IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v48y2017icp1-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Some factors limiting transfer of biotechnology research for health care at Cinvestav: A Mexican scientific center

Author

Listed:
  • Medina-Molotla, Nelly
  • Thorsteinsdóttir, Halla
  • Frixione, Eugenio
  • Kuri-Harcuch, Walid

Abstract

We investigated a number of factors that influence the transfer and commercialization of biotechnology for health care at Cinvestav, a leading Mexican research institute and major contributor to biomedical sciences in the country. Mixed methods were used, where we sent a survey to all the principal investigators (PIs) doing research in health-oriented biotechnology at Cinvestav that we could identify and asked them about their transfer of technologies activities, and interviews were carried out with those PIs who are currently pursuing projects for commercialization. Our results show that, despite a strong publishing record on the international front, most of these scientists lack a business-oriented focus. Further business expertise does not appear to be readily available or helpful at the institutional technology transfer office. Weak collaboration strategies reflected in a low number of key partnerships, together with a lack of private financing, also limit the capacity to transfer and commercialize the technologies being generated. The local scientific tradition and conditions do not seem to be amenable to these kinds of efforts, nor does the government pursue a coherent strategy to promote technology transfer and commercialization in health biotechnology. Consequently, promising projects take too long to develop and usually go to a limited extent through the consecutive patenting and licensing steps, both indicators of commercial activity in academia. The end result is a lack of success in making the results of new scientific knowledge beneficial for public health, a problem experienced not only by Mexico but shared by a number of low-and-middle income countries. We discuss the need for an urgent change in concerted vision by research institutions in developing countries, so as to engage their robust scientific infrastructure with the social and health demands of their populations.

Suggested Citation

  • Medina-Molotla, Nelly & Thorsteinsdóttir, Halla & Frixione, Eugenio & Kuri-Harcuch, Walid, 2017. "Some factors limiting transfer of biotechnology research for health care at Cinvestav: A Mexican scientific center," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 1-10.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:48:y:2017:i:c:p:1-10
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2016.10.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X1630080X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2016.10.004?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. Friedman, Joseph & Silberman, Jonathan, 2003. "University Technology Transfer: Do Incentives, Management, and Location Matter?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 17-30, January.
    2. Philip Cooke, 2007. "European asymmetries: A comparative analysis of German and UK biotechnology clusters," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(7), pages 454-474, August.
    3. Siegel, Donald S. & Waldman, David & Link, Albert, 2003. "Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 27-48, January.
    4. McMahon, Dominique & Thorsteinsdóttir, Halla, 2013. "Pursuing endogenous high-tech innovation in developing countries: A look at regenerative medicine innovation in Brazil, China and India," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 965-974.
    5. Lynn Mytelka, 2006. "Pathways and Policies to (Bio) Pharmaceutical Innovation Systems in Developing Countries," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 415-435.
    6. McMillan, G. Steven & Narin, Francis & Deeds, David L., 2000. "An analysis of the critical role of public science in innovation: the case of biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-8, January.
    7. Kenneth C Shadlen, 2012. "The Mexican Exception: Patents and Innovation Policy in a Non-conformist and Reluctant Middle Income Country," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 24(2), pages 300-318, April.
    8. Luciano Martins Costa Póvoa & Márcia Siqueira Rapini, 2010. "Technology transfer from universities and public research institutes to firms in Brazil: what is transferred and how the transfer is carried out," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(2), pages 147-159, March.
    9. Jorge Niosi & Tomas G. Bas & Julieta Flores Amador, 2013. "Biopharmaceuticals in Latin America: challenges and opportunities," Innovation and Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 19-36, April.
    10. Hobday, Michael & Rush, Howard & Bessant, John, 2004. "Approaching the innovation frontier in Korea: the transition phase to leadership," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1433-1457, December.
    11. De Fuentes, Claudia & Dutrénit, Gabriela, 2012. "Best channels of academia–industry interaction for long-term benefit," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1666-1682.
    12. Helen Lawton Smith & Sharmistha Bagchi-Sen, 2006. "University-Industry Interactions: the Case of the UK Biotech Industry," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 371-392.
    13. Hopkins, Michael M. & Martin, Paul A. & Nightingale, Paul & Kraft, Alison & Mahdi, Surya, 2007. "The myth of the biotech revolution: An assessment of technological, clinical and organisational change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 566-589, May.
    14. David Wield & Rebecca Hanlin & James Mittra & James Smith, 2013. "Twenty-first century bioeconomy: Global challenges of biological knowledge for health and agriculture," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 17-24, January.
    15. Hernandez-Mondragon, Alma Cristal & Herrera-Estrella, Luis & Kuri-Harcuch, Walid, 2016. "Legislative environment and others factors that inhibit transfer of Mexican publicly funded research into commercial ventures," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 100-108.
    16. Jorge Niosi & Petr Hanel & Susan Reid, 2012. "The international diffusion of biotechnology: the arrival of developing countries," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 767-783, September.
    17. Bozeman, Barry, 2000. "Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 627-655, April.
    18. Zucker, Lynne G & Darby, Michael R & Brewer, Marilynn B, 1998. "Intellectual Human Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 290-306, March.
    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. Chen, Shih-Hsin & Lin, Wei-Ting, 2018. "Analyzing determinants for promoting emerging technology through intermediaries by using a DANP-based MCDA framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 94-110.

