IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v43y2014i2p245-260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Local context, academic entrepreneurship and open science: Publication secrecy and commercial activity among Japanese and US scientists

Author

Listed:
  • Walsh, John P.
  • Huang, Hsini

Abstract

Like the US before it, Japan has adopted a series of policy initiatives designed to encourage the commercialization of academic science. However, such initiatives may also adversely affect “open-science”. Based on matched surveys of almost 1000 researchers in Japan and over 800 in the US, the paper examines rates of commercial activity, reasons to patent, and secrecy related to research results. In particular, it examines the extent to which participation in commercial activity is associated with publication secrecy. The results show that patenting rates are higher in Japan, while industry funding is more common in the US. In addition, the overall level of publication secrecy is greater in Japan. And, in both countries, individuals who are commercially active are less likely to share their research results through publication. But, patents are less directly linked to commercial activity in Japan than in the US, and have less impact on academic secrecy. The results suggest that academic entrepreneurship is associated with reduced participation in open science, but that the extent of adverse effects depends significantly on institutional context.

Suggested Citation

  • Walsh, John P. & Huang, Hsini, 2014. "Local context, academic entrepreneurship and open science: Publication secrecy and commercial activity among Japanese and US scientists," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 245-260.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:43:y:2014:i:2:p:245-260
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733313001820
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.003?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. Odagiri, Hiroyuki & Goto, Akira, 1996. "Technology and Industrial Development in Japan: Building Capabilities by Learning, Innovation and Public Policy," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198288022.
    2. Wesley M. Cohen & John P. Walsh, 2008. "Real Impediments to Academic Biomedical Research," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 8, pages 1-30, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Margarethe F. Wiersema & Harry P. Bowen, 2009. "The use of limited dependent variable techniques in strategy research: issues and methods," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(6), pages 679-692, June.
    4. Janusz A. Ordover, 1991. "A Patent System for Both Diffusion and Exclusion," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 43-60, Winter.
    5. David C. Mowery & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2005. "The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and University-Industry Technology Transfer: A Model for Other OECD Governments?," Springer Books, in: Albert N. Link & F. M. Scherer (ed.), Essays in Honor of Edwin Mansfield, pages 233-245, Springer.
    6. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    7. Frank T. Rothaermel & Shanti D. Agung & Lin Jiang, 2007. "University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 691-791, August.
    8. Chiara Franzoni, 2009. "Do scientists get fundamental research ideas by solving practical problems?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 18(4), pages 671-699, August.
    9. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2003. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. S. Breschi & F. Lissoni & F. Montobbio, 2007. "The Scientific Productivity Of Academic Inventors: New Evidence From Italian Data," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 101-118.
    11. Walsh, John P. & Cohen, Wesley M. & Cho, Charlene, 2007. "Where excludability matters: Material versus intellectual property in academic biomedical research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1184-1203, October.
    12. Thursby, Jerry & Fuller, Anne W. & Thursby, Marie, 2009. "US faculty patenting: Inside and outside the university," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 14-25, February.
    13. Kenney, Martin & Patton, Donald, 2009. "Reconsidering the Bayh-Dole Act and the Current University Invention Ownership Model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 1407-1422, November.
    14. NAGAOKA Sadao & John P. WALSH, 2009. "The R&D Process in the U.S. and Japan: Major findings from the RIETI-Georgia Tech inventor survey," Discussion papers 09010, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    15. Owen-Smith, Jason, 2003. "From separate systems to a hybrid order: accumulative advantage across public and private science at Research One universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1081-1104, June.
    16. Paula Stephan & Shiferaw Gurmu & Albert Sumell & Grant Black, 2007. "Who'S Patenting In The University? Evidence From The Survey Of Doctorate Recipients," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 71-99.
    17. Partha, Dasgupta & David, Paul A., 1994. "Toward a new economics of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 487-521, September.
    18. Ai, Chunrong & Norton, Edward C., 2003. "Interaction terms in logit and probit models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 123-129, July.
    19. David C. Mowery & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2005. "The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and University--Industry Technology Transfer: A Model for Other OECD Governments?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 115-127, January.
    20. Ajay Agrawal & Rebecca Henderson, 2002. "Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 44-60, January.
    21. NAGAOKA Sadao & John P. WALSH, 2009. "Commercialization and Other Uses of Patents in Japan and the U.S.: Major findings from the RIETI-Georgia Tech inventor survey," Discussion papers 09011, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    22. Scott Shane, 2002. "Selling University Technology: Patterns from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 122-137, January.
    23. Etzkowitz, Henry, 1998. "The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 823-833, December.
    24. Fiona Murray & Scott Stern, 2005. "Do Formal Intellectual Property Rights Hinder the Free Flow of Scientific Knowledge? An Empirical Test of the Anti-Commons Hypothesis," NBER Working Papers 11465, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    25. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby, 2007. "Virtuous circles in science and commerce," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 86(3), pages 445-470, August.
    26. Richard R. Nelson, 2006. "The Market Economy and the Scientific Commons," Chapters, in: Birgitte Andersen (ed.), Intellectual Property Rights, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    27. Murray, Fiona & Stern, Scott, 2007. "Do formal intellectual property rights hinder the free flow of scientific knowledge?: An empirical test of the anti-commons hypothesis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 648-687, August.
