IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mic/tmpjrn/v9y2013i02p71-77.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technological Audit as a Method of Evaluation of the Commercial Attractiveness of the Objects of Intellectual Property

Author

Listed:
  • Aleksandra Kosenko

Abstract

Considered in this paper are the questions used to assess the commercial potential of intellectual property objects in the theory and practice of the technological audit. A mechanism for the valuation of the level of commercial attractiveness of intellectual technologies is proposed, and the theoretical provisions of principles, objectives, and outcomes of technological audit are discussed. The features of the technological audit of the results of intellectual activities of industrial enterprises are determined.

Suggested Citation

  • Aleksandra Kosenko, 2013. "Technological Audit as a Method of Evaluation of the Commercial Attractiveness of the Objects of Intellectual Property," Theory Methodology Practice (TMP), Faculty of Economics, University of Miskolc, vol. 9(02), pages 71-77.
    • Handle: RePEc:mic:tmpjrn:v:9:y:2013:i:02:p:71-77
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://tmp.gtk.uni-miskolc.hu/volumes/2013/02/TMP_2013_02_09.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(3), pages 297-297.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ozgur Aydogmus & Erkan Gürpinar, 2022. "Science, Technology and Institutional Change in Knowledge Production: An Evolutionary Game Theoretic Framework," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1163-1188, December.
    2. Cimoli, Mario & Primi, Annalisa & Rovira, Sebastián, 2011. "National innovation surveys in latin America: empirical evidence and policy implications," Documentos de Proyectos 3897, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    3. Inglesi-Lotz, Roula, 2017. "Social rate of return to R&D on various energy technologies: Where should we invest more? A study of G7 countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 521-525.
    4. Z. Jun Lin & Shengqiang Liu & Fangcheng Sun, 2017. "The Impact of Financing Constraints and Agency Costs on Corporate R&D Investment: Evidence from China," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 17(1), pages 3-42, March.
    5. Daniel P. Gross & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2021. "The Economics of Crisis Innovation Policy: A Historical Perspective," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 111, pages 346-350, May.
    6. Michael J. Andrews, 2020. "Local Effects of Land Grant Colleges on Agricultural Innovation and Output," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Research and Innovation in Agriculture, pages 139-175, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Bronwyn Hall & Alessandro Maffioli, 2008. "Evaluating the impact of technology development funds in emerging economies: evidence from Latin America," The European Journal of Development Research, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 172-198.
    8. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2017. "Digital knowledge generation and the appropriability trade-off," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 991-1002.
    9. Carayol, Nicolas & Dalle, Jean-Michel, 2007. "Sequential problem choice and the reward system in Open Science," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 167-191, June.
    10. Dolfsma, W.A., 2006. "IPRs, Technological Development, and Economic Development," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2006-004-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    11. Andrés Barge-Gil & Alberto López, 2015. "R versus D: estimating the differentiated effect of research and development on innovation results," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(1), pages 93-129.
    12. Nejla YACOUB, 2012. "Brevetabilité des médicament, innovation et l’avenir de l’industrie pharmaceutique en Tunisie DRUGS PATENTABILITY INNOVATION AND THE FUTURE OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY IN TUNISIA THEORETICAL STUDY ," Working Papers 248, Laboratoire de Recherche sur l'Industrie et l'Innovation. ULCO / Research Unit on Industry and Innovation.
    13. Valérie Revest & Alessandro Sapio, 2012. "Financing technology-based small firms in Europe: what do we know?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 179-205, July.
    14. Penin, Julien, 2005. "Patents versus ex post rewards: A new look," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 641-656, June.
    15. Gambardella, Alfonso & Conti, Raffaele & Novelli, Elena, 2018. "Specializing in Generality: Firm Strategies When Intermediate Markets Work," CEPR Discussion Papers 12782, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Kancs, d’Artis & Siliverstovs, Boriss, 2016. "R&D and non-linear productivity growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 634-646.
    17. Paul A. David, 2005. "The Economic Logic of “Open Science” and the Balance between Private Property Rights and the Public Domain in Scientific Data and," Development and Comp Systems 0502006, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. José Miguel Benavente & Gustavo Crespi & Alessandro Maffioli, 2007. "The Impact of National Research Funds: An Evaluation of the Chilean FONDECYT," OVE Working Papers 0307, Inter-American Development Bank, Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE).
    19. Cristiano, Antonelli & Scellato, Giuseppe, 2007. "Complexity and Innovation: Social Interactions and Firm Level Total Factor Productivity," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200709, University of Turin.
    20. Bernhard Ganglmair & Imke Reimers, 2019. "Visibility of Technology and Cumulative Innovation: Evidence from Trade Secrets Laws," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2019_119v1, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • M15 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - IT Management

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:mic:tmpjrn:v:9:y:2013:i:02:p:71-77. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vgtmihu.html .

    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.