proofs and prototypes for sale: the licensing of university inventions’, American Economic Review, 91 (1), 240–59.
95. Katz, J.A. (2003), ‘The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education 1876–1999’, Journal of Business Venturing, 18 (2), 283–300.
96. Katz, J. and W.B. Gartner (1988), ‘Properties of emerging organizations’, Academy of Management Review, 13 (3), 429–41.
97. Keck, O. (1993), ‘The national system for technical innovation in Germany’, in Richard R. Nelson (ed.), National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 115–57.
98. Kenney, M. and W.R. Goe (2004), ‘The role of social embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship: a comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford’, Research Policy, 33 (5), 691–707.
99. Kenney, M. and D. Patton (2009), ‘Reconsidering the Bayh–Dole Act and the current university invention ownership model’, Research Policy, 38 (9), 1407–22.
100. Kolodny, H., B. Stymne, R. Shani, J.R. Figuera and P. Lillrank (2001), ‘Design and policy choices for technology extension organizations’, Research Policy, 30 (2), 201–25.
101. Krugman, P. (1991), Geography and Trade, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
102. Kuratko, D.F. (2005), ‘The emergence of entrepreneurship education: development, trends, and challenges’, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29 (5), 577–97.
103. Lach, S. and M. Schankerman (2008), ‘Incentives and invention in universities’, The RAND Journal of Economics, 39 (2), 403–33.
104. Lazear, E.P. (2005), ‘Entrepreneurship’, Journal of Labor Economics, 23 (4), 649–80.
105. Lee, S.S. and J.S. Osteryoung (2004), ‘A comparison of critical success factors for effective operations of university business incubators in the United States and Korea’, Journal of Small Business Management, 42 (4), 418–26.
106. Lerner, J. and U. Malmendier (2007), ‘With a little help from my (random) friends: success and failure in post–business school entrepreneurship’, Working paper, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
107. Lindelöf, P. and H. Löfsten (2003), ‘Science park location and new technology-based firms in Sweden – implications for strategy and performance’, Small Business Economics, 20 (3), 245–58.
108. Lindelöf, P. and H. Löfsten (2004), ‘Proximity as a resource base for competitive advantage– university–industry links for technology transfer’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 29 (3/4), 311–26.
109. Lindholm-Dahlstrand, Å. (1999), ‘Technology-based SMEs in the Goteborg region: their origin and interaction with universities and large firms’, Regional Studies, 33 (4), 379–89.
110. Link, A.N. and D.S. Siegel (2005), ‘University-based technology initiatives: quantitative and qualitative evidence’, Research Policy, 34 (3), 253–7.
111. Lissoni, F., P. Llerena, M. McKelvey and B. Sanditov (2008), ‘Academic patenting in Europe: new evidence from the KEINS database’, Research Evaluation, 17 (2), 87–102.
112. Litan, R.E., L. Mitchell and E.J. Reedy (2007), ‘Commercializing university innovations: alternative approaches’, Innovation Policy and the Economy, 8, 31–57.
113. Lockett, A. and M. Wright (2005), ‘Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin–out companies’, Research Policy, 34 (7), 1043–57.
114. Lööf, H. (2005), ‘Vad ger samarbetet mellan universitet och näringliv’, Tillväxtpolitisk utblick, ITPS, Nr. 1, January.
115. Louis, K.S., D. Blumenthal, M.E. Gluck and M.A. Soto (1989), ‘Entrepreneurs in academe: an exploration of behaviors among life scientists’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 34 (1), 110–31.
116. Louis, K.S., L.M. Jones, M.S. Anderson, D. Blumenthal and E.G. Campbell (2001), ‘Entrepreneurs, secrecy, and productivity’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 233–45.
117. Lowe, R.A. (2002), ‘Entrepreneurship, invention, and innovation: the commercialization of university research by inventor-founded firms’, PhD thesis, Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
118. Lowe, R. (2006), ‘Who develops a university invention? The roles of inventor knowledge and licensing policies’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 31 (4), 415–29.
