IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/jecxxx/v17y2009i02ns0218495809000308.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Entrepreneurial University, Transfer Technology And Funding: An Empirical Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • SARA FERNÁNDEZ LOPEZ

    (Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain)

  • LUÍS OTERO

    (Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain)

  • DAVID RODEIRO

    (Department of Business Organization and Commerce, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain)

  • ALFONSO RODRÍGUEZ

    (Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain)

Abstract

Universities are now responsible for economic and social development. This new mission is transforming the traditional university into an entrepreneurial university. This entrepreneurial activity has mainly been carried out by transferring technology to industry, in particular, by patenting.The objective of this paper is to understand why some Spanish universities are more successful than others at patenting. In order to determine the factors that influence the patenting activity, we used a sample made up of 47 Spanish Public On-Campus Universities existing in 2003. Firstly, we applied the Poisson model. Secondly, after finding overdispersion in the data, the two approximations of the binomial negative were estimated (NEGBIN I and NEGBIN II). Lastly, we compared the results obtained with the three regression models.The results show that university patents are significantly positively associated with research funding, university size, technology transfer experience and resources and scientific areas with a greater market orientation. On the contrary, our results support the idea that university's research quality has a negative effect on the patent outputs.This study contributes to the literature on university patenting activity. First, there are no similar empirical studies about Spanish universities. Second, our findings provide quantitative evidence of the importance of funding research and university support policies in patent production. As a consequence, we can set out several policies to improve the dissemination of scientific knowledge and technology transfer activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Sara Fernández Lopez & Luís Otero & David Rodeiro & Alfonso Rodríguez, 2009. "Entrepreneurial University, Transfer Technology And Funding: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Enterprising Culture (JEC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(02), pages 147-179.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:jecxxx:v:17:y:2009:i:02:n:s0218495809000308
    DOI: 10.1142/S0218495809000308
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0218495809000308
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S0218495809000308?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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hezam Haidar & Karine Evrard Samuel & Jean-François Boujut, 2019. "Influential factors of initiating open innovation collaboration between universities and SMEs: Systematic Literature Review," Post-Print hal-02184337, HAL.

    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. Hottenrott, Hanna & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2010. "Industry funding of university research and scientific productivity," ZEW Discussion Papers 10-105, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Kira Fabrizio & Alberto Di Minin, 2004. "Commercializing the laboratory: the relationship between faculty patenting and publishing," Working Papers 200402, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna of Pisa, Istituto di Management.
    3. Fabrizio, Kira R. & Di Minin, Alberto, 2008. "Commercializing the laboratory: Faculty patenting and the open science environment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 914-931, June.
    4. Cornelia Lawson, 2013. "Academic Inventions Outside the University: Investigating Patent Ownership in the UK," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 385-398, July.
    5. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Schoen, Anja & Wastyn, Annelies, 2014. "Selection bias in innovation studies: A simple test," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 287-299.
    6. 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.
    7. Paula Susana Figueiredo Moutinho & Margarida Fontes & Manuel Mira Godinho, 2007. "Do individual factors matter? A survey of scientists’ patenting in Portuguese public research organisations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(2), pages 355-377, February.
    8. Crespi, Gustavo & D'Este, Pablo & Fontana, Roberto & Geuna, Aldo, 2011. "The impact of academic patenting on university research and its transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 55-68, February.
    9. Goldfarb, Brent & Henrekson, Magnus, 2001. "Bottom-Up vs. Top-Down Policies towards the Commercialization of University Intellectual Property," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 463, Stockholm School of Economics, revised 26 May 2002.
    10. Joaquín Azagra-Caro, 2014. "Determinants of national patent ownership by public research organisations and universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(6), pages 898-914, December.
    11. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2003. "Universities as Research Partners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 485-491, May.
    12. Nicolas Carayol & Elodie Carpentier, 2022. "The spread of academic invention: a nationwide case study on French data (1995–2012)," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1395-1421, October.
    13. Heidrun C. Hoppe & Emre Ozdenoren, 2002. "Intermediation in Innovation," CIG Working Papers FS IV 02-11, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    14. Mike Wright & Evila Piva & Simon Mosey & Andy Lockett, 2009. "Academic entrepreneurship and business schools," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(6), pages 560-587, December.
    15. Thomas Bolli & Jörg Schläpfer, 2015. "Job mobility, peer effects, and research productivity in economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 629-650, September.
    16. Hanna Hottenrott & Cornelia Lawson, 2014. "Research grants, sources of ideas and the effects on academic research," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 109-133, March.
    17. José Manuel Pastor & Lorenzo Serrano, 2016. "The determinants of the research output of universities: specialization, quality and inefficiencies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1255-1281, November.
    18. Aldo Geuna & Alessandro Muscio, 2008. "The governance of University knowledge transfer," SPRU Working Paper Series 173, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    19. Joanna Poyago-Theotoky & John Beath & Donald S. Siegel, 2002. "Universities and Fundamental Research: Reflections on the Growth of University--Industry Partnerships," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 10-21, Spring.
    20. Freel, Mark & Persaud, Ajax & Chamberlin, Tyler, 2019. "Faculty ideals and universities' third mission," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 10-21.

    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:wsi:jecxxx:v:17:y:2009:i:02:n:s0218495809000308. 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/jec/jec.shtml .

    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.