The bayh-dole act and high-technology entrepreneurship in the United States during the 1980s and 1990s

Entrepreneurship, Growth, and Public Policy

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 250-283

  Mowery, David C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84888252261     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511805950.012     Document Type: Chapter

References (68)

1. American Medical Association. 1937. Principles of Medical Ethics.
2. Association of University Technology Managers. 2001. AUTM Licensing Survey, FY 2001 Northbrook, 1ll.: Association of University Technology Managers.
3. Association of University Technology Managers. 2002. AUTM Licensing Survey, FY 2002 Northbrook, 1ll.: Association of University Technology Managers.
4. Barrett, Paul. 1980. “Harvard Fears Congress May Not Pass Patent Bill.” Harvard Crimson, October 7.
5. Broad, William. 1979a. “Patent Bill Returns Bright Idea to Inventor (in News and Comment).” Science (August 3), 473-476.
6. Broad, William. 1979b. “Whistle Blower Reinstated at HEW.” Science, 476.
7. Christie, Katerina L. Gaita, Melanie J. Howlett, and Elisabeth M. Webster. 2003. “Analysis of the Legal Framework for Patent Ownership in Publicly Funded Research Institutions.” Commonwealth of Australia, Division of Education, Science, and Training.
8. Cohen, Wesley M., and Daniel A. Levinthal. 1990. “Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128-152.
9. Cohen, Wesley M., Richard Florida, Lucien Randazzese, and John Walsh. 1998. “Industry and the Academy: Uneasy Partners in the Cause of Technological Advance.” In R. Noll (ed.), Challenges to the Research University. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
10. Cohen, Wesley M., Richard R. Nelson, and John Walsh. 2002. “Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D.” Management Science, 48, 1-23.
11. Columbia University Committee on Patents. August 1974. “Patent Policy.” Columbiana Archives, “Patents” Folder, Columbia University in the City of New York.
12. Colyvas, Jeannette, Michael Crow, Anettine Gelijns, Robert Mazzoleni, Richard R. Nelson, Nathan Rosenberg, and Bhaven N. Sampat. 2002. “How Do University Inventions Get into Practice?” Management Science, 48, 61-72.
13. Cooke, Robert. 2001. Dr. Folkman’s War: Angiogenesis and the Struggle to Defeat Cancer. New York: Random House.
14. Cottrell, F. 1932. “Patent Experience of the Research Corporation.” Transactions of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers.
15. Dertouzos, Michael, Richard Lester, and Robert M. Solow. 1989. Made in America. Cambridge: MIT Press.
16. DiGregorio, Dante, and Scott Shane. 2003. “Why Do Some Universities Generate More Start-ups Than Others?” Research Policy, 32, 209-227.
17. Eisenberg, Rebecca S. 1996. “Public Research and Private Development: Patents and Technology Transfer in Government-Sponsored Research.” Virginia Law Review, 1663-1727.
18. Eskridge, N. 1978. “Dole Blasts HEW for ‘Stonewalling’ Patent Applications.” Bioscience, 605-606.
19. Etzkowitz, Henry. 1994. “Knowledge as Property: The Massachusetts Institute of Tech- nology and the Debate of Academic Patent Policy.” Minerva, 32(Winter), 383-421. Federal Council on Science and Technology (FCST). 1978. Report on Government Patent Policy, 1973-1976. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
20. Geiger, Roger L. 1986. To Advance Knowledge: The Growth of American Research Universities, 1900-1940. New York: Oxford University Press.
21. Geiger, Roger L. 1993. Research and Relevant Knowledge: American Research Universities since World War II. New York: Oxford University Press.
22. Geiger, Roger L. 2004. Knowledge and Money: Research Universities and the Paradox of the Marketplace. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
23. Goldfarb, Brent, and Magnus Henrekson. 2003. “Bottom-Up versus Top-Down Policies Towards the Commercialization of University Intellectual Property.” Research Policy, 32(4), 639-658.
24. Government University Industry Research Roundtable (GUIRR). 1991. Industrial Perspectives on Innovation and Interactions with Universities. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
25. Graham, Hugh D., and Nancy Diamond. 1997. The Rise of American Research Universities. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
26. Hall, Bronwyn H., and Rosemarie H. Ziedonis. 2001. “The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995.” RAND Journal of Economics, 32, 101-128.
27. Harbridge House. 1968a. “Effects of Patent Policy on Government R&D Programs.” Government Patent Policy Study, Final Report., vol. II. Washington, D.C.: Federal Council for Science and Technology.
28. Harbridge House. 1968b. “Effects of Government Policy on Commercial Utilization and Business Competition.” Government Patent Policy Study, Final Report, vol. IV. Washington, D.C.: Federal Council for Science and Technology.
29. Henderson, Rebecca, Adam B. Jaffe, and Manuel Trajtenberg. 1998a. “Universities as a Source of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis of University Patenting, 1965-1988.” Review of Economics & Statistics, 80(1), 119-127.
30. Henderson, Rebecca, Adam B. Jaffe, and Manuel Trajtenberg. 1998b. “University Patenting Amid Changing Incentives for Commercialization.” In Creation and Transfer of Knowledge, G. Barba Navaretti, P. Dasgupta, K. G. Maler, and D. Siniscalco, eds. New York: Springer.
31. Henig, R. 1979. “New Patent Policy Bill Gathers Congressional Support.” Bioscience, 29, 281-284.
32. Hughes, Sally S. 2001. “Making Dollars out of DNA.” Isis, 92, 541-575.
33. “Innovation’s Golden Goose.” 2002. The Economist, December 12.
34. Jensen, Richard, and Marie Thursby. 2001. “Proofs and Prototypes for Sale: The Licensing of University Inventions.” American Economic Review, 91, 240-258.
