IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v12y2003i1p17-27.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Academic patents as an indicator of useful research? A new approach to measure academic inventiveness

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Meyer

Abstract

Academic patents may be a more accurate measure of inventive output generated by academics than university-owned patents. Using Finnish data, a comparative analysis suggests that number of academic patents is higher not only than the number of university-owned patents but also than patents citing domestic science. Also different linkage intensities could be identified. The second part of the study tries to identify areas for further analysis and introduces some results with respect to concentration of academic inventive activity, academic contributions to national patenting and utilization of patented inventions. Finally, limitations and applicability of the overall approach are discussed. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Meyer, 2003. "Academic patents as an indicator of useful research? A new approach to measure academic inventiveness," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 17-27, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:12:y:2003:i:1:p:17-27
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154403781776735
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    More about this item

    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:oup:rseval:v:12:y:2003:i:1:p:17-27. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.