Do public research organisations own most patents invented by their staff?

Trabajo presentado a la BETA Conference on "The economic analysis of knowledge production in academia" celebrada en Strasbourg (Francia) el 2 de Julio de 2010.Technology ownership and knowledge transfer aim at the dissemination of public research results usually in one direction – from the university or public research organisation (PRO) that produced the results. However, the complementarities between these types of instruments are not clear compared to the bidirectional channels of knowledge exchange. We analyse one PRO in Spain, a country that is peculiar in terms of infrequent changes to the legislations on science and patents and a predominance of PRO-owned over PRO-invented patents, similar to the situation in the USA but different from that in most EU member states. Against this background, knowledge transfer (measured through PRO-invented patents) increases faster than technology ownership (measured through PRO-owned patents). This situation may be damaging to knowledge exchange (measured through PRO co-owned patents).Peer reviewe

Access to universities’ public knowledge in Spain: geographical patterns

Ingenio Working Paper Series[ES]: Las referencias bibliográficas contenidas en los documentos de patente son una fuente de información sobre el acceso al conocimiento público con que se justifica o ataca la novedad de la invención. En vez de la distinción habitual entre referencias por tipo de literatura citada, se aborda otra más original, por tipo de institución citada, y se pone el acento en las universidades. El acceso al conocimiento público universitario en España comparte tendencias europeas: está altamente internacionalizado y se accede sobre todo a universidades estadounidenses. Presenta algunas idiosincrasias, como el acceso relativamente infrecuente al Instituto Tecnológico de Massachussets; y la elevada frecuencia de citas a universidades holandesas e israelíes. Además, se accede a universidades de la propia región mucho más que en otros estados miembros (sobre todo en comunidades distintas de Madrid). Respecto al acceso de otros países de la UE27, Alemania cita relativamente poco a las universidades españolas y la única citada por encima de la media europea es la Autónoma de Madrid. Se ofrece a los gestores de política algunas recomendaciones para influir sobre alguna de estas características de acuerdo con ciertos criterios de deseabilidad.[EN]: References in patent documents are sources of information about access to public knowledge to claim novelty or lack of novelty in the invention. The usual distinction breaks references down by type of cited literature but we do it by type of cited institution –more original. We focus on universities and compare Spain with the European Union 27 at national, regional and institutional levels. Spanish and European university public knowledge is similar: it is highly internationalised and American universities are the most accessed. Spain presents some idiosyncrasies: sporadic access to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, frequent to Dutch and Israeli universities. Access to universities from the same region occurs more often than in other Member States (due mainly to regions other than Madrid). Access to Spanish universities is relatively low from Germany, and the only one cited above the European average is the Autonomous University of Madrid. We give policymakers some recommendations to modify these characteristics according to some desirability criteria.La investigación se ha financiado con fondos del proyecto 2091 de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia.Peer reviewe

Inclining the columns to make the temple look straight: a first glance at monetary indicators on university–industry cooperation

The analysis of university-industry cooperation (UIC) rarely considers the geographic implications of its promotion. We hypothesise that UIC may lead to a cumulative advantage of already good performers. The 6th EU R&D Framework Programme is a useful source to verify this hypothesis because of its a priori neutrality regarding UIC. Using original data on the funding allotted per participant, we build national indicators of the value of FP6-sponsored UIC across the EU27. The results confirm that richer countries involved in UIC get more funds than poorer countries. We discuss the role of policy in light of the apparent entry barriers in UIC

ERAWATCH Country Report 2008 - An Assessment of Research System and Policies: Spain

The main objective of ERAWATCH country reports 2008 is to characterise and assess the performance of national research systems and related policies in a structured manner that is comparable across countries. The reports are produced for each EU Member State to support the mutual learning process and the monitoring of Member States' efforts by DG Research in the context of the Lisbon Strategy and the European Research Area. In order to do so, the system analysis focuses on key processes relevant for system performance. Four policy-relevant domains of the research system are distinguished, namely resource mobilisation, knowledge demand, knowledge production and knowledge circulation. The reports are based on a synthesis of information from the ERAWATCH Research Inventory and other important available information sources.JRC.J.3-Knowledge for Growt

ERAWATCH Analytical Country Report 2007: Spain

The main objective of ERAWATCH analytical country reports is to characterise and assess the performance of national research systems and related policies in a structured manner that is comparable across countries. The reports support the mutual learning process and the monitoring of Member States efforts by DG Research in the context of the Lisbon Strategy. In order to do so, the system analysis focuses on key processes relevant for system performance. Four policy-relevant domains of the research system are distinguished, namely resource mobilisation, knowledge demand, knowledge production and knowledge circulation. This analytical approach has been tested in 2007 by applying it to six countries, one of which is Spain. The report is based on a synthesis of information from the ERAWATCH Research Inventory and other important available information sources.JRC.J.3-Knowledge for Growt