    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. Gideon D. Markman & Peter T. Gianiodis & Phillip H. Phan, 2009. "Supply‐Side Innovation and Technology Commercialization," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 625-649, June.
    2. Robert Huggins & Daniel Prokop & Piers Thompson, 2020. "Universities and open innovation: the determinants of network centrality," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 718-757, June.
    3. Saul Lach & Mark Schankerman, 2008. "Incentives and invention in universities," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(2), pages 403-433, June.
    4. Battaglia, Daniele & Landoni, Paolo & Rizzitelli, Francesco, 2017. "Organizational structures for external growth of University Technology Transfer Offices: An explorative analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 45-56.
    5. D'Este, P. & Patel, P., 2007. "University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1295-1313, November.
    6. Edler, Jakob & Fier, Heide & Grimpe, Christoph, 2011. "International scientist mobility and the locus of knowledge and technology transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 791-805, July.
    7. O’Kane, Conor & Mangematin, Vincent & Geoghegan, Will & Fitzgerald, Ciara, 2015. "University technology transfer offices: The search for identity to build legitimacy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 421-437.
    8. Christoph Grimpe & Heide Fier, 2010. "Informal university technology transfer: a comparison between the United States and Germany," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(6), pages 637-650, December.
    9. Han, Jaepil, 2018. "Effects of Technology Transfer Policies on the Technical Efficiency of Korean University TTOs," KDI Journal of Economic Policy, Korea Development Institute (KDI), vol. 40(4), pages 23-45.
    10. O’Kane, Conor, 2018. "Technology transfer executives' backwards integration: An examination of interactions between university technology transfer executives and principal investigators," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 76, pages 64-77.
    11. Chang, Yuan-Chieh & Yang, Phil Y. & Chen, Ming-Huei, 2009. "The determinants of academic research commercial performance: Towards an organizational ambidexterity perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 936-946, July.
    12. A. Bellucci & L. Pennacchio, 2016. "University knowledge and firm innovation: evidence from European countries," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 730-752, August.
    13. Federico Castillo & J. Keith Gilless & Amir Heiman & David Zilberman, 2018. "Time of adoption and intensity of technology transfer: an institutional analysis of offices of technology transfer in the United States," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 120-138, February.
    14. Conor O'Kane & Vincent Mangematin & Will Geoghegan & Ciara Fitzgerald, 2015. "University Technology Transfer offices : the search for identity to build legimacy," Post-Print hal-01072998, HAL.
    15. Clovia Hamilton & Simon P. Philbin, 2020. "Knowledge Based View of University Tech Transfer—A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-28, September.
    16. Barletta, Florencia & Yoguel, Gabriel & Pereira, Mariano & Rodríguez, Sergio, 2017. "Exploring scientific productivity and transfer activities: Evidence from Argentinean ICT research groups," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1361-1369.
    17. Soares, Thiago J. & Torkomian, Ana L.V. & Nagano, Marcelo Seido, 2020. "University regulations, regional development and technology transfer: The case of Brazil," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    18. Albats, Ekaterina & Alexander, Allen T. & Cunningham, James A., 2022. "Traditional, virtual, and digital intermediaries in university-industry collaboration: exploring institutional logics and bounded rationality," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    19. Maria das Dores B. Moura Oliveira & Aurora A.C. Teixeira, 2009. "Policy approaches regarding technology transfer: Portugal and Switzerland compared," UITT Working Papers 2009-09-wp5, INESC Porto, Unidade de Inovação e Transferência de Tecnologia(UITT).
    20. Bozeman, Barry & Rimes, Heather & Youtie, Jan, 2015. "The evolving state-of-the-art in technology transfer research: Revisiting the contingent effectiveness model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 34-49.

    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:teinso:v:48:y:2017:i:c:p:1-10. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    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.