    28. Fiona E. Murray & Scott Stern, 2007. "Do Formal Intellectual Property Rights Hinder the Free Flow of Scientific Knowledge?: An Empirical Test of the Anti-Commons Hypothesis," NBER Chapters, in: Academic Science and Entrepreneurship: Dual Engines of Growth, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    29. Campbell, Eric G. & Weissman, Joel S. & Causino, Nancyanne & Blumenthal, David, 2000. "Data withholding in academic medicine: characteristics of faculty denied access to research results and biomaterials," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 303-312, February.
    30. Robert Kneller, 2007. "The beginning of university entrepreneurship in Japan: TLOs and bioventures lead the way," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 435-456, August.
    31. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2007. "University licensing," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 23(4), pages 620-639, Winter.
    32. Cohen, Wesley M. & Goto, Akira & Nagata, Akiya & Nelson, Richard R. & Walsh, John P., 2002. "R&D spillovers, patents and the incentives to innovate in Japan and the United States," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1349-1367, December.
    33. Nagaoka, Sadao & 長岡, 貞男 & Igami, Masatsura & 伊神, 正貫 & Eto, Manabu & 江藤, 学 & Ijichi, Tomohiro & 伊地知, 寛博, 2010. "Knowledge Creation Process in Science : Basic findings from a large‐scale survey of researchers in Japan," IIR Working Paper 10-08, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    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. Christopher S. Hayter & Andrew J. Nelson & Stephanie Zayed & Alan C. O’Connor, 2018. "Conceptualizing academic entrepreneurship ecosystems: a review, analysis and extension of the literature," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 1039-1082, August.
    2. 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.
    3. Schaeffer, Véronique, 2019. "The use of material transfer agreements in academia: A threat to open science or a cooperation tool?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    4. Gümüsay, Ali Aslan & Bohné, Thomas Marc, 2018. "Individual and organizational inhibitors to the development of entrepreneurial competencies in universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 363-378.
    5. Maria Rosario Benavides & Marcus Antonius Ynalvez, 2018. "Academics’ “ambidextrous behavior” and doctoral science mentoring practices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 79-109, April.
    6. Aydemir, Nisa Yazici & Huang, Wan-Ling & Welch, Eric W., 2022. "Late-stage academic entrepreneurship: Explaining why academic scientists collaborate with industry to commercialize their patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    7. Isabel Cavalli & Charlie Joyez, 2021. "The Dynamics of French Universities in Patent Collaboration Networks," GREDEG Working Papers 2021-38, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    8. Bhawani Bhatnagar & Viktor Dörfler & Jillian MacBryde, 2023. "Navigating the open innovation paradox: an integrative framework for adopting open innovation in pharmaceutical R&D in developing countries," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 2204-2248, December.
    9. Ani Gerbin & Mateja Drnovsek, 2016. "Determinants and public policy implications of academic-industry knowledge transfer in life sciences: a review and a conceptual framework," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 979-1076, October.
    10. Alejandra Manco, 2022. "A Landscape of Open Science Policies Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    11. Lis-Gutiérrez, Jenny-Paola, 2015. "Gestión de la propiedad intelectual en museos [Management of intellectual property in museums]," MPRA Paper 68098, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 275-314, Elsevier.
    2. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.
    3. repec:wip:wpaper:4 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Kenney, Martin & Patton, Donald, 2009. "Reconsidering the Bayh-Dole Act and the Current University Invention Ownership Model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 1407-1422, November.
    7. Perkmann, Markus & King, Zella & Pavelin, Stephen, 2011. "Engaging excellence? Effects of faculty quality on university engagement with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 539-552, May.
    8. Wipo, 2011. "World Intellectual Property Report 2011- The Changing Face of Innovation," WIPO Economics & Statistics Series, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, number 2011:944, June.
    9. 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.
    10. Andrew J. Nelson, 2016. "How to Share “A Really Good Secret”: Managing Sharing/Secrecy Tensions Around Scientific Knowledge Disclosure," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 265-285, April.
    11. Shibayama, Sotaro & Lawson, Cornelia, 2021. "The use of rewards in the sharing of research resources," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    12. Heike Grimm & Johannes Jaenicke, 2015. "Testing the causal relationship between academic patenting and scientific publishing in Germany: Crowding-out or reinforcement?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 512-535, June.
    13. Schaeffer, Véronique, 2019. "The use of material transfer agreements in academia: A threat to open science or a cooperation tool?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    14. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    15. Francesco Lissoni & Fabio Montobbio, 2015. "The Ownership of Academic Patents and Their Impact. Evidence from Five European Countries," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 66(1), pages 143-171.
    16. Nicola Baldini, 2008. "Negative effects of university patenting: Myths and grounded evidence," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 75(2), pages 289-311, May.
    17. Sotaro Shibayama, 2012. "Conflict between entrepreneurship and open science, and the transition of scientific norms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 508-531, August.
    18. Lissoni, Francesco & Montobbio, Fabio & Zirulia, Lorenzo, 2013. "Inventorship and authorship as attribution rights: An enquiry into the economics of scientific credit," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 49-69.
    19. Haeussler, Carolin & Colyvas, Jeannette A., 2011. "Breaking the Ivory Tower: Academic Entrepreneurship in the Life Sciences in UK and Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 41-54, February.
    20. 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.
    21. Amit Shovon Ray & Sabyasachi Saha, "undated". "Patenting Public-Funded Research for Technology Transfer: A Conceptual-Empirical Synthesis of US Evidence and Lessons for India," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi Working Papers 244, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi, India.

    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:eee:respol:v:43:y:2014:i:2:p:245-260. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.