Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How to evaluate the impact of academic spin-offs on local development: an empirical analysis of the Italian case

  • Published:
The Journal of Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper proposes a framework to evaluate the impact of academic spin-offs at the local level. Spin-off creation is the most complex way of commercializing academic research, compared to patenting and R&D collaborations, but has the highest potential impact on the local context. We develop a framework that takes into account the direct and indirect impacts of spin-offs. In the empirical part of the paper we apply this framework to Italian spin-offs set up between 2000 and 2012, and to a sample of Università Politecnica delle Marche spin-offs. The empirical analysis shows that, measured in quantitative terms, the impact of spin-offs on the local economy is quite small. However, this depends on the characteristics of the local economy, and there are some indirect effects that should be considered in both the short and longer terms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The database is publicly accessible at http://spinoff.dii.univpm.it. From now on we will refer to it as CIE spin-off database.

  2. A 1999 Parliamentary Act authorizes universities and other public research institutions (PRI) to issue regulations, as an exception to existing rules, that allow researchers and professors to participate in the capital and management of newly established companies aimed at the commercial explotitaion of research. Following the publication of this legislation, in the early years of 2000, universities developed specific regulations for the involvement of their permanent staff (e.g. professors and researchers) and temporary stuff (e.g. doctoral students, research grant holders, etc.) in the ownership and management of spin-off companies. On this aspect see also the discussion in Fini et al. (2011, pp. 1116–1117).

  3. The last Netval Report (Daniele et al. 2012) reports that the number of Italian spin-offs was 990 in 2011. The discrepancy depends on the inclusion of start-ups that do not fit our definition, and of spin-offs set up before 2000. Our definition of spin-offs is not intended to deny the importance of other types of entrepreneurial ventures resulting from university activity. In a recent survey conducted in the USA on scientists involved in cancer research, Aldridge and Audretsch (2011) demonstrate that the entrepreneurial activity of such scientists is more robust than is acknowledged by university TTOs. We do not know the importance of other entrepreneurial activity of Italian academicians besides that officially authorized by their parent universities. It should be noted that, in Italy, university employees are civil servants and are not allowed to be involved in commercial activities unless specifically authorized by their university. Moreover, Bathelt et al. (2010) find that unsponsored spin-offs rely on generic broad knowledge for the development of innovative products and services rather than relying on the results of a specific research.

  4. Among high-tech firms we consider high-tech manufacturing activities (such as chemical, pharmaceutical, electronics, computer machines) and also high-tech services (telecommunications, informatics, professional and technical services).

  5. Note that in Italy most industrial policy making is at regional level.

  6. We performed the same analysis with a cut-off of €100,000 and obtained the same results.

  7. Few spin-offs rely on the development of a property rights strategy based on patenting; only one of the most successful spin-offs owns (8) patents.

  8. The government of the Marche region has played an active role in the formation of the national technology cluster on ‘ambient assisted living’ and has identified home automation as the main technological domain of its Smart Specialization Strategy in the new EU programming period (Horizon 2014–2020).

  9. A synthesis of this legislation is available at:

    http://www.mise.gov.it/images/stories/documenti/Exective_summary_ENG_FINAL.pdf.

References

  • Aldridge, T. T., & Audretsch, D. B. (2011). The Bayh–Dole act and scientist entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1058–1067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Algieri, B., Aquino, A., & Succurro, M. (2013). Technology transfer offices and academic spin-off creation: The case of Italy. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(4), 382–400.

  • Audretsch, D. B. (1995). Innovation and industry evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B. (2012). From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the entrepreneurial society. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(3), 313–321.

  • Audretsch, D. B., & Lehmann, E. E. (2005). Does the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship hold for regions? Research Policy, 34(8), 1191–1202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bathelt, H., Kogler, D. F., & Munro, A. K. (2010). A knowledge-based typology of university spin-offs in the context of regional economic development. Technovation, 30(9–10), 519–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benneworth, P., & Charles, D. (2005). University spin-off policies and economic development in less successful regions: Learning from two decades of policy practice. European Planning Studies, 13(4), 537–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berggren, E., & Lindholm Dahlstrand, Å. (2009). Creating an entrepreneurial region: Two waves of academic spin-offs from Halmstad University. European Planning Studies, 17(8), 1171–1189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonardo, D., Paleari, S., & Vismara, S. (2010). The M&A dynamics of European science-based entrepreneurial firms. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(1), 141–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonardo, D., Paleari, S., & Vismara, S. (2011). Valuing University-Based Firms: The effects of academic affiliation on IPO performance. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 35(4), 755–776.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carree, M., Malva, A. D., & Santarelli, E. (2014). The contribution of universities to growth: Empirical evidence for Italy. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(3), 393–414.