119. Lowe, R. and C. Gonzalez-Brambila (2007), ‘Faculty entrepreneurs and research productivity’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 32 (3), 173–94.
120. Macho-Stadler, I., D. Perez-Castrillo and R. Veugelers (2007), ‘Licensing of universityinventions: the role of a technology transfer office’, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 25 (3), 483–510.
121. Madden, T.J., P.S. Ellen and I. Ajzen (1992), ‘A comparison of the theory of planned behavior and the theory of reasoned action’, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18 (1), 3–9.
122. Mansfield, E. and J.Y. Lee (1996), ‘The modern university: contributor to industrial innovation and recipient of industrial R&D support’, Research Policy, 25 (7), 1047–58.
123. Markman, G.D., P.T. Gianiodis and P.H. Phan (2008), ‘Full-time faculty or part-time entrepreneurs’, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55 (1), 29–36.
124. Markman, G.D., P.T. Gianiodis and P.H. Phan (2009), ‘Supply-side innovation and technology commercialization’, Journal of Management Studies, 46 (4), 625–49.
125. McMullan, W.E. and W.A. Long (1987), ‘Entrepreneurship education in the nineties’, Journal of Business Venturing, 2 (3), 261–75.
126. Merges, R.P. and R.R. Nelson (1990), ‘On the complex economics of patent scope’, Columbia Law Review, 90 (4), 839–916.
127. Merton, R. (1973), The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
128. Meyer, M. (2003), ‘Academic patents as an indicator of useful research? A new approach to measure academic inventiveness’, Research Evaluation, 12 (1), 17–27.
129. Mowery, D.C., R.R. Nelson, B.N. Sampat and A.A. Ziedonis (2004), Ivory Tower and Industrial Innovation, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
130. Mowery, D.C. and B.N. Sampat (2001), ‘Patenting and licensing university inventions: lessons from the history of the research corporation’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 317–55.
131. Mowery, D.C. and B.N. Sampat (2005), ‘The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and university–industry technology transfer: a model for other OECD governments’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 30, 115–27.
132. Mowery, D.C. and A. Ziedonis (2001), ‘The geographic reach of market and nonmarket channels of technology transfer’, NBER Working Paper 8568, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
133. Mukherjee, A. and S. Stern (2009), ‘Disclosure or secrecy? The dynamics of open science’, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 27 (3), 449–62.
134. Murmann, J.P. (2003), Knowledge and Competitive Advantage: The Coevolution of Firms, Technology, and National Institutions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
135. Murray, F. and S. Stern (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 and Organization, 63 (4), 648–87.
136. Mustar, P. (1997), ‘How French academics create high tech companies: conditions of success and failure of this form of relation between science and market’, Science and Public Policy, 24 (1), 37–43.
137. Myhrvold, N. (2010), ‘Funding Eureka!’, Harvard Business Review, 88 (3), 40–50.
138. Nelsen, L. (1999), ‘Remarks by Lita Nelsen, M.I.T. Technology Licensing Office’, available at: http://www.aaas.org/spp/secrecy/Presents/nelsen.htm (accessed 22 March 2011).
139. Nelsen, L. (2007), ‘The activities and roles of M.I.T. in forming clusters and strengthening entrepreneurship’, in Anatole Krattiger, Richard T. Mahoney, Lita Nelsen, Jennifer Thomson, Alan Bennet, Kanikaram Satyanarayana, Gregory Graff, Carlos Fernandez and Stanley Kowalski (eds), Intellectual Property Management in Health and Agricultural Innovation: A Handbook of Best Practices, Oxford: MIHR and Davis, CA: PIPRA, available online at www.ipHandbook.org (accessed 12 February 2010).
140. Nelson, R.R. (1959), ‘The simple economics of basic scientific research’, Journal of Political Economy, 67, 297–306.
141. Niosi, J. (2006), ‘Success factors in Canadian academic spin-offs’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 31 (4), 451–7.
