IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v46y2016icp100-108.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Legislative environment and others factors that inhibit transfer of Mexican publicly funded research into commercial ventures

Author

Listed:
  • Hernandez-Mondragon, Alma Cristal
  • Herrera-Estrella, Luis
  • Kuri-Harcuch, Walid

Abstract

In this work we explored some factors that limit technology transfer in the process of innovation from different research institutions in Mexico. We found that one of the main inhibitors for technology transfer is the conflict of interest provision in the Federal Law of Administrative Responsibilities of Public Servants. Since most research and development activities are carried out in public institutions, and funding is mainly derived from Federal and State government programs, scientists are considered public servants in the eyes of the Law. Therefore, according to current norms scientists can incur in conflict of interest for technology transfer and commercialization of their research. From the information gathered from this study, we proposed an amendment to the above mentioned Law to eliminate potential conflict of interest, which derives from the participation of scientists from Mexican publicly funded institutions in the creation of spin-off companies, and hence, to incentivize entrepreneurship, technology transfer and innovation to effectively commercialize the products of publicly funded research. We also discovered other inhibitors of technology transfer that are discussed in this paper.

Suggested Citation

  • Hernandez-Mondragon, Alma Cristal & Herrera-Estrella, Luis & Kuri-Harcuch, Walid, 2016. "Legislative environment and others factors that inhibit transfer of Mexican publicly funded research into commercial ventures," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 100-108.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:46:y:2016:i:c:p:100-108
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2016.03.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X16300021
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2016.03.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vanloqueren, Gaëtan & Baret, Philippe V., 2009. "How agricultural research systems shape a technological regime that develops genetic engineering but locks out agroecological innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 971-983, July.
    2. Jorge Niosi, 2006. "Introduction to the Symposium: Universities as a Source of Commercial Technology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 399-402, July.
    3. Siegel, Donald S. & Waldman, David & Link, Albert, 2003. "Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 27-48, January.
    4. Franklin, Stephen J & Wright, Mike & Lockett, Andy, 2001. "Academic and Surrogate Entrepreneurs in University Spin-Out Companies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 127-141, January.
    5. Hewitt-Dundas, Nola & Roper, Stephen, 2011. "Creating advantage in peripheral regions: The role of publicly funded R&D centres," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 832-841, July.
    6. David C. Mowery & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2005. "The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and University-Industry Technology Transfer: A Model for Other OECD Governments?," Springer Books, in: Albert N. Link & F. M. Scherer (ed.), Essays in Honor of Edwin Mansfield, pages 233-245, Springer.
    7. James Cunningham & Paul O’Reilly & Conor O’Kane & Vincent Mangematin, 2014. "The inhibiting factors that principal investigators experience in leading publicly funded research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 93-110, February.
    8. Thursby, Jerry G. & Thursby, Marie C., 2011. "Has the Bayh-Dole act compromised basic research?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1077-1083, October.
    9. Julie DeCourcy, 2007. "Research Joint Ventures And International Competitiveness: Evidence From The National Cooperative Research Act," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 51-65.
    10. James Cunningham & Paul O'Reilly & Conor O'Kane & Vincent Mangematin, 2014. "The inhibiting factors that principal investigators experience in leading publicly funded research projects," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00756228, HAL.
    11. Wright, Mike & Lockett, Andy & Clarysse, Bart & Binks, Martin, 2006. "University spin-out companies and venture capital," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 481-501, May.
    12. Tina C. Ambos & Kristiina Mäkelä & Julian Birkinshaw & Pablo D'Este, 2008. "When Does University Research Get Commercialized? Creating Ambidexterity in Research Institutions," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 1424-1447, December.
    13. David C. Mowery & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2005. "The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and University--Industry Technology Transfer: A Model for Other OECD Governments?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 115-127, January.
    14. Grimaldi, Rosa & Kenney, Martin & Siegel, Donald S. & Wright, Mike, 2011. "30 years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1045-1057, October.
    15. Barry Bozeman & Daniel Fay & Catherine Slade, 2013. "Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 1-67, February.
    16. Bray, Michael J. & Lee, James N., 2000. "University revenues from technology transfer: Licensing fees vs. equity positions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(5-6), pages 385-392.
    17. Iain M. Cockburn & Rebecca M. Henderson, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
    18. Sampat, Bhaven N., 2006. "Patenting and US academic research in the 20th century: The world before and after Bayh-Dole," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 772-789, July.
    19. Hsu, David H., 2007. "Experienced entrepreneurial founders, organizational capital, and venture capital funding," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 722-741, June.
    20. Clarysse, Bart & Wright, Mike & Lockett, Andy & Van de Velde, Els & Vohora, Ajay, 2005. "Spinning out new ventures: a typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 183-216, March.
    21. Kato, Masatoshi & Odagiri, Hiroyuki, 2012. "Development of university life-science programs and university–industry joint research in Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 939-952.