Recognising the Value of Business Patents with University Inventors

Support to university patent ownership is a popular R&D policy initiative to promote effective knowledge sharing. Yet the broader, unintentional, consequences of such support on the link between public funding of university R&D and increased university-industry cooperation have not been studied. Through regression models on the determinants of university-owned patents in the EU and US, tentative results illustrate that the risk of negative consequences exists. Complementing current metrics about university performance with statistics about business patents with university inventors would help avoid such a risk and find definitive quantitative evidence.JRC.J.3-Knowledge for Growt

Do public research organisations own most patents invented by their staff?

[EN] Technology ownership and knowledge transfer aim at the dissemination of public research results, usually in one direction – from the university or public research organisation (PRO) that produced the results. However, the complementarities between these types of instruments are not clear compared to the bidirectional channels of knowledge exchange. We analyse one PRO in Spain, a country that is peculiar in terms of infrequent changes to the legislation on science and patents and a predominance of PRO-owned over PRO-invented patents, similar to the situation in the USA but different from that in most EU member states. Against this background, knowledge transfer (measured through PROinvented patents) increases faster than technology ownership (measured through PRO-owned patents). This situation may be damaging to knowledge exchange (measured through PRO co-owned patents).Azagra-Caro, JM. (2011). Do public research organisations own most patents invented by their staff?. Science and Public Policy. 38(3):237-250. doi:10.3152/016502611X12849792159272S23725038

Access to universities public knowledge: Who s more nationalist?

