IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/indinn/v17y2010i5p445-468.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the Consequences of Patenting University Research: Lessons from a Survey of French Academic Inventors

Author

Listed:
  • Julien Penin

Abstract

This paper focuses on the consequences of patenting university research. It presents the results of a survey on 280 French academic inventors, that is, French university professors who are also designated as inventors in at least one European patent. This survey provides new insights into the effect of university patenting on the commercialization of university inventions, the transfer of scientific research, the incentives to do basic research and the access to upstream knowledge. In particular, the study suggests that patenting university research can, on the one hand, facilitate the transfer of technology from university to industry, especially in the fields of life sciences and pharmaceuticals. On the other hand, it almost systematically delays the publication of research findings, thus hindering the dissemination of scientific knowledge.

Suggested Citation

  • Julien Penin, 2010. "On the Consequences of Patenting University Research: Lessons from a Survey of French Academic Inventors," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(5), pages 445-468.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:indinn:v:17:y:2010:i:5:p:445-468
    DOI: 10.1080/13662711003790577
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13662711003790577
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13662711003790577?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. 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.
    2. Pierre Azoulay & Waverly Ding & Toby Stuart, 2006. "The Impact of Academic Patenting on the Rate, Quality, and Direction of (Public) Research Output," NBER Working Papers 11917, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Guido Buenstorf, 2006. "Is Academic Entrepreneurship Good or Bad for Science? Empirical Evidence from the Max Planck Society," Papers on Economics and Evolution 2006-17, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
    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. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & Alessandro Nuvolari, 2012. "Traditional Versus Heterodox Motives for Academic Patenting: Evidence from the Netherlands," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(8), pages 671-695, November.
    2. Domenico De Stefano & Susanna Zaccarin, 2013. "Modelling Multiple Interactions in Science and Technology Networks," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 221-240, April.

    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. Julien Pénin, 2009. "On the consequences of university patenting: What can we learn by asking directly to academic inventors?," Working Papers of BETA 2009-04, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    2. Pénin, Julien, 2011. "Sur les conséquences du brevet d’invention dans la science : résultats d’une enquête auprès des inventeurs académiques français," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 87(2), pages 137-173, juin.
    3. Fabiano, Gianluca & Marcellusi, Andrea & Favato, Giampiero, 2021. "R versus D, from knowledge creation to value appropriation: Ownership of patents filed by European biotechnology founders," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    4. Archibugi, Daniele & Filippetti, Andrea, 2018. "The retreat of public research and its adverse consequences on innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 97-111.
    5. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Cédric Schneider, 2009. "Why Challenge the Ivory Tower? New Evidence on the Basicness of Academic Patents," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(4), pages 488-499, November.
    6. Pluvia Zuniga, 2011. "The State of Patenting at Research Institutions in Developing Countries: Policy Approaches and Practices," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 04, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, revised Dec 2011.
    7. Daniele Archibugi & Andrea Filippetti, 2016. "(English) The Retreat of Public Research and its Adverse Consequences on Innovation (Italiano) I cambiamenti nella ricerca pubblica e le conseguenze avverse sull’innovazione," IRPPS Working Papers 94:2016, National Research Council, Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies.
    8. Chok, Jay Inghwee, 2009. "Regulatory dependence and Scientific Advisory Boards," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 710-725, June.
    9. Ugo Pagano & Maria Alessandra Rossi, 2016. "The knowledge economy, the crash and the depression," Department of Economics University of Siena 741, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    10. Larsen, Maria Theresa, 2011. "The implications of academic enterprise for public science: An overview of the empirical evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 6-19, February.
    11. Paula E. Stephan, 2008. "Science and the University: Challenges for Future Research," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 54(2), pages 313-324.
    12. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & Alessandro Nuvolari, 2012. "Traditional Versus Heterodox Motives for Academic Patenting: Evidence from the Netherlands," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(8), pages 671-695, November.
    13. Öcalan-Özel, Sıla & Pénin, Julien, 2019. "Invention characteristics and the degree of exclusivity of university licenses: The case of two leading French research universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1445-1457.
    14. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Jofre-Bonet, Mireia & Lawson, Cornelia, 2015. "The double-edged sword of industry collaboration: Evidence from engineering academics in the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 1160-1175.
    15. Federico Munari & Raffaele Oriani, 2011. "Why, When and How to Value Patents? An Introduction," Chapters, in: Federico Munari & Raffaele Oriani (ed.), The Economic Valuation of Patents, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Mounir Amdaoud & Christian Bas, 2021. "Patent Determinants for SMEs in Least-Developed Countries: How Enterprise Size Makes the Difference," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(2), pages 943-961, June.
    17. Catherine Beaudry & Ramine Kananian, 2013. "Follow the (Industry) Money -- The Impact of Science Networks and Industry-to-University Contracts on Academic Patenting in Nanotechnology and Biotechnology," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 241-260, April.
    18. repec:wip:wpaper:4 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Nagaoka, Sadao & Motohashi, Kazuyuki & Goto, Akira, 2010. "Patent Statistics as an Innovation Indicator," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1083-1127, Elsevier.
    20. Chang-Yang Lee & Ji-Hwan Lee & Ajai S. Gaur, 2017. "Are large business groups conducive to industry innovation? The moderating role of technological appropriability," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 313-337, June.
    21. Henri A. Schildt & Markku V.J. Maula & Thomas Keil, 2005. "Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 493-515, July.

    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:taf:indinn:v:17:y:2010:i:5:p:445-468. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CIAI20 .

    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.