Abstract
As the commercialization of academic research has risen as a target area in many countries, the need for better empirical data collection to evaluate policy changes on this front has increasingly been recognized. This need is exemplified in the Norwegian case where legislative changes went into effect in 2003 expressly to encourage greater commercialization through patenting research results. This policy ambition faces the problem that no record of the patenting activity of academic researchers is available before 2003 when the country’s “professor’s privilege” was phased out. This article addresses the fundamental difficulty of how to empirically test the effect of such policy aims. It develops a methodology which can be used to reliably baseline changes in the extent and focus of academic patents. The purpose is to describe the empirical approach and results, while also providing insight into the changes in Norwegian policy on this front and their context.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Balconi, M., Breschi, S., Lissoni, F. (2004), Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data. Research Policy, 33(1): 127–145.
Baldini, N., Grimaldi, R., Sobrero, M. (2007), To patent or not to patent: A survey of Italian inventors on motivations, incentives and obstacles to university patenting. Scientometrics, 70: 333–354.
Bassecoulard, E., Zitt, M. (2004), Patents and publications: the lexical connection. In: H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, U. Schmoch (Eds), Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 665–694.
Berglund, F., Wendt, K. (Eds) (2004), Report on Science & Technology Indicators for Norway: 2003. Oslo: The Research Council of Norway.
Calvert, J., Patel, P. (2003), University-industry research collaborations in the UK: bibliometric trends. Science and Public Policy, 30(2): 85–96.
Clark, B. R. (1998), Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation. New York: Pergamon.
David, P. A., Mowery, D. C., Steinmueller, W. E. (1994), Analyzing the economic payoffs from basic research. In: D. C. Mowery (Ed.), Science and Technology Policy in Interdependent Economies, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 57–78.
Du Plessis, M., Looy, B. V., Debackere, K., Magerman, T. (2005), Assessing academic patent activity: the case of Flanders. Paper presented at the 5th Triple Helix International Conference: The Capitalization of Knowledge, Turin, Italy.
Etzkowitz, H. (1998), The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy, 27(8): 823–833.
Etzkowitz, H. (2003), Research groups as ‘quasi-firms’: The invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32(1): 109–121.
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.
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.
Florida, R., Cohen, W. M. (1999), Engine or infrastructure? The university role in economic development. In: L. M. Branscomb, F. Kodama, R. Florida (Eds), Industrializing Knowledge. University-Industry Linkages in Japan and the United States, Cambridge MA/London: MIT Press, pp. 589–610.
Freeman, C. (1987), Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Pinter.
Geuna, A. (2001), The changing rationale for European university research funding: are there negative unintended consequences? Journal of Economic Issues, XXXV(3): 607–632.
Geuna, A., Nesta, L. (2003), University Patenting and Its Effects on Academic Research. Brighton: SPRU-University of Sussex.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., Trow, M. (1994), The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage.
Godin, B., Gingras, Y. (2000), Impact of collaborative research on academic science. Science and Public Policy, 27(1): 65–73.
Gulbrandsen, M. (2003), “Jeg gjør jo ikke dette for å bli rik av det”: kommersialisering av norsk universitetsforskning — en intervjustudie. Oslo: Norsk institutt for studier av forskning og utdanning.
Gulbrandsen, M., Smeby, J.-C. (2005), Industry funding and university professors’ research performance. Research Policy, 34(6): 932–950.
Guston, D. H., Keniston, K. (1994), Introduction: the social contract for science. In: The Fragile Contract: University Science and the Federal Government, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, pp. 1–41.
Henderson, R., Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M. (1998), Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965–1988. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(1): 119–127.
Jaffe, A. B., Lerner, J. (2004), Innovation and Its Discontents: How Our Broken Patent System is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What to Do about It. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Lundvall, B.-Å. (Ed.) (1992), National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Pinter Publishers.
Martin, B. R. (2003), The changing social contract for science and the evolution of the university. In: A. Geuna, A. J. Salter, W. E. Steinmueller (Eds), Science and Innovation: Rethinking the Rationales for Funding and Governance, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 7–29.
