IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v117y2018i2d10.1007_s11192-018-2893-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of patent policy on innovation outputs and commercialization: evidence from universities in China

Author

Listed:
  • Hong Gong

    (Wuhan University
    Research Center for China Industry-University-Research Institute Collaboration of Wuhan University)

  • Shan Peng

    (Wuhan University)

Abstract

As the important source of scientific and technological innovation in China, the improvement of productivity from the patent commercialization in universities and research institutes is of great significance to the promotion of China’s sustainable economic development. Despite the quantity of patent applications from universities has increased dramatically in recent years, the rate of patent commercialization is somewhat lower than we expect. The purpose of our study is to examine whether the incentive patent policy has effectively enhanced the patent outputs and commercialization of universities in China. We determine the specific patent policy based on the information collection and measure the specific effect of the patent policy by using the data of the 64 universities that were directly under the Ministry of Education from 2009 to 2015. As a result, we find that although the policy has increased a university’s patent output, it does not encourage the patent’s commercialization. This is because to a certain extent, the policy has a negative impact on the enthusiasm of the university patent commercialization. Therefore, we argue that patent policies focusing on the quantity in the short term can improve the innovation output but will have a negative impact on university’s sustainable development in the long run.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:117:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2893-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-018-2893-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-018-2893-5
    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/s11192-018-2893-5?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. 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. Geuna, Aldo & Rossi, Federica, 2011. "Changes to university IPR regulations in Europe and the impact on academic patenting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1068-1076, October.
    3. 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.
    4. Mowery, David C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Sampat, Bhaven N. & Ziedonis, Arvids A., 2001. "The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole act of 1980," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 99-119, January.
    5. Wonchang Hur & Jaeho Park, 2016. "Network Patterns of Inventor Collaboration and Their Effects on Innovation Outputs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-25, March.
    6. John Tyler, 2013. "Redeploying Bayh-Dole: beyond Merely doing good to optimizing the potential in results of taxpayer-funded research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(6), pages 911-929, December.
    7. Ani Gerbin & Mateja Drnovsek, 2016. "Determinants and public policy implications of academic-industry knowledge transfer in life sciences: a review and a conceptual framework," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 979-1076, October.
    8. Loet Leydesdorff & Martin Meyer, 2010. "The decline of university patenting and the end of the Bayh–Dole effect," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(2), pages 355-362, May.
    9. Nicola Baldini & Rosa Grimaldi & Maurizio Sobrero, 2007. "To patent or not to patent? A survey of Italian inventors on motivations, incentives, and obstacles to university patenting," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(2), pages 333-354, February.
    10. Yixin Dai & David Popp & Stuart Bretschneider, 2005. "Institutions and intellectual property: The influence of institutional forces on university patenting," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(3), pages 579-598.
    11. 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.
    12. Jaehyun Choi & Dongsik Jang & Sunghae Jun & Sangsung Park, 2015. "A Predictive Model of Technology Transfer Using Patent Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-21, December.
    13. 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.
    14. Heike Grimm & Johannes Jaenicke, 2012. "What drives patenting and commerzialisation activity at East German universities? The role of new public policy, institutional environment and individual prior knowledge," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 454-477, August.
    15. Jianyu Zhao & Guangdong Wu, 2017. "Evolution of the Chinese Industry-University-Research Collaborative Innovation System," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-13, April.
    16. 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.
    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. Hongxia Zhao & Hongyang Chen & Huijuan Zhao & Ying Lu & Jianhua Zhu, 2024. "What business environment element configuration can promote urban digitization development?," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(11), pages 27923-27944, November.
    2. Chi-Yo Huang & Min-Jen Yang & Jeen-Fong Li & Hueiling Chen, 2021. "A DANP-Based NDEA-MOP Approach to Evaluating the Patent Commercialization Performance of Industry–Academic Collaborations," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(18), pages 1-26, September.
    3. Hong Gong & Libing Nie & Yuyao Peng & Shan Peng & Yushan Liu, 2020. "The innovation value chain of patents: Breakthrough in the patent commercialization trap in Chinese universities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, March.
    4. Meng, Qiaoyu & Li, Yi & Cao, Qinwei, 2024. "The paradox analysis and functional mechanism between R&D efficiency and transformation effect: Evidence from key universities in China," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    5. Muhammad Qayyum & Yuyuan Yu & Tingting Tu & Mir Muhammad Nizamani & Afaq Ahmad & Minhaj Ali, 2022. "Relationship between economic liberalization and intellectual property protection with regional innovation in China. A case study of Chinese provinces," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(1), pages 1-17, January.
    6. Qinghua Xia & Qinwei Cao & Manqing Tan, 2020. "Basic research intensity and diversified performance: the moderating role of government support intensity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 577-605, October.
    7. Shen, Huijun & Coreynen, Wim & Huang, Can, 2022. "Exclusive licensing of university technology: The effects of university prestige, technology transfer offices, and academy-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    8. Lei Ye & Ting Zhang & Xianzhong Cao & Senlin Hu & Gang Zeng, 2024. "Mapping the landscape of university technology flows in China using patent assignment data," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.
    9. Arho Suominen & Matthias Deschryvere, 2024. "Barriers to immaterial property rights development in research organizations: an explorative study from Finland," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(5), pages 1935-1958, October.
    10. Jiafeng Gu, 2021. "Effects of Patent Policy on Outputs and Commercialization of Academic Patents in China: A Spatial Difference-in-Differences Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-17, December.
    11. Zhouyi Wu & Chuncao Wang & Bin He & Siying Yang, 2022. "State‐owned industrial enterprises' non‐R&D innovation and regional total factor productivity: An analysis based on the panel co‐integration method," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(8), pages 3338-3347, December.
    12. Natalia Wagner, 2023. "Inventive Activity for Climate Change Mitigation: An Insight into the Maritime Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-23, November.
    13. Yutao Sun & Chen Zhang & Robert A. W. Kok, 2020. "The role of research outcome quality in the relationship between university research collaboration and technology transfer: empirical results from China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1003-1026, February.
    14. Hu, Mei-Ying & Lu, You-Xun & Lai, Ching-chong, 2023. "Patent term extensions and commercialization lags in the pharmaceutical industry: A growth-theoretic analysis," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    15. Qinwei Cao & Peng Xie & Meng Jiao & Wanchun Duan, 2021. "The larger scientific and technological human scale, the better innovation effect? Evidence from key universities in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5623-5649, July.
    16. Podrecca, Matteo & Culot, Giovanna & Tavassoli, Sam & Orzes, Guido, 2024. "Artificial intelligence for climate change: a patent analysis in the manufacturing sector," Papers in Innovation Studies 2024/12, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    17. 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.
    18. Qinwei Cao & Manqing Tan & Peng Xie & Jian Huang, 2022. "Can emerging economies take advantage of their population size to gain international academic recognition? Evidence from key universities in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 927-957, February.