142. Noble, D.F. (1977), America by Design: Science, Technology, and the Rise of Corporate Capitalism, New York: Knopf.
143. Noll, R.G. (1998), Challenges to Research Universities, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
144. NSERC (2005), Research Means Business, Ottawa: National Sciences and Engineering Research Council.
145. NSF (2007), Science and Engineering Indicators 2006, Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
146. Oosterbeek, H., C.M. Van Praag and A. IJsselstein (2008), ‘The impact of entrepreneur-ship education on entrepreneurship competencies and intentions: an evaluation of the junior achievement student mini–company program’, available at SSRN: http://ssm.com/abstract=1118251 (accessed 22 March 2011).
147. O’Shea, R.P., T.J. Allen, A. Chevalier and F. Roche (2005), ‘Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of US universities’, Research Policy, 34 (7), 994–1009.
148. Page, N. (2007), ‘The making of a licensing legend: Stanford University’s office of technology licensing’, in Anatole Krattiger, Richard T. Mahoney, Lita Nelsen, Jennifer Thomson, Alan Bennet, Kanikaram Satyanarayana, Gregory Graff, Carlos Fernandez and Stanley Kowalski (eds), Intellectual Property Management in Health and Agricultural Innovation: A Handbook of Best Practices, Oxford: MIHR and Davis, CA: PIPRA, available at www. ipHandbook.org (accessed 12 February 2010).
149. Palmer, A.M. (1948), Survey of University Patent Policies: Preliminary Report, Washington, DC: National Research Council.
150. Peterman, N.E. and J. Kennedy (2003), ‘Enterprise education: influencing students’ perceptions of entrepreneurship’, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 28 (2), 129–44.
151. Pfeiffer, E.W. (1997), What MIT Learned from Stanford, available at: http://www.forbes.com/asap/1997/0825/059.html (accessed 7 December 2009).
152. Porter, M. (1998), ‘Clusters and the new economics of competition’, Harvard Business Review, 76 (6), 77–90.
153. Powers, J.B. and P. McDougall (2005), ‘Policy orientation effects on performance with licensing to start-ups and small companies’, Research Policy, 34 (7), 1028–42.
154. Rasmussen, E.A. (2008), ‘Government instruments to support the commercialization of university research: lessons from Canada’, Technovation, 28 (8), 506–17.
155. Rasmussen, E.A. and R. Sorheim (2006), ‘Action-based entrepreneurship education’, Technovation, 26 (2), 185–94.
156. Read, C. (2005), ‘Survey of intellectual property commercialization in the higher education sector, 2003’, Innovation and Electronic Information Division Working Papers, 18 (32).
157. Reid, R.H. (1997), Architects of the Web, New York: John Wiley & Sons.
158. Regeringens Proposition (1998/1999:94), Vissa forskningsfrågor, Riksdagstryck, Stockholm.
159. Research Corporation (1947), Annual Report, New York: Research Corporation.
160. Roberts, E.B. (1991), ‘The technological base of the new enterprise’, Research Policy, 20 (4), 283–98.
161. Roberts, E.B. and C.E. Eesley (2009), ‘Entrepreneurial impact: the role of MIT’, Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, Kansas City, MO.
162. Rogers, E.M., Y. Yin and J. Hoffmann (2000), ‘Assessing the effectiveness of technology transfer offices at US research universities’, Journal of the Association of University Technology Managers, 12, 47–80.
163. Rothaermel, F.T., S.D. Agung and L. Jiang (2007), ‘University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 16 (4), 691–791.
164. Rothaermel, F.T. and D.N. Ku (2008), ‘Intercluster innovation differentials: the role of research universities’, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55 (1), 9–22.
165. Rothaermel, F.T. and M. Thursby (2005), ‘University–incubator firm knowledge flows: assessing their impact on incubator firm performance’, Research Policy, 34 (3), 305–20.
166. Samuelson, P.A. (1954), ‘The pure theory of public expenditure’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 36, 387–9.