[EN] Access to public knowledge is a prerequisite for the good functioning of developed economies. Universities strive and are also requested to contribute to this knowledge both locally and internationally. Traditional studies on the geography of knowledge flows have identified a localisation effect; however, these studies do not use the country as the unit of observation and hence do not explore national patterns. In this paper, we hypothesise that the localisation of university knowledge flows is directly related to share of firm expenditure on research and development. To test this hypothesis, we use references to universities in patent documents as indicators based on a data set of around 20,000 university references, for 37 countries in the period 1990–2007, resulting in panels of around 300–500 observations. We build indicators for the university knowledge flows both inside and outside the applicant country, which we explain as a function of some proxies for national size and research structure based on econometric estimations. We draw some conclusions as to the importance of national business scientific strength for fostering increased domestic university knowledge flows.This research was initiated with the framework of ERAWATCH, a joint initiative of the European Commission's Directorate General for Research and the Joint Research Centre-Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS). The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Commission (EC). Neither the EC nor anyone acting on behalf of the EC is responsible for the use that might be made of the information. I am grateful to Rene van Bavel and Xabier Goenaga for their support and to Laura de Dominicis for exchange of ideas. I am also grateful to the international consortium that produced the database, including Henry Etzkowitz, Marina Ranga and members of Incentim and CWTS, led, respectively, by Bart Van Looy and Robert J.W. Tijssen. Previous versions of the paper were presented at the Triple Helix VIII International Conference on University, Industry and Government Linkages and the IPTS Workshop "The Output of R&D activities: Harnessing the Power of Patents Data-II'', and I acknowledge helpful comments from the audiences. My colleagues at INGENIO also provided useful comments on a seminar presentation. I also gratefully acknowledge support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation and the Spanish National Research Council to the project "Access to the public knowledge base'' (ref. 201010I004).Azagra Caro, JM. (2012). Access to universities public knowledge: Who s more nationalist?. Scientometrics. 91(3):671-679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0629-5S671679913Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Solazzi, M. (2010). Assessing public–private research collaboration: Is it possible to compare university performance? Scientometrics, 84, 173–197.Acosta, M., & Coronado, D. (2003). Science-technology flows in Spanish regions: An analysis of scientific citations in patents. Research Policy, 32(10), 1783–1803.Acosta, M., Coronado, D., Ferrándiz, E., & León, M. D. (2011). Factors affecting inter-regional academic scientific collaboration within Europe: The role of economic distance. Scientometrics, 87, 63–74.Agrawal, A., Cockburn, I., & McHale, J. (2006). Gone but not forgotten: Knowledge flows, labor mobility, and enduring social relationships. Journal of Economic Geography, 6(5), 571–591.Agrawal, A., Kapur, D., & McHale, J. (2008). How do spatial and social proximity influence knowledge flows? Evidence from patent data. Journal of Urban Economics, 64(2), 258–269.Alcácer, J., & Gittelman, M. (2006). Patent citations as a measurement of knowledge flows: The influence of examiner citations. Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(4), 774–779.Alcácer, J., Gittelman, M., & Sampat, B. (2009). Applicant and examiner citations in US patents: An overview and analysis. Research Policy, 38(2), 415–427.Azagra-Caro, J. M., Fernández-de-Lucio, I., Perruchas, F., & Mattsson, P. (2009). What do patent examiner inserted citations indicate for a region with low absorptive capacity? Scientometrics, 80(2), 441–455.Azagra-Caro, J. M., Pontikakis, D., & Varga, A. (2011). Delocalisation patterns in university–industry interaction: Evidence from the 6th R&D framework programme. European Planning Studies, forthcoming.Azagra-Caro, J. M., Yegros–Yegros, A., & Archontakis, F. (2006). What do university patent routes indicate at regional level? Scientometrics, 66(1), 219–230.Breschi, S., & Lissoni, F. (2001). Knowledge spillovers and local innovation systems: A critical survey. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), 975–1005.Breschi, S., & Lissoni, F. (2005). Knowledge networks from patent data. In H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 613–643). Dordrecht: KluwerBreschi, S., & Malerba, F. (1997). Sectoral innovation systems: Technological regimes, Shumpeterian dynamics, and spatial boundaries. In C. Edquist (Ed.), Systems of innovation: Technologies, institutions and organizations (ch. 6). Londres and Washington: Pinter.Callaert, J., van Looy, B., Verbeek, A., Debackere, K., & Thus, B. (2006). Traces of prior art: An analysis of non-patent references found in patent documents. Scientometrics, 69(1), 3–20.Criscuolo, P., & Verspagen, B. (2008). Does it matter where patent citations come from? Inventor vs. examiner citations in European patents. Research Policy, 37(10), 1892–1908.EC (2007). Commission Green Paper ‘The European Research Area: New Perspectives’, COM(2007) p. 161.Feldman, M. P. (1999). The new economics of innovation, spillovers and agglomeration: A review of empirical studies. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 8(1), 5–25.Greene, W. H. (2002). LIMDEP Version 8.0 econometric modeling guide 2. Plainview, NY: Econometric Software, Inc.Guellec, D., & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2001). The internationalisation of technology analysed with patent data. Research Policy, 30, 1253–1266.Hu, A. G. Z., & Jaffe, A. B. (2003). Patent citations and international knowledge flow: The cases of Korea and Taiwan. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21(6), 849–880.Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (1996). Flows of knowledge from universities and federal labs: Modeling the flow of patent citations over time and across institutional and geographic boundaries. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 93, 12671–12677.Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (1999). International knowledge flows: Evidence from patent citations. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 8(1), 105–136.Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), 577–598.Lecocq, C., & Van Looy, B. (2009). The impact of collaboration on the technological performance of regions: Time invariant or driven by life cycle dynamics? Scientometrics, 80(3), 847–867.Maurseth, P. B., & Verspagen, B. (2002). Knowledge spillovers in Europe: A patent citations analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 104(4), 531–545.Meyer, M. (2000). Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature. Research Policy, 29(3), 409–434.Pavitt, K. (1984). Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13, 343–373.Phene, A., Fladmoe-Lindquist, K., & Marsh, L. (2006). Breakthrough innovations in the US biotechnology industry: The effects of technological space and geographic origin. Strategic Management Journal, 27(4), 369–388.Ponds, R. (2009). The limits to internationalization of scientific research collaboration. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34, 76–94.Rosenkopf, L., & Nerkar, A. (2001). Beyond local search: Boundary-spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry. Strategic Management Journal, 22(4), 287–306.Sapsalis, E., & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2007). The institutional sources of knowledge and the value of academic patents. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 16(2), 139–157.Singh, J. (2005). Collaborative networks as determinants of knowledge diffusion patterns. Management Science, 51(5), 756–770.Sonn, J. W., & Storper, M. (2008). The increasing importance of geographical proximity in technological innovation: An analysis of US patent citations, 1975–1997. Environment and Planning, 40(5), 1020–1039.Tijssen, R. J. W. (2001). Global and domestic utilization of industrial relevant science: Patent citation analysis of science-technology interactions and knowledge flows. Research Policy, 30(1), 35–54.Tijssen, R. J. W., & Van Leeuwen, T. N. (2006). Measuring impacts of academic science on industrial research: A citation-based approach. Scientometrics, 66(1), 55–69.Verbeek, A., Debackere, K., & Luwel, M. (2003). Science cited in patents: A geographic “flow” analysis of bibliographic citation patterns in patents. Scientometrics, 58(2), 241–263