Martin, B. R., Etzkowitz, H. (2000), The origin and evolution of the university species. VEST Journal for Science and Technology Studies, 13(3–4): 9–34.
Iversen, E. J. (2005), Patenter Som Indikatorer. In: Maus, K. W., Wendt, K. (Eds) (2005), Det Norske Forsknings-og Innovasjonssystemet — Statistikk og Indikatorer, Oslo: Norges Forskningsråd, pp. 220–235.
Meyer, M. (2003a), Academic entrepreneurs or entrepreneurial academics? Research-based ventures and public support mechanisms. R&D Management, 33(2): 107–115.
Meyer, M. (2003b), Academic patents as an indicator of useful research? A new approach to measure academic inventiveness. Research Evaluation, 12(1): 17–27.
Meyer, M., Siniläinen, T., Utecht, J. T. (2003), Towards hybrid Triple Helix indicators: A study of university-related patents and a survey of academic inventors. Scientometrics, 58(2): 321–350.
Mowery, D. C., Sampat, B. N. (2005), Universities in national innovation systems. In: J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, R. R. Nelson (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 209–239.
Mowery, D. C., Ziedonis, A. A. (2002), Academic patent quality and quantity before and after the Bayh-Dole act in the United States. Research Policy, 31(3): 399–418.
Nelson, R. R. (2001), Observations on the Post-Bayh-Dole rise of patenting at American universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2): 13–19.
Nelson, R. R. (Ed.) (1993), National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
OECD (2003), Turning Science into Business: Patenting and Licensing at Public Research Organisations. Paris: OECD.
Rosenberg, N., Nelson, R. R. (1994), American universities and technical advance in industry. Research Policy, 23(3): 323–348.
Sampat, B. N., Nelson, R. R. (2002), The evolution of university patenting and licensing procedures: An empirical study of institutional change. Advances in Strategic Management, 19: 135–164.
Sapsalis, E., Potterie, B. V. P. D. L. (2003), Insight into the patenting performance of Belgian universities. Brussels Economic Journal, 46(3): 37–58.
Sapsalis, E., Looy, B. V., Pottelsberghe, B. V., Callaert, J., Debackere, K. (2005), On the Patenting Performance of European Universities. Paper presented at the 5th Triple Helix International Conference: The Capitalization of Knowledge, Turin, Italy.
Saragossi, S., Potterie, B. V. P. D. L. (2003), What patent data reveal about universities: The case of Belgium. Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(1): 47–51.
Schmoch, U. (2004), The technological output of scientific institutions. In: H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, U. Schmoch (Eds), Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 717–731.
Slaughter, S., Rhoades, G. (1996), The emergence of a competitiveness research and development policy coalition and the commercialization of academic science and technology. Science, Technology & Human Values, 21(3): 303–339.
Stankiewicz, R. (1986), Academics and Entrepreneurs: Developing University-Industry Relations. London: Pinter.
Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., Jaffe, A. B. (1997), University versus corporate patents. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 5: 19–50.
Valentin, F., Jensen, R. L. (2003), Discontinuities and distributed innovation: the case of biotechnology in food production. Industry and Innovation, 10(3): 275–310.
Van Looy, B., Ranga, M., Callaert, J., Debackere, K., Zimmermann, E. (2004), Combining entrepreneurial and scientific performance in academia: Towards a compounded and reciprocal Matthew-effect? Research Policy, 33(3): 425–441.
Vavakova, B. (1998), The new social contract between governments, universities and society: Has the old one failed? Minerva, 36(3): 209–228.
Webster, A. (2003), Knowledge translations: Beyond the public/private divide? Journal of Education through Partnership, 3(2): 7–22.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Iversen, E.J., Gulbrandsen, M. & Klitkou, A. A baseline for the impact of academic patenting legislation in Norway. Scientometrics 70, 393–414 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-0209-2
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-0209-2