IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Conflict between entrepreneurship and open science, and the transition of scientific norms

  • Sotaro Shibayama

    ()

Registered author(s):

    In the trend of academic entrepreneurship, practical and direct contribution of university research to the society has been emphasized, in which university scientists have increasingly engaged in commercial activities, university-industry relationships, and technology transfers. However, this trend has aroused concern about a potentially negative impact on the tradition of open science. Drawing on a survey data of 698 Japanese natural scientists, this study analyzes the behaviors and norms of university scientists under the influence of university interventions for entrepreneurship, whereby examining the compatibility between entrepreneurship and open science. The results indicate that entrepreneurial interventions have facilitated scientists’ norm for practical contribution, and consequently, their involvement in commercial activities and ties with industry. Then, some, but not all, of these entrepreneurial activities have deterred cooperative or open relationships between scientists. However, the results suggest that the entrepreneurial interventions have not deteriorated the traditional norm for open science. Further analyses indicate that the two norms for practical contribution and for open science are determined independently, implying that academic entrepreneurship can be promoted without deteriorating open science. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10961-010-9202-7
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Springer in its journal The Journal of Technology Transfer.

    Volume (Year): 37 (2012)
    Issue (Month): 4 (August)
    Pages: 508-531

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:37:y:2012:i:4:p:508-531
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=104998

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2000. "Universities as Research Partners," NBER Working Papers 7643, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Rajeev K. Goel & Daniel P. Rich, 2005. "Organization of Markets for Science and Technology," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 161(1), pages 1-, March.
    5. Lei, Zhen & Juneja, Rakhi & Wright, Brian D, 2009. "Patents versus patenting: implications of intellectual property protection for biological research," MPRA Paper 34640, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. 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.
    7. Brown, Marilyn A. & Berry, Linda G. & Goel, Rajeev K., 1991. "Guidelines for successfully transferring government-sponsored innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 121-143, April.
    8. 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.
    9. Henderson, R. & Jaffe, A.B.: Tratenberg, M., 1995. "Universities as a Source of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis of University Patenting 1965-1988," Papers 09-95, Tel Aviv.
    10. Richard R. Nelson, 2003. "The Market Economy, and the Scientific Commons," LEM Papers Series 2003/24, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    11. Laband, David N & Beil, Richard O, 1999. " Are Economists More Selfish Than Other 'Social' Scientists?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 100(1-2), pages 85-101, July.
    12. 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, 01.
    13. Paul A. David, 2004. "Understanding the emergence of 'open science' institutions: functionalist economics in historical context," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 571-589, August.
    14. John R. Carter & Michael D. Irons, 1991. "Are Economists Different, and If So, Why?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(2), pages 171-177, Spring.
    15. Glenn Ellison, 2000. "The Slowdown of the Economics Publishing Process," NBER Working Papers 7804, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Ajay Agrawal & Rebecca Henderson, 2002. "Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 44-60, January.
    17. Mowery, David C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Sampat, Bhaven N. & Ziedonis, Arvids A., 2001. "The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole act of 1980," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 99-119, January.
    18. David N. Laband & Robert D. Tollison, 2000. "Intellectual Collaboration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(3), pages 632-661, June.
    19. Lee, Yong S., 1996. "'Technology transfer' and the research university: a search for the boundaries of university-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 843-863, September.
    20. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1991. "Multitask Principal-Agent Analyses: Incentive Contracts, Asset Ownership, and Job Design," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(0), pages 24-52, Special I.
    21. Joanna Poyago-Theotoky & John Beath & Donald S. Siegel, 2002. "Universities and Fundamental Research: Reflections on the Growth of University--Industry Partnerships," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 10-21, Spring.
    22. Robert H. Frank & Thomas Gilovich & Dennis T. Regan, 1993. "Does Studying Economics Inhibit Cooperation?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 159-171, Spring.
    23. Laband, David N., 2002. "Contribution, attribution and the allocation of intellectual property rights: economics versus agricultural economics," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 125-131, February.
    24. Nelson, Richard R, 2001. " Observations on the Post-Bayh-Dole Rise of Patenting at American Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 13-19, January.
    25. Aghion, P. & Tirole, J., 1993. "On the Management of Innovation," Working papers 93-12, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
    26. Aghion, Philippe & Tirole, Jean, 1994. "The Management of Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 109(4), pages 1185-1209, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:37:y:2012:i:4:p:508-531. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn)

    or (Christopher F. Baum)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.