    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. Soares, Thiago J. & Torkomian, Ana L.V. & Nagano, Marcelo Seido, 2020. "University regulations, regional development and technology transfer: The case of Brazil," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Caviggioli, Federico & De Marco, Antonio & Montobbio, Fabio & Ughetto, Elisa, 2020. "The licensing and selling of inventions by US universities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    3. James A. Cunningham & Erik E. Lehmann & Matthias Menter & Nikolaus Seitz, 2019. "The impact of university focused technology transfer policies on regional innovation and entrepreneurship," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(5), pages 1451-1475, October.
    4. Erdős, Katalin, 2019. "Egyetemi vállalkozások Magyarországon - újragondolva? [University spin-off in Hungary - Rethought?]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(3), pages 305-329.
    5. Thomas Walter & Christoph Ihl & René Mauer & Malte Brettel, 2018. "Grace, gold, or glory? Exploring incentives for invention disclosure in the university context," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(6), pages 1725-1759, December.
    6. Wipo, 2011. "World Intellectual Property Report 2011- The Changing Face of Innovation," WIPO Economics & Statistics Series, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, number 2011:944, April.
    7. Krzysztof Klincewicz & Szymon Szumiał, 2022. "Successful patenting—not only how, but with whom: the importance of patent attorneys," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5111-5137, September.
    8. Jiafeng Gu, 2021. "Effects of Patent Policy on Outputs and Commercialization of Academic Patents in China: A Spatial Difference-in-Differences Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-17, December.
    9. 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.
    10. Tischler, Joachim & Walter, Sascha, 2014. "Das Patentierverhalten akademischer Gründer nach Abschaffung des Hochschullehrerprivilegs," EconStor Preprints 96157, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    11. Aydemir, Nisa Yazici & Huang, Wan-Ling & Welch, Eric W., 2022. "Late-stage academic entrepreneurship: Explaining why academic scientists collaborate with industry to commercialize their patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    12. Chen, Kaihua & Zhang, Chao & Feng, Ze & Zhang, Yi & Ning, Lutao, 2022. "Technology transfer systems and modes of national research institutes: evidence from the Chinese academy of sciences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Schaeffer, Véronique, 2019. "The use of material transfer agreements in academia: A threat to open science or a cooperation tool?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    16. 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.
    17. Ani Gerbin & Mateja Drnovsek, 2016. "Determinants and public policy implications of academic-industry knowledge transfer in life sciences: a review and a conceptual framework," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 979-1076, October.
    18. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & M. Ángeles Martínez, 2018. "Does technological diversification spur university patenting?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 96-119, February.
    19. Hans K. Hvide & Benjamin F. Jones, 2018. "University Innovation and the Professor's Privilege," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(7), pages 1860-1898, July.
    20. Chi-Yo Huang & Min-Jen Yang & Jeen-Fong Li & Hueiling Chen, 2021. "A DANP-Based NDEA-MOP Approach to Evaluating the Patent Commercialization Performance of Industry–Academic Collaborations," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(18), pages 1-26, September.

    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:117:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2893-5. 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.