  • Clarysse, B., & Moray, N. (2004). A process study of entrepreneurial team formation: The case of a research-based spin-off. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1), 55–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colombo, M. G., D’Adda, D., & Piva, E. (2010). The contribution of university research to the growth of academic start-ups: An empirical analysis. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(1), 113–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2010). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 316–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniele, C., Lazzeri, F., Patrono, A., & Piccaluga, A. (2012). Pronti per evolvere. Milano: IX Rapporto NetVal sulla valorizzazione della ricerca nelle università italiane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Gregorio, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy, 32(2), 209–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Djokovic, D., & Souitaris, V. (2008). Spinouts from academic institutions: A literature review with suggestions for further research. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), 225–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29(2), 313–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., Santoni, S., & Sobrero, M. (2011). Complements or substitutes? The role of universities and local context in supporting the creation of academic spin-offs. Research Policy, 40(8), 1113–1127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2008). Factors fostering academics to start up new ventures: An assessment of Italian founders’ incentives. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(4), 380–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grandi, A., & Grimaldi, R. (2003). Exploring the networking characteristics of new venture founding teams. Small Business Economics, 21(4), 329–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, R. T., & Leitch, C. (2010). Voodoo Institution or Entrepreneurial University? Spin-off companies, the entrepreneurial system and regional development in the UK. Regional Studies, 44(November), 1241–1262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henrekson, M., & Rosenberg, N. (2001). Designing efficient institutions for science-based entrepreneurship: Lesson from the US and Sweden. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(3), 207–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heydebreck, P., Klofsten, M., & Maier, J. (2000). Innovation support for new technology-based firms: The Swedish Teknopol approach. R and D Management, 30(1), 89–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iacobucci, D., Iacopini, A., Micozzi, A., & Orsini, S. (2011). Fostering entrepreneurship in academic spin-offs. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 12(4), 513–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, M., Jacob, M., & Hellström, T. (2005). The strength of strong ties: University spin-offs and the significance of historical relations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(3), 271–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knockaert, M., Ucbasaran, D., Wright, M., & Clarysse, B. (2011). The relationship between knowledge transfer, top management team composition, and performance: The case of science-based entrepreneurial firms. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 35(4), 777–803.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawton Smith, H., & Ho, K. (2006). Measuring the performance of Oxford University, Oxford Brookes University and the government laboratories’ spin-off companies. Research Policy, 35(10), 1554–1568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindholm Dahlstrand, Å. (1999). Technology-based SMEs in the Goteborg region: Their origin and interaction with universities and large firms. Regional Studies, 33(4), 379–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, A., Siegel, D., Wright, M., & Ensley, M. D. (2005). The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: Managerial and policy implications. Research Policy, 34(7), 981–993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, A., & Wright, M. (2005). Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies. Research Policy, 34(7), 1043–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, A., Wright, M., & Franklin, S. (2003). Technology transfer and universities’ spin-out strategies. Small Business Economics, 20(2), 185–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinelli, A., Meyer, M., & von Tunzelmann, N. (2008). Becoming an entrepreneurial university? A case study of knowledge exchange relationships and faculty attitudes in a medium-sized, research-oriented university. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), 259–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muscio, A., & Pozzali, A. (2013). The effects of cognitive distance in university-industry collaborations: Some evidence from Italian universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(4), 486–508.

  • Nicolaou, N., & Birley, S. (2003). Academic networks in a trichotomous categorisation of university spinouts. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(3), 333–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niosi, J. (2006). Success factors in Canadian academic spin-offs. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(4), 451–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994–1009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Shea, R., Chugh, H., & Allen, T. (2008). Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: A conceptual framework. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(6), 653–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD, 2005. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2005.

  • Pirnay, F., Surlemont, B., & Nlemvo, F. (2003). Toward a typology of university spin-offs. Small Business Economics, 21(4), 355–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, E., & Borch, O. J. (2010). University capabilities in facilitating entrepreneurship: A longitudinal study of spin-off ventures at mid-range universities. Research Policy, 39(5), 602–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez-Pose, A., & Refolo, M. C. (2003). The link between local production systems and public and university research in Italy. Environment and Planning Part A, 35(8), 1477–1492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. (2004). Academic entrepreneurship: University spinoffs and wealth creation. Cheltenam, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vanaelst, I., et al. (2006). Entrepreneurial team development in academic spinouts: An examination of team heterogeneity. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(2), 249–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vincett, P. S. (2010). The economic impacts of academic spin-off companies, and their implications for public policy. Research Policy, 39(6), 736–747.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vohora, A., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy, 33(1), 147–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zomer, A. H., Jongbloed, B. W. A., & Enders, J. (2010). Do spin-offs make the academics’ heads Spin? The impacts of spin-off companies on their parent research organisation. Minerva, 48(3), 331–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Università Politecnica delle Marche, via Brecce Bianche, Monte Dago, Ancona, Italy

    Donato Iacobucci & Alessandra Micozzi

Authors
  1. Donato Iacobucci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alessandra Micozzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Donato Iacobucci.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Iacobucci, D., Micozzi, A. How to evaluate the impact of academic spin-offs on local development: an empirical analysis of the Italian case. J Technol Transf 40, 434–452 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-014-9357-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-014-9357-8

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation