Skip to main content

Technology Transfer Policies and Entrepreneurial Innovations at Brazilian University-Industry Partnerships

  • 419 Accesses

Part of the International Studies in Entrepreneurship book series (ISEN,volume 51)

Abstract

Over the past 40 years, the Bayh-Dole Act has been the most inspired piece of legislation around the world. This policy measure has empowered organizations to be the owners of inventions made by federally-funded research, as well as this policy has ensured royalties, licensing, and spinning-off to the organizations that have made these inventions. In the Latin-American context, technology transfer policies to support entrepreneurial innovations have been characterized by the strengthening of university-industry partnerships. This chapter discussed the evolution of determinants and outcomes of technology transfer policies implemented in Brazil. Our findings provide useful implications for academics and policymakers.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-70022-5_5
  • Chapter length: 18 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-70022-5
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

Notes

  1. 1.

    In order to identify knowledge-intensive companies, we used data from companies participating in the PIPE/FAPESP Program, which aims to subsidize innovative small business initiatives. Created in 1997 by the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) and inspired by the U.S. Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR), the program gives support to entrepreneurial projects with a high level of knowledge intensity and innovative potential (Salles-Filho et al. 2011).

  2. 2.

    This procedure follows recommendations from the Research Ethics Committee from the University of Campinas. Interviews were approved under the protocol #89010418.2.0000.8142/Project ‘Universities as Pivotal Agents in Innovation Ecosystems’.

References

  • Albuquerque, E. (1999). National systems of innovation and non-OECD countries: Notes about a rudimentary and tentative typology. Brazilian Journal of Political Economy, 19(4), 35–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albuquerque, E., Suzigan, W., Arza, V., & Dutrénit, G. (2015). Matrices of university–firm interactions in Latin America. In E. Albuquerque, W. Suzigan, G. Kruss, & K. Lee (Eds.), Developing national systems of innovation: University–industry interactions in the global south (pp. 194–218). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldridge, T., & Audretsch, D. B. (2017). The Bayh-Dole act and scientist entrepreneurship. In D. B. Audretsch & A. N. Link (Eds.), Universities and the entrepreneurial ecosystem (pp. 57–66). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alves, A., Quelhas, O., Silva, M., & Lameira, V. (2015). On the role of university in the promotion of innovation: Exploratory evidences from a university-industry cooperation experience in Brazil. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 17(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arocena, R., & Sutz, J. (2001). Changing knowledge production in Latin American universities. Research Policy, 30(8), 1221–1234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B. (2014). From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the entrepreneurial society. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(3), 313–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Autio, E., Kenney, M., Mustar, P., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2014). Entrepreneurial innovation: The importance of context. Research Policy, 43(7), 1097–1108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cai, Y., & Liu, C. (2015). The roles of universities in fostering knowledge-intensive clusters in Chinese regional innovation systems. Science and Public Policy, 42(1), 15–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callan, B. (2001). Generating spin-offs: Evidence from across the OECD. Science Technology Industry Review, 26, 13–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Bruneel, J., & Mahajan, A. (2014). Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems. Research Policy, 43(7), 1164–1176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crescenzi, R., Nathan, M., & Pose, A. (2016). Do inventors talk to strangers? On proximity and collaborative knowledge creation. Research Policy, 45(1), 177–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crescenzi, R., Filippetti, A., & Iammarino, S. (2017). Academic inventors: Collaboration and proximity with industry. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42, 730–762.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewes, M., Dalmarco, G., & Padula, A. (2015). Innovation policies in Brazilian and Dutch aerospace industries: How sectors driven by national procurement are influenced by its S&T environment. Space Policy, 34, 32–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutrénit, G., & Arza, V. (2015). Features of interactions between public research organizations and industry in Latin America: The perspective of researchers and firms. In E. Albuquerque, W. Suzigan, G. Kruss, & K. Lee (Eds.), Developing national systems of innovation: University–industry interactions in the global south (pp. 93–119). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K., & Graebner, M. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandes, A., Souza, B., Silva, A., Suzigan, W., Chaves, C., & Albuquerque, E. (2010). Academy–industry links in Brazil: Evidence about channels and benefits for firms and researchers. Science and Public Policy, 37(7), 485–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, B., Queiroz, S., & Vonortas, N. (2018). On the location of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship in developing countries: Lessons from São Paulo, Brazil. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 30(5–6), 612–638.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, B., Schaeffer, P., & Vonortas, N. (2019). Evolution of university-industry collaboration in Brazil from a technology upgrading perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 145, 330–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, B., Guerrero, M., Guimón, J., & Schaeffer P. R. (2020). Knowledge transfer for frugal innovation: Where do entrepreneurial universities stand? Journal of Knowledge Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-01-2020-0040.

  • Freitas, I., Marques, R., & Silva, E. (2013). University-industry collaboration and innovation in emergent and mature industries in new industrialized countries. Research Policy, 42(2), 443–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, A., & Rothaermel, F. (2012). When stars shine: The effects of faculty founders on new technology ventures. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 6(2), 220–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2011). 30 years after Bayh–Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1045–1057.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2017). The impact of Triple Helix agents on entrepreneurial innovations’ performance: An inside look at enterprises located in an emerging economy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 119, 294–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerrero, M., Cunningham, J. A., & Urbano, D. (2015). Economic impact of entrepreneurial universities’ activities: An exploratory study of the United Kingdom. Research Policy, 44(3), 748–764.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2019). Effectiveness of technology transfer policies and legislation in fostering entrepreneurial innovations across continents: An overview. Journal of Technology Transfer, 44, 1347–1366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2019a). A research agenda for entrepreneurship and innovation: The role of entrepreneurial universities. In D. Audretch, E. Lehnman, & A. Link (Eds.), A research agenda for entrepreneurship and innovation (pp. 107–133). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2019b). Effectiveness of technology transfer policies and legislation in fostering entrepreneurial innovations across continents: An overview. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 44(5), 1347–1366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayter, C. (2016). A trajectory of early-stage spin-off success: The role of knowledge intermediaries within an entrepreneurial university ecosystem. Small Business Economics, 47(3), 633–656.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrera, F., Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2018). Entrepreneurship and innovation ecosystem’s drivers: The role of higher education organizations. In J. Leitão, H. M. Alves, N. Krueger, & J. Park (Eds.), Entrepreneurial, innovative and sustainable ecosystems (pp. 109–128). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jain, S., George, G., & Maltarich, M. (2009). Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity. Research Policy, 38(6), 922–935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirby, D., Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2011). Making universities more entrepreneurial: Development of a model. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 28, 302–316.

    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.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazzoleni, R., & Nelson, R. (2007). The roles of research at universities and public labs in economic catch-up. Research Policy, 36(10), 1512–1528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meng, D., Li, X., & Rong, K. (2019). Industry-to-university knowledge transfer in ecosystem-based academic entrepreneurship: Case study of automotive dynamics & control group in Tsinghua University. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 141, 249–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Ács, Z. (2017). The campus as entrepreneurial ecosystem: The University of Chicago. Small Business Economics, 49, 75–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K., McAdam, R., Moffett, S., Alexander, A., & Puthusserry, P. (2016). Knowledge transfer in university quadruple helix ecosystems: An absorptive capacity perspective. R&D Management, 46(2), 383–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miranda, F. J., Chamorro, A., & Rubio, S. (2018). Re-thinking university spin-off: A critical literature review and a research agenda. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(4), 1007–1038.

    Google Scholar 

  • Motoyama, Y., & Knowlton, K. (2017). Examining the connections within the startup ecosystem: A case study of St. Louis. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 7(1), 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norbäck, P. J., & Persson, L. (2012). Entrepreneurial innovations, competition and competition policy. European Economic Review, 56(3), 488–506.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, A. L., & Sapir, A. (2017). Shifts in the organization and profession of academic science: The impact of IPR and technology transfer. Journal of Professions and Organization, 4(1), 36–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkmann, M., King, Z., & Pavelin, S. (2011). Engaging excellence? Effects of faculty quality on university engagement with industry. Research Policy, 40(4), 539–552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapini, M., Albuquerque, E., Chave, C., Silva, L., Souza, S., Righi, H., & Cruz, W. (2009). University-industry interactions in an immature system of innovation: Evidence from Minas Gerais, Brazil. Science and Public Policy, 36(5), 373–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, M. (2010). Patent incentives, technology markets, and public–private bio-medical innovation networks in Brazil. World Development, 38(8), 1082–1093.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salles-Filho, S., Bonacelli, M., Carneiro, A., Castro, P., & Santos, F. (2011). Evaluation of ST&I programs: A methodological approach to the Brazilian Small Business Program and some comparisons with the SBIR program. Research Evaluation, 20(2), 157–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos, M., & Mello, J. (2009). IPR policy and management of university technology transfer offices in Brazil. In Triple Helix Association: 7th biennial international conference on university, industry and government linkages, Glasgow, Scotland, 17–19 June 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos, M., & Torkomian, A. (2013). Technology transfer and innovation: The role of the Brazilian TTOs. International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development, 12(1), 89–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva, L., & Guimarães, P. (2015). Law and innovation policies: An analysis of the mismatch between innovation public policies and their results in Brazil. Law and Development Review, 9(1), 1–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sørheim, R., Widding, L. Ø., Oust, M., & Madsen, Ø. (2011). Funding of university spin-off companies: A conceptual approach to financing challenges. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 18(1), 58–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. (2003). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. New York/Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M., Lockett, A., Clarysse, B., & Binks, M. (2006). University spin-out companies and venture capital. Research Policy, 35(4), 481–501.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Maribel Guerrero acknowledges the Facultad de Economía y Negocios at the Universidad del Desarrollo (Chile), the Northumbria Centre for Innovation, Regional Transformation and Entrepreneurship based on Newcastle Business School at Northumbria University (UK), and the Centre for Innovation Research (CIRCLE) at Lund University (SE) for their invaluable support. Authors acknowledge funding from the São Paulo Research Foundation (Fapesp Grant #2016/17801-4). Bruno Fischer’s contribution to this article is based on the study funded by the Basic Research Program of the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE) and by the Russian Academic Excellence Project ‘5-100’.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bruno Brandão Fischer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Guerrero, M., Schaeffer, P.R., Fischer, B.B. (2021). Technology Transfer Policies and Entrepreneurial Innovations at Brazilian University-Industry Partnerships. In: Guerrero, M., Urbano, D. (eds) Technology Transfer and Entrepreneurial Innovations. International Studies in Entrepreneurship, vol 51. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70022-5_5

Download citation