Academic incentives, research organization and patenting at a large french university

Economics of Innovation and New Technology

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 119-138

  Carayol, Nicolas ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ LOUIS PASTEUR   (France)

Author keywords

Academic Patenting; Economics of science; Laboratory; University

Indexed keywords

EID: 85066211802     PISSN: 10438599     EISSN: 14768364     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10438590600982855     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Agrawal, A., and Henderson, R., 2002. Putting patents in context: exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Management Science, 48 (1): 44–60.
2. Allison, P. D., Long, J. S., and Stewart, J. A., 1982. Cumulative advantage and inequality in science. American Sociological Review, 47: 615–625.
3. Azagra-Caro, J., Carayol, N., and Llerena, P., 2006. Patent production a european research university: evidence at the laboratory level. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31 (2): 257–268.
4. Beath, J., Owen, R., Poyago-Theotoky, J., and Ulph, D., 2003. Optimal incentives for income generation within universities: the rule of thumb for the Compton tax. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21 (9): 1301–1322.
5. Bercovitz, J., Feldman, F., Feller, I., and Burton, R., 2001. Organizational structure as determinants of academic patent and licensing behavior: an exploratory study of Duke, Johns Hopkins, and Pennsylvania state universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26 (1–2): 21–35.
6. Bonaccorsi, A., and Daraio, C., 2003. Age effects in scientific productivity. The case of the Italian National Research Council (CNR). Scientometrics, 58 (1): 35–48.
7. Cameron, C., and Trivedi, P., 1998. Models for Count Data, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8. Carayol, N., 2003a. Objectives, agreements and matching in science industry collaborations: reassembling the pieces of the puzzle. Research Policy, 32: 887–908.
9. Carayol, N., 2003b. “ Optimal Academic Competition: Dynamic Incentives and Cumulative Advantages ”. Mimeo BETA-University Louis Pasteur.
10. Carayol, N., and Matt, M., 2004a. Does research organization influence academic production? laboratory level evidence from a large european university. Research Policy, 33: 1081–1102.
11. Carayol, N., and Matt, M., 2004b. Individual and collective determinants of academic scientists' productivity. Information Economics and Policy, 18: 55–72.
12. Cohen, W. M., Florida, R., Randazzese, L., and Walsh, J., 1998. “ Industry and the academy: uneasy partners in the cause of technological advance ”. In Challenge to the University, Edited by: Noll, R., 171–199. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
13. Cole, S., and Cole, J., 1973. Social Stratification in Science, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
14. Coupé, T., 2003. Science is golden: academic R&D and university patents. Journal of Technology Transfer, 28: 31–46.
15. Crow, M., and Bozeman, B., 1987. R&D Laboratory classification and public policy: the effects of environmental context on laboratory behavior. Research Policy, 16: 229–258.
16. Dasgupta, P., and David, P. A., 1994. Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy, 23: 487–521.
17. Diamond, A. M., 1986. The life-cycle research productivity of mathematicians and scientists. The Journal of Gerontology, 41: 520–525.
18. Diamond, A. M., 1996. The economics of science. Knowledge and Policy, 9: 6–49.
19. European Commission. 2003. Third European Report on Science and Technology Indicators. Brussels.
20. Foltz, J., Barham, B., and Kim, K., 2000. Universities and agricultural biotechnology patent production. Agribusiness, 16 (1): 82–95.
21. Foltz, J., Kim, K., and Barham, B., 2001. A Dynamic Count Data Analysis of University AgBiotech Patents. 56 Food Marketing Policy Center Research Report
22. Geuna, A., and Nesta, L., 2006. University patenting and its effects on academic research: the emerging european evidence. Research Policy, 35 (6): 790–807.
23. Greene, W., 1994. “ Accounting for Excess Zeros and Sample Selection in Poisson and Negative Binomial Regression Models ”. Department of Economics, Stern School of Business, New York University. EC-94-10
24. Greene, W., 2003. Econometric Analysis, 5th edn., Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
25. Henderson, R., Jaffe, A. B., 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: 119–127.
26. Jensen, J., and Thursby, M. C., 2004. Proofs and prototypes for sale: the licensing of university inventions. American Economic Review, 91: 240–59.
27. Lach, S., and Schankerman, M., 2003. Incentives and Invention in Universities. CEPR Discussion Paper, 3916
28. Lambert, D., 1992. Zero inflated poisson regressions, with an application to defects in manufacturing. Technometrics, 34 (1): 1–14.
29. Levin, S. G., and Stephan, P. E., 1991. Research productivity over the life cycle: evidence for academic scientists. American Economic Review, 81: 114–132.
30. Mansfield, E., 1995. Academic research underlying industrial innovations: sources, characteristics, and financing. Review of Economics and Statistics, 77 (1): 55–65.
31. Merton, R. K., 1957. Priorities in scientific discovery. American Sociological Review, 22: 635–659.
32. Mowery, D. C., and Ziedonis, A. A., 2002. Academic patent quality before and after the Bayh–Dole Act in the United States. Research Policy, 31: 399–418.
33. National Science Board. 2004. Science and Engineering Indicators, National Science Foundation.
34. Owen-Smith, J., and Powell, W., 2001. To patent or not: faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26 (1–2): 99–114.
35. Payne, A., and Siow, A., 2003. Does federal research increase university research output?. Advances in Economic Analysis & Policy, 3 (1) Article 1
36. Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., and Link, A. N., 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.
37. Stephan, P. E., 1996. The economics of science. Journal of Economic Literature, 34: 1199–1235.
38. Stephan, P. E., 2001. Educational implications of university–industry technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26: 199–205.
39. Stephan, P. E., Gurmu, S., Sumell, A. J., and Black, G., Who is Patenting in the University? Evidence from the Survey of Doctorate Recipients. Paper Presented at the Workshop ‘The Empirical Economic Analysis of the Academic Sphere’. March17, Strasbourg, France. BETA, University Louis Pasteur.
40. Thursby, J. G., and Thursby, M. C., 2003a. “ Are Faculty Critical? Their Role in University-Industry Licensing ”. NBER. 9991
41. Thursby, J. G., and Thursby, M. C., 2003b. “ Patterns of Research and Licensing Activity of Science and Engineering Faculty ”. Mimeo Georgia Tech. and Amory University.
42. Vuong, Q., 1989. Likelihood ratio tests for model selection and non-nested hypotheses. Econometrica, 57: 307–334.
43. Wallmark, J. T., 1997. Innovations and patents at universities: the case of Chalmers University of Technology. Technovation, 17: 127–139.
44. Weiss, Y., and Lillard, L. A., 1982. Output variability, academic labor contracts, and waiting times for promotion. Research in Labor Economics, 5: 157–188.
45. Winkelmann, R., 2003. Econometric Analysis of Count Data, 4th edn., Berlin: Springer.
46. Zucker, L. G., Darby, M., and Brewer, M. B., 1998. Intellectual human capital and the birth of U.S. biotechnology enterprises. American Economic Review, 88 (1): 290–306.