    22. Goldfarb, Brent & Henrekson, Magnus, 2003. "Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 639-658, April.
    23. Siegel, Robin & Siegel, Eric & MacMillan, Ian C., 1988. "Corporate venture capitalists: Autonomy, obstacles, and performance," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 233-247.
    24. James Cunningham & Paul O'Reilly & Conor O'Kane & Vincent Mangematin, 2014. "The inhibiting factors that principal investigators experience in leading publicly funded research projects," Post-Print hal-00756228, HAL.
    25. Céline Druilhe & Elizabeth Garnsey, 2004. "Do Academic Spin-Outs Differ and Does it Matter?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 29(3_4), pages 269-285, August.
    26. Donald S. Siegel & Reinhilde Veugelers & Mike Wright, 2007. "Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: performance and policy implications," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 23(4), pages 640-660, Winter.
    27. Henrekson, Magnus & Rosenberg, Nathan, 2001. "Designing Efficient Institutions for Science-Based Entrepreneurship: Lessons from the US and Sweden," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 207-231, June.
    28. Di Gregorio, Dante & Shane, Scott, 2003. "Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 209-227, February.
    29. Thursby, Jerry G & Jensen, Richard & Thursby, Marie C, 2001. "Objectives, Characteristics and Outcomes of University Licensing: A Survey of Major U.S. Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 59-72, January.
    30. Bozeman, Barry, 2000. "Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 627-655, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Medina-Molotla, Nelly & Thorsteinsdóttir, Halla & Frixione, Eugenio & Kuri-Harcuch, Walid, 2017. "Some factors limiting transfer of biotechnology research for health care at Cinvestav: A Mexican scientific center," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 1-10.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christian Sandström & Karl Wennberg & Martin W. Wallin & Yulia Zherlygina, 2018. "Public policy for academic entrepreneurship initiatives: a review and critical discussion," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1232-1256, October.
    2. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.
    3. Brantnell, Anders & Baraldi, Enrico, 2022. "Understanding the roles and involvement of technology transfer offices in the commercialization of university research," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    4. Christopher S. Hayter & Andrew J. Nelson & Stephanie Zayed & Alan C. O’Connor, 2018. "Conceptualizing academic entrepreneurship ecosystems: a review, analysis and extension of the literature," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 1039-1082, August.
    5. Rasmussen, Einar & Borch, Odd Jarl, 2010. "University capabilities in facilitating entrepreneurship: A longitudinal study of spin-off ventures at mid-range universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 602-612, June.
    6. Good, Matthew & Knockaert, Mirjam & Soppe, Birthe & Wright, Mike, 2019. "The technology transfer ecosystem in academia. An organizational design perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 35-50.
    7. Gideon D. Markman & Donald S. Siegel & Mike Wright, 2008. "Research and Technology Commercialization," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 1401-1423, December.
    8. Alejandro Bengoa & Amaia Maseda & Txomin Iturralde & Gloria Aparicio, 2021. "A bibliometric review of the technology transfer literature," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1514-1550, October.
    9. Mario BENASSI & Matteo LANDONI & Francesco RENTOCCHINI, 2017. "University Management Practices and Academic Spin-offs," Departmental Working Papers 2017-11, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    10. Manuel Portugal Ferreira & Nuno R. Reis & Roberta M. Paula & Claudia Frias Pinto, 2017. "Structural and longitudinal analysis of the knowledge base on spin-off research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 289-313, July.
    11. Charlotta Dahlborg & Danielle Lewensohn & Rickard Danell & Carl Johan Sundberg, 2017. "To invent and let others innovate: a framework of academic patent transfer modes," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 538-563, June.
    12. James A. Cunningham & Matthias Menter & Chris Young, 2017. "A review of qualitative case methods trends and themes used in technology transfer research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 923-956, August.
    13. Rory O’Shea & Harveen Chugh & Thomas Allen, 2008. "Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: a conceptual framework," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(6), pages 653-666, December.
    14. Annelore Huyghe & Mirjam Knockaert & Evila Piva & Mike Wright, 2016. "Are researchers deliberately bypassing the technology transfer office? An analysis of TTO awareness," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 589-607, October.
    15. Cornelia Kolb & Marcus Wagner, 2018. "How university spin-offs differ in composition and interaction: a qualitative approach," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 734-759, June.
    16. Ming Chu Leung & John A. Mathews, 2011. "Origins and dynamics of university spin-offs: the case of Hong Kong," International Journal of Transitions and Innovation Systems, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(2), pages 175-201.
    17. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 275-314, Elsevier.
    18. Gümüsay, Ali Aslan & Bohné, Thomas Marc, 2018. "Individual and organizational inhibitors to the development of entrepreneurial competencies in universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 363-378.
    19. Battaglia, Daniele & Landoni, Paolo & Rizzitelli, Francesco, 2017. "Organizational structures for external growth of University Technology Transfer Offices: An explorative analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 45-56.
    20. Einar Rasmussen & Paul Benneworth & Magnus Gulbrandsen, 2013. "Scoping paper: Developing University Innovation Capacity: How can innovation policy effectively harness universities’ capability to promote high-growth technology businesses?," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20131007, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:46:y:2016:i:c:p:100-108. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.