35. Katz, Michael L., and J. A. Ordover. 1990. “R&D Competition and Cooperation.” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics, 137-192.
36. Kenney, Martin. 1986. Biotechnology: The University-Industry Complex. New Haven: Yale University Press.
37. Kevles, Daniel. 1994. “Ananda Chakrabarty Wins a Patent: Biotechnology, Law, and Society, 1973-1980.” Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 25, 111-135.
38. Kilger, Christian, and Kurt Bartenbach. 2002. “New Rules for German Professors.” Science, 298, 1173-1175.
39. Leslie, Stuart. 1993. The Cold War and American Science. New York: Columbia University Press.
40. Levin, Richard C., Alvin K. Klevorick, Richard R. Nelson, and Sidney G. Winter. 1987. “Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development.” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 3, 783-820.
41. Lowe, Robert A. 2001. “The Role and Experience of Start-Ups in Commercializing University Inventions: Start-up Licensees at the University of California.” In G. Libecap, ed., Entrepreneurial Inputs and Outcomes. Amsterdam: JAI Press.
42. Mansfield, E. 1991. “Academic Research and Industrial Innovations.” Research Policy, 20, 1-12.
43. Mowery, David C. 1999. “America’s Industrial Resurgence (?): An Overview.” In D. C. Mowery, ed., U.S. Industry in 2000: Studies in Competitive Performance. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
44. Mowery, David C., and Nathan Rosenberg. 1998. Paths of Innovation: Technological Change in 20th-Century America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45. Mowery, David C., and Bhaven N. Sampat. 2001a. “Patenting and Licensing University Inventions: Lessons from the History of the Research Corporation.” Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 317-355.
46. Mowery, David C., and Bhaven N. Sampat. 2001b. “University Patents, Patent Policies, and Patent Policy Debates, 1925-1980.” Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 781-814.
47. Mowery, David C., and Bhaven N. Sampat. 2004. “The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and University-Industry Technology Transfer: A Model for Other OECD Governments?” Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(1-2), 115-127.
48. Mowery, David C., and Arvids Ziedonis. 2002. “Academic Patent Quality and Quantity Before and After the Bayh-Dole Act in the United States.” Research Policy, 31(3), 399-418.
49. Mowery, David C., Richard R. Nelson, Bhaven N. Sampat, and Arvids Ziedonis. 2004. Ivory Tower and Industrial Innovation. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.
50. National Science Board. 2002. Science and Engineering Indicators: 2002. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
51. OECD. 2000. A New Economy? The Changing Role of Innovation and Information Technology in Growth. Paris.
52. Palmer, Archie M. 1957. Medical Patents. Washington, D.C.: National Research Council.
53. Reimers, Niels. 1998. Stanford’s Office of Technology Licensing and the Cohen/Boyer Cloning Patents, An Oral History Conducted in 1997 by Sally Smith Hughes, Ph.D., Regional Oral History Office. Berkeley, Calif.: Bancroft Library.
54. Research Corporation. 1974-1975. Annual Report. New York and Tucson, Arizona.
55. Rosenberg, Nathan, and Richard R. Nelson. 1994. “American Universities and Technical Advance in Industry.” Research Policy, 23, 323-348.
56. Shane, Scott. 2002. “Selling University Technology.” Management Science, 48, 61-72.
57. Stevens, Ashley J. 2004. “The Enactment of Bayh-Dole.” Journal of Technology Transfer, 29, 93-99.
58. Thursby, Jerry, Richard Jensen, and Marie C. Thursby. 2001. “Objectives, Characteristics and Outcomes of University Licensing: A Survey of Major U.S. Universities.” Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 59-72.
59. Trow, M. 1979. “Aspects of Diversity in American Higher Education.” In H. Gans (ed.), On the Making of Americans. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
60. Trow, M. 1991. “American Higher Education: ‘Exceptional’ or Just Different?” In B. E. Shafer (ed.), Is America Different? A New Look at American Exceptionalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
61. University of California Office of the President. 2002. 5 Years of Progress: A Summary Report on the Results of the 1997 President’s Retreat on the University of California’s Relationships with Industry in Research and Technology Transfer. Oakland: University of California Office of the President.
62. U.S. General Accounting Office. 1968. Problem Areas Affecting Usefulness of Results of Government-Sponsored Research in Medicinal Chemistry: A Report to the Congress. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
63. U.S. House of Representatives. 1980. “Floor Debate on H.R. 6933.”Congressional Record, November 21, 1980: 30556-30560.
64. U.S. Senate, Committee on the Judiciary. 1979. The University and Small Business Patent Procedures Act: Hearings on S. 414, May 16 and June 6. 96th Congress, 1st Session. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
65. Weiner, Charles. 1989. “Patenting and Academic Research: Historical Case Studies.” In Weil and J.W. Snapper (eds.), Owning Scientific and Technical Information. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.
66. Weissman, Robert. 1989. “Public Finance, Private Gain: The Emerging University- Business-Government Alliance and the New U.S. Technological Order.” Harvard University Undergraduate Thesis.
67. Zucker, Lynn G., and Michael R. Darby. 1998. “Intellectual Human Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises.” American Economic Review, 88, 290-306.
68. Zucker, Lynn G., Michael R. Darby, and Maximo Torero. 2002. “Labor Mobility from Academe to Commerce.” Journal of Labor Economics, 20, 629-660.