IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v101y2014i3d10.1007_s11192-014-1404-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessments of technology transfer activities of US universities and associated impact of Bayh–Dole Act

Author

Listed:
  • Ampere A. Tseng

    (National Taiwan University of Science and Technology
    National Taiwan University of Science and Technology)

  • Miroslav Raudensky

    (Brno University of Technology)

Abstract

Patents and licenses are foundational to successful technology transfer in universities. In this article, the activities and performance of university patenting and licensing are studied to gauge the effectiveness of the Bayh–Dole Act (the “Act”), the most influential piece of US legislation on university technology transfer (UTT). Based on raw data from five sources, the annual numbers of patents granted, licenses signed, startup companies launched, and research expenditures are analyzed. Correlations are performed for all data presented to quantify trends over different time periods. We found that patenting and licensing activities in US universities slowed down greatly after 2000 and remained flat until the period from 2010 to 2012, when activities recover to the level of strength characterizing the period before 2000 and after the enactment of the Act. We identify that economic recessions is the major cause to the flatness of the patenting activities during 2000s. We also explain some of the differences found among different data sources and time periods.

Suggested Citation

  • Ampere A. Tseng & Miroslav Raudensky, 2014. "Assessments of technology transfer activities of US universities and associated impact of Bayh–Dole Act," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1851-1869, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:101:y:2014:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-014-1404-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-014-1404-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-014-1404-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-014-1404-6?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. Andreas Hornstein & Per Krusell, 1996. "Can Technology Improvements Cause Productivity Slowdowns?," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1996, Volume 11, pages 209-276, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Ben S. Bernanke & Julio J. Rotemberg (ed.), 1996. "NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1996," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262522225, April.
    3. Rebecca Henderson & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1998. "Universities As A Source Of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis Of University Patenting, 1965-1988," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 119-127, February.
    4. Poh Kam Wong & Annette Singh, 2010. "University patenting activities and their link to the quantity and quality of scientific publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(1), pages 271-294, April.
    5. 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.
    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?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 115-127, January.
    7. Ashley J. Stevens, 2004. "The Enactment of Bayh--Dole," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 93-99, January.
    8. Van Looy, Bart & Landoni, Paolo & Callaert, Julie & van Pottelsberghe, Bruno & Sapsalis, Eleftherios & Debackere, Koenraad, 2011. "Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 553-564, May.
    9. Powers, Joshua B. & McDougall, Patricia, 2005. "Policy orientation effects on performance with licensing to start-ups and small companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1028-1042, September.
    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. Shu-Hao Chang, 2022. "Examining Key Technologies Among Academic Patents Through an Analysis of Standard-Essential Patents," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(3), pages 21582440221, July.
    2. Hong Gong & Shan Peng, 2018. "Effects of patent policy on innovation outputs and commercialization: evidence from universities in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 687-703, November.

    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. Link, Albert N. & Siegel, Donald S. & Van Fleet, David D., 2011. "Public science and public innovation: Assessing the relationship between patenting at U.S. National Laboratories and the Bayh-Dole Act," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1094-1099, October.
    2. Amit Shovon Ray & Sabyasachi Saha, "undated". "Patenting Public-Funded Research for Technology Transfer: A Conceptual-Empirical Synthesis of US Evidence and Lessons for India," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi Working Papers 244, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi, India.
    3. Christian Fisch & Tobias Hassel & Philipp Sandner & Joern Block, 2015. "University patenting: a comparison of 300 leading universities worldwide," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 318-345, April.
    4. Hyejin Jung & Byung-Keun Kim, 2018. "Determinant factors of university spin-off: the case of Korea," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(6), pages 1631-1646, December.
    5. Catalina Martínez & Valerio Sterzi, 2021. "The impact of the abolishment of the professor’s privilege on European university-owned patents," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3), pages 247-282, March.
    6. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Doherr, Thorsten & Hussinger, Katrin & Schliessler, Paula & Toole, Andrew A., 2016. "Knowledge Creates Markets: The influence of entrepreneurial support and patent rights on academic entrepreneurship," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 131-146.
    7. Francesco Lissoni & Patrick Llerena & Maureen McKelvey & Bulat Sanditov, 2008. "Academic patenting in Europe: new evidence from the KEINS database," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 87-102, June.
    8. Catalina Martinez & Lydia Bares, 2018. "The link between technology transfer and international extension of university patents: Evidence from Spain," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(6), pages 827-842.
    9. Patrick S. W. Fong & Xuhua Chang & Qiang Chen, 2018. "Faculty patent assignment in the Chinese mainland: evidence from the top 35 patent application universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 69-95, February.
    10. Antonio Della Malva & Francesco Lissoni & Patrick Llerena, 2013. "Institutional change and academic patenting: French universities and the Innovation Act of 1999," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 211-239, January.
    11. Birgitte Andersen & Federica Rossi, 2011. "Intellectual property governance and knowledge creation in UK universities," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(8), pages 701-725, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Riccardo Fini & Kun Fu & Marius Tuft Mathisen & Einar Rasmussen & Mike Wright, 2017. "Institutional determinants of university spin-off quantity and quality: a longitudinal, multilevel, cross-country study," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 361-391, February.
    14. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Daniele Biancardi & Mabel Sanchez Barrioluengo & Federico Biagi, 2019. "Study on Higher Education Institutions and Local Development," JRC Research Reports JRC117272, Joint Research Centre.
    15. Francesco Lissoni & Fabio Montobbio, 2015. "The Ownership of Academic Patents and Their Impact. Evidence from Five European Countries," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 66(1), pages 143-171.
    16. Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry, 2019. "Collaboration or funding: lessons from a study of nanotechnology patenting in Canada and the United States," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 741-777, June.
    17. Motohashi, Kazuyuki & Muramatsu, Shingo, 2012. "Examining the university industry collaboration policy in Japan: Patent analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 149-162.
    18. Roya Ghafele & Benjamin Gibert, 2014. "IP Commercialization Tactics in Developing Country Contexts," Journal of Management and Strategy, Journal of Management and Strategy, Sciedu Press, vol. 5(2), pages 1-15, May.
    19. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & Aldo Geuna & Federica Rossi, 2011. "University–Industry Interactions: The Unresolved Puzzle," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 11, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    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:spr:scient:v:101:y:2014:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-014-1404-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.