DETERMINANTES DE LAS PATENTES UNIVERSITARIAS. EL CASO DE LA UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE VALENCIA

Universities have traditionally developed training and research functions. In the last decades they have adopted a third function: the transfer of their knowledge. The instruments employed have been varied: R&D contracts, assessments, technical reports and others like patent licensing, about which a special emphasis has been placed for some years. The surge of patents at developed country universities is justified because they represent a good source of increase and diversification of university funds. Until now the incipient literature on the topic has not created a specific model of the factors that affect the generation of university patents. In this work, departing from the recognition that a relation between them and the amount of R&D carried out by university departments exist, the fitness of the models of industrial patents has been tested in the context of universities. The application made on the available data of the Universidad Politécnica de Valencia produced as a result that, actually, count data econometric models are appropriate to model the mentioned relation. From the results obtained we can gather that current R&D exerts a greater influence on patents than past R&D, that the fields of knowledge more dependent on science present more technological opportunities and that the departments with more staff apply for a relatively lower number of patents. On the other hand, the disaggregation of R&D by source of funding allows us to observe that publicly funded research is the most important for the generation of patents, but that synergy exists with complementary funding by companies; the disaggregation of R&D by types of itself indicates, in turn, that the activities of technology transfer proper do not head to the application for patents. Las universidades han desempeñado tradicionalmente funciones de docencia e investigación. En las últimas décadas han adoptado una tercera función: la transferencia de su conocimiento. Los instrumentos utilizados han sido diversos: contratos de I+D, asesorías e informes técnicos y otros como la licencia de patentes, sobre la que se ha puesto un énfasis especial desde hace unos años. El auge de las patentes en las universidades de los países desarrollados se justifica porque suponen una buena fuente de aumento y diversificación de la financiación universitaria. Hasta ahora la incipiente literatura sobre el tema no ha creado un modelo específico de los factores que inciden en la generación de las patentes universitarias. En este trabajo, partiendo del reconocimiento de que existe una relación entre las mismas y el volumen de la I+D llevada a cabo por los departamentos universitarios, se ha ensayado la idoneidad de los modelos de patentes empresariales en el contexto de las universidades. La aplicación realizada sobre los datos disponibles de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia da como resultado que, en efecto, los modelos econométricos de variables contables resultan adecuados para modelar la citada relación. De los resultados obtenidos se desprende que la I+D contemporánea ejerce una mayor influencia sobre las patentes que la I+D pasada, que las áreas de conocimiento más dependientes de la ciencia presentan mayores oportunidades tecnológicas y que los departamentos con más personal solicitan relativamente un menor número de patentes. Por otro lado, la desagregación de la I+D por origen de la financiación permite observar que la investigación financiada públicamente es la más importante de cara a la generación de patentes, pero que existe sinergia con la financiación complementaria de las empresas; la desagregación de la I+D por tipos de la misma indica, a su vez, que las actividades más propiamente de transferencia de tecnología no conducen a la solicitud de patentI+D, patentes, universidades. R&D, patents, universities.

'Getting out of the closet': Scientific authorship of literary fiction and knowledge transfer

Some scientists write literary fiction books in their spare time. If these books contain scientific knowledge, literary fiction becomes a mechanism of knowledge transfer. In this case, we could conceptualize literary fiction as non-formal knowledge transfer. We model knowledge transfer via literary fiction as a function of the type of scientist (academic or non-academic) and his/her scientific field. Academic scientists are those employed in academia and public research organizations whereas non-academic scientists are those with a scientific background employed in other sectors. We also distinguish between direct knowledge transfer (the book includes the scientist's research topics), indirect knowledge transfer (scientific authors talk about their research with cultural agents) and reverse knowledge transfer (cultural agents give scientists ideas for future research). Through mixed-methods research and a sample from Spain, we find that scientific authorship accounts for a considerable percentage of all literary fiction authorship. Academic scientists do not transfer knowledge directly so often as non-academic scientists, but the former engage into indirect and reverse transfer knowledge more often than the latter. Scientists from History stand out in direct knowledge transfer. We draw propositions about the role of the academic logic and scientific field on knowledge transfer via literary fiction. We advance some tentative conclusions regarding the consideration of scientific authorship of literary fiction as a valuable knowledge transfer mechanism.Comment: Paper published in Journal of Technology Transfe