167. Saxenian, Anna Lee (1996), Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
168. Schankerman, M. (1998), ‘How valuable is patent protection? Estimates by technology field’, The RAND Journal of Economics, 29 (1), 77–107.
169. Schankerman, M. and A. Pakes (1986), ‘Estimates of the value of patent rights in European countries during the post–1950 period’, Economic Journal, 96 (384), 1052–76.
170. Scherer, F.M. and D. Harhoff (2000), ‘Technology policy for a world of skew–distributed outcomes’, Research Policy, 29 (4–5), 559–66.
171. Scotchmer, S. (1991), ‘Standing on the shoulders of giants – cumulative research and the patent law’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5 (1), 29–41.
172. SFS 1996:1392, ‘Ändring i Högskolelagen’, Svensk för Fatningsamling, Stockholm: Swedish Parliament.
173. Shane, S. (2004), Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.
174. Shane, S.A. (2008), Illusions of Entrepreneurship: The Costly Myths that Entrepreneurs, Investors, and Policy Makers Live By, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
175. Shapero, A. (1975), ‘Displaced, uncomfortable entrepreneur’, Psychology Today, 9 (6), 83–8.
176. Shapero, A. (1985), ‘The entrepreneurial event’, Enterprise, February 5–9.
177. Shapiro, C. (2000), ‘Navigating the patent thicket: cross licenses, patent pools, and standard setting’, in Adam B. Jaffe, Josh Lerner and Scott Stern (eds), Innovation Policy and the Economy, Vol. 1, Boston, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research and MIT Press, pp. 119–50.
178. Siegel, D.S., R. Veugelers and M. Wright (2007a), ‘Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: performance and policy implications’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23 (4), 640–60.
179. Siegel, D.S., D. Waldman and A. Link (2003a), ‘Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study’, Research Policy, 32 (1), 27–48.
180. Siegel, D.S., P. Westhead and M. Wright (2003b), ‘Assessing the impact of university science parks on research productivity: exploratory firm-level evidence from the United Kingdom’, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21 (9), 1357–69.
181. Siegel, D.S., M. Wright and A. Lockett (2007b), ‘The rise of entrepreneurial activity at universities: organizational and societal implications’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 16, 489–504.
182. Solomon, G.T., K.M. Weaver and L.W. Fernald (1994), ‘A historical examination of small business–management and entrepreneurship pedagogy’, Simulation and Gaming, 25 (3), 338–52.
183. SOU 1992:7, Kompetensutveckling – en nationell strategi, Stockholm: Utbildnings-departementet.
184. SOU 1996:70, Samverkan mellan högskolan och näringslivet, Huvudbetänkande av NYFOR, Stockholm: Fritzes.
185. SOU 1996:89, Samverkan mellan högskolan och de små och medelstora företagen. Slutbetänkande av NYFOR, Stockholm: Fritzes.
186. SOU 1998:128, Forskningspolitik: Slutbetänkande av Kommittén för översyn av den svenska forskningspolitiken, Staten offentliga utredningar, Stockholm: Sveriges Riksdag.
187. Souitaris, V., S. Zerbinati and A. Andreas (2007), ‘Do entrepreneurship programmes raise entrepreneurial intention of science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources’, Journal of Business Venturing, 22 (4), 566–91.
188. Squicciarini, M. (2008), ‘Science parks’ tenants versus out-of-park firms: who innovates more? A duration model’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 33 (1), 45–71.
189. Squicciarini, M. (2009), ‘Science parks: seedbeds of innovation? A duration analysis of firms’ patenting activity’, Small Business Economics, 32 (2), 169–90.
190. Stephan, P.E., S. Gurmu, A. Sumell and G. Black (2007), ‘Who’s patenting in the university? Evidence from the survey of doctorate recipients’, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 16, 71–99.
191. Stephan, P.E., A.J. Sumell, G.C. Black and J.D. Adams (2004), ‘Doctoral education and economic development: the flow of Ph.D.s to industry’, Economic Development Quarterly, 18 (2), 151–67.
