IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/worpat/v27y2005i2p113-123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Independent inventors and public support measures: insights from 33 case studies in Finland

Author

Abstract

This study explores the experiences of individual inventors trying to protect, patent, and utilize their inventions. The paper also examines the extent to which inventors received public support. Drawing on an analysis of 33 case studies of Finnish independent inventors, the study explores the extent to which the inventor types correspond with access to certain support measures and commercialization success. The findings suggest that different types of inventors and their patents concur with different levels of access to and use of support measures. Access to innovation support does not necessarily coincide with commercialization success. At times, inventor categories with some success in utilizing patented inventions coincided with little support and advice from public organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Meyer, M., 2005. "Independent inventors and public support measures: insights from 33 case studies in Finland," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 113-123, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:worpat:v:27:y:2005:i:2:p:113-123
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0172-2190(04)00144-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Meyer, Martin, 2006. "Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1646-1662, December.
    2. João Ricardo Faria & Rajeev K. Goel & Devrim Göktepe-Hultén, 2022. "Factors facilitating the inventing academics transition from nascent entrepreneurs to business owners," Chapters, in: David E. Audretsch & Erik B. Lehmann & Albert N. Link (ed.), Handbook of Technology Transfer, chapter 5, pages 75-102, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Christos Agiakloglou & Kyriakos Drivas & Dimitris Karamanis, 2016. "Individual inventors and market potentials: Evidence from US patents," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 147-156.
    4. van Burg, Elco & Du, Jingshu & Kers, Jannigje Gerdien, 2021. "When do academics patent outside their university? An in-depth case study," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    5. Chen, Jin & Su, Yu-Shan & de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & von Hippel, Eric, 2020. "Household sector innovation in China: Impacts of income and motivation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    6. Yipeng Zhang, 2023. "The Sustainability of Regional Innovation in China: Insights from Regional Innovation Values and Their Spatial Distribution," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-42, June.
    7. C. Wickramasinghe & Nobaya Ahmad & Sharifah Rashid & Zahid Emby, 2011. "Impact of Subjective Well-Being on Success of Technological Knowledge Creation among Independent Inventors in Developing Countries: A First Look at Sri Lanka," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 2(3), pages 432-452, September.
    8. Devrim Göktepe-Hulten & Prashanth Mahagaonkar, 2010. "Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: in the expectation of money or reputation?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 401-423, August.

    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:worpat:v:27:y:2005:i:2:p:113-123. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/654/description#description .

    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.