Financing University Research

Ghafele, Roya (2012): Financing University Research.

Abstract

While the detailed mechanisms of the interplay of knowledge creation and economic growth have been discussed in great detail by endogenous growth theory, this paper is interested in assessing the role that universities play in the knowledge based economy. It does so at the example of best practice scenarios, as currently being undertaken by the University of Oxford, U.C. Berkeley, the M.I.T. and Chalmers School of Technology. It argues that key to successful research commercialization is the leverage of clusters and networks that assure knowledge flows between universities and business. We call this the ‘Third Way’ of university research commercialization, which focuses on systemic change, rather than on single stakeholder intervention. It reflects a novel generation of knowledge policies that focuses on training, awareness raising and the leverage of cluster effects, rather than the development of physical infrastructure (i.e. science parks). This is a unique approach that outperforms existing best practice in many ways; i.e. it focuses on the leverage of networks among the various academic institutions, rather than repeating the traditional ‘one university – one technology transfer office’ approach. The ‘Third Way’ also outperforms existing best practices by adopting latest trends in intellectual property management , such as online trading, perceiving intellectual property as a financial asset and leveraging open innovation for improving patent quality. Organizational values, structures & procedures of various actors (business, academia, government) are recognized and different institutional cultures are sought to be overcome through boundary spanning. The competing demands and interests of business and academia are reflected through the introduction of ‘social responsible university research commercialization’, as currently undertaken by U.C. Berkeley.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Technology Transfer, Research Funding, Intellectual Property, Chalmers School of Technology, U.C. Berkeley, Oxford University
• Subjects: O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O34 - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O32 - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

References

1 Baumol W.J. 2002.The Free Market Innovation Machine, 3, 14. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Quoted from M. J. Ryan: IP and Economic Growth. Creative and Innovative Economy Center Discussion Note. Nr. 2

Romer P. 1986. Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth, 94 Journal of Political Economy. S. 1002 ; Romer P. 1990. Endogenous Technological Change, 98 Journal of Political Economy 71. P.29

3 Arthur W.B. 1989. Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events. The Economic Journal Vol. 99, No. 394, pp. 116-131

4 Ryan M and Ghafele R. Do Patent Reforms Promote Innovation in Developing Countries? Evidence from Jordan and Brazil. George Washington University Discussion Paper. 2007, pp.1042

5 Wilensky, H.L. 1967. Organizational Intelligence: Knowledge and Policy in Government and Industry. New York: Basic Books;

Demsetz, H. 1972. Toward a Theory of Property Rights. American Economic Review 57, pp. 347-359;

Connor, K. and C.K. Prahalad. 1996. Resource-Based Theory of the Firm: Knowledge Versus Opportunism. Organization Science 7, pp.477- 489

6 OECD Secretariat: Turning Science into Business: Patenting and Licensing at Public Research Organisations, OECD, Paris 2003, www.oecd.org/document/2/0,2340,en_ 2649_34797_2513917_1_1_1_1,00.html

7 R. Rajala, M. Ross and V. Tuunainen.2007 Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research Nr. 2/

8 R. Ghafele/ B. Gibert. 2011. Responsiveness Revolution. Credit Suisse Research Institute Report. Zuerich.

9 Chesbrough H.W. 2007 Why Companies Should Have Open Business Models. MIT Sloan Management Review, 48: 2, pp. 22-28

10 Hoekman B.,/ Maskus K. E./ Saggi, K. 2004 Transfer of Technology to Developing Countries: Unilateral and Multilateral Policy Options, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3332.

11 Polster C. 2001. How the Law Works: Exploring the Implications of Emerging Intellectual Property Regimes for Knowledge, Economy and Society. Current Sociology, 49:4. pp. 92-94

12 Kirkland J. (ed.). 1996. Barriers to International Technology Transfer. London. Kluwer Academic Publishers. S.18

13 Bugliarello G. /Pak N. / Zhores A./ Moore J. (ed.). 1994. Technology Transfer. New Perspectives and Human Resources. Kluwer Law International.

Dordrecht/Boston/London; Centre de Développement de l’OCDE. (2002) Technologie et lutte contre la pauvreté en Asie et dans le Pacifique. OCDE. Paris;

Dyker D. A. 1997. The Technology of Transition. Science and Technology Policies for Transition Countries. Central University Press. Budapest;

Shin J.-S. 1996. The Economics of the Latecomers. Catching-up, technology transfer and institutions in Germany, Japan and South Korea. Routledge. London/New York;

Boutat A. 1991. Les Transferts Internationaux de Technologie. Presse Universitaire de Lyon. Lyon ;

Boutat A. 1991. Relations Technologiques Internationales. Mécanismes et enjeux. Presse Universitaire de Lyon. Lyon

14 UNFCC. 2009. Advance Report on Recommendations on Future Financing Options for Enhancing the Development, Deployment, Diffusion, and Transfer of Technologies Under the Convention, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Bonn, 1-10 June 2009.

15 Sandor D. 2009 The Interwoven World of PPPs and Green-Technology Spillovers: What Role Does IP Play In Securing the Strength of the Web? Paper submitted under the supervision of Ghafele R. in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science by Coursework in Global Governance & Diplomacy at the University of Oxford.

16 R. Ghafele. Financing University Research. ipfinance.blogspot.com/2011/03/waking-sleeping-giant.html

17 Teece, D.J. 1987. Profiting from Technological Innovation: Implications for Integration, Collaboration, Licensing, and Public Policy. Research Policy 15 pp.285-305.

18 Soto, H. de. 2000. The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else.Basic Books. New York

19 Rudisill N. 2010. Essay 1: Please assess the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats [SWOT] of a system of proprietary knowledge as a means to organize innovation? Class on Global Governance of Innovation by R. Ghafele

20 Scherer F.M. / Harhoff D. 2000. Technology policy for a world of skew-distributed outcomes. Research Policy 2000. Nr. 29, pp. 559- 566

21 R. Ghafele. Financing University Research. ipfinance.blogspot.com/2011/03/waking-sleeping-giant.html

22 R. Ghafele. Financing University Research. ipfinance.blogspot.com/2011/03/waking-sleeping-giant.html

23 E.Rasmussen, Ø. Moen and M. Gulbrandsen.2006 Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge. Technovation. Nr. 26 (4),pp. 518-533

24 F. M. Santos, K. M. Eisenhardt. 2009. Constructing Markets and Shaping Boundaries: Entrepreneurial Power in Nascent Fields. The Academy of Management Journal. Nr. 52 (4), pp. 643-671

25 R. Ghafele. Financing University Research. ipfinance.blogspot.com/2011/03/waking-sleeping-giant.html

26 R. Ghafele. Financing University Research. ipfinance.blogspot.com/2011/03/waking-sleeping-giant.html