192. Stuart, T. and W. Ding (2006), ‘When do scientists become entrepreneurs? The social structural antecedents of commercial activity in the academic life sciences’, American Journal of Sociology, 112 (1), 97–144.
193. Stuart, T. and O. Sorenson (2003), ‘The geography of opportunity: spatial heterogeneity in founding rates and the performance of biotechnology firms’, Research Policy, 32 (32), 229–53.
194. Takahashi, M. and R. Carraz (2009), Academic Patenting in Japan: Illustration from a Leading Japanese University, Strasbourg: University of Strasbourg.
195. Thursby, J., A.W. Fuller and M. Thursby (2009), ‘US faculty patenting: inside and outside the university’, Research Policy, 38 (1), 14–25.
196. Thursby, J.G. and S. Kemp (2002), ‘Growth and productive efficiency of university intellectual property licensing’, Research Policy, 31 (1), 109–24.
197. Thursby, J.G. and M.C. Thursby (2002), ‘Who is selling the Ivory Tower? Sources of growth in university licensing’, Management Science, 48 (1), 90–104.
198. Thursby, J.G. and M.C. Thursby (2007), ‘University licensing’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23 (4), 620–39.
199. Tkachev, A. and L. Kolvereid (1999), ‘Self-employment intentions among Russian students’, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 11 (3), 269–80.
200. Valentin, F. and R.L. Jensen (2007), ‘Effects on academia–industry collaboration of extending university property rights’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 32 (3), 251–76.
201. van Clouse, G.H. (1990), ‘A controlled experiment relating entrepreneurial education to students’ start-up decisions’, Journal of Small Business Management, 28 (2), 45–53.
202. Vesper, K.H. and W.E. McMullan (1997), ‘New venture scholarship versus practice: when entrepreneurship academics try the real things as applied research’, Technovation, 17 (7), 349–58.
203. von Graevenitz, G., D. Harhoff and R. Weber (2009), ‘The effects of entrepreneurship education’, Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, 76 (1), 90–112.
204. Wallmark, J.T. (1997), ‘Inventions and patents at universities: the case of Chalmers University of Technology’, Technovation, 17 (3), 127–39.
205. Walsh, J.P., W.M. Cohen and C. Cho (2007), ‘Where excludability matters: material versus intellectual property in academic biomedical research’, Research Policy, 36 (8), 1184–203.
206. Westhead, P. (1997), ‘R & D “inputs” and “outputs” of technology-based firms located on and off science parks’, R & D Management, 27 (1), 45–62.
207. Westhead, P. and S. Batstone (1998), ‘Independent technology–based firms: the perceived benefits of a science park location’, Urban Studies, 35 (12), 2197–219.
208. Westhead, P. and D.J. Storey (1995), ‘Links between higher-education institutions and high-technology firms’, Omega – International Journal of Management Science, 23 (4), 345–60.
209. Wickstead, Segal Q. (1985), The Cambridge Phenomenon, Thetford, UK: Thetford Press.
210. Wright, M., B. Clarysse, P. Mustar and A. Lockett (2007), Academic Entrepreneurship in Europe, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.
211. Zhang, J. (2009), ‘The performance of university spin-offs: an exploratory analysis using venture capital data’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 34 (3), 255–86.
212. Zucker, L.G. and M.R. Darby (2001), ‘Capturing technological opportunity via Japan’s star scientists: evidence from Japanese firms’ biotech patents and products’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 26 (1–2), 37–58.
213. Zucker, L.G., M.R. Darby and J. Armstrong (1998a), ‘Geographically localized knowledge: spillovers or markets?’, Economic Inquiry, 36 (1), 65–86.
214. Zucker, L.G., M.R. Darby and M.B. Brewer (1998b), ‘Intellectual human capital and the birth of US biotechnology enterprises’, American Economic Review, 88 (1), 290–306.