IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v43y2018i6d10.1007_s10961-017-9610-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social and economic impact of the commercialization of the Argus II artificial retina in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Amanda C. Walsh

    (RTI International)

  • Marwa E. Salem

    (RTI International)

  • Zachary T. Oliver

    (RTI International)

  • Kyle Clark-Sutton

    (RTI International)

Abstract

Each year, the United States invests about $45 billion in research conducted by federal researchers within federal laboratories. These efforts generate extensive social benefits when results are transferred to the private sector. It is important that we effectively quantify the economic and societal impact of federal technology transfer activities to inform taxpayers and policymakers about the value of public investments in this form of research. The Argus II device, an artificial retina commercialized in the United States by Second Sight in 2013, provides a rich example of how private sector innovation can be enhanced by research collaborations with federal labs and academia. Over the 25-year journey from idea to product, Second Sight carried out research and development collaborations with six Department of Energy national laboratories and seven universities. The case of Argus II also offers valuable insight into (1) how private industry, academia, and government can work together to bring socially beneficial innovations to fruition and (2) the tradeoffs inherent in these public–private collaborations. In this paper, we use a Markov model to estimate the realized and potential future social benefits associated with Argus II. We provide an interactive tool that can be used to replicate our findings and modify assumptions using updated patient information as it becomes available. We also provide insight into the aspects of federal involvement surrounding the development of Argus II that contributed to its successful commercialization and discuss other spillover benefits from these public–private collaborations.

Suggested Citation

  • Amanda C. Walsh & Marwa E. Salem & Zachary T. Oliver & Kyle Clark-Sutton, 2018. "Social and economic impact of the commercialization of the Argus II artificial retina in the United States," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(6), pages 1607-1630, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:43:y:2018:i:6:d:10.1007_s10961-017-9610-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-017-9610-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10961-017-9610-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-017-9610-z?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. Markman, Gideon D. & Gianiodis, Peter T. & Phan, Phillip H. & Balkin, David B., 2005. "Innovation speed: Transferring university technology to market," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1058-1075, September.
    2. Michael Gallaher & Brent Rowe, 2006. "The Costs and Benefits of Transferring Technology Infrastructures Underlying Complex Standards: The Case of IPv6," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 519-544, September.
    3. Bradley, Samantha R. & Hayter, Christopher S. & Link, Albert N., 2013. "Models and Methods of University Technology Transfer," UNCG Economics Working Papers 13-10, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.
    4. John Scott, 2009. "Cost-benefit analysis for global public–private partnerships: an evaluation of the desirability of intergovernmental organizations entering into public–private partnerships," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(6), pages 525-559, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Shen, Huijun & Coreynen, Wim & Huang, Can, 2022. "Exclusive licensing of university technology: The effects of university prestige, technology transfer offices, and academy-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    3. Shen, Huijun & Coreynen, Wim & Huang, Can, 2023. "Prestige and technology-transaction prices: Evidence from patent-selling by Chinese universities," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    4. Belitski, Maksim & Aginskaja, Anna & Marozau, Radzivon, 2019. "Commercializing university research in transition economies: Technology transfer offices or direct industrial funding?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 601-615.
    5. Conor O’Kane & James A. Cunningham & Matthias Menter & Sara Walton, 2021. "The brokering role of technology transfer offices within entrepreneurial ecosystems: an investigation of macro–meso–micro factors," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1814-1844, December.
    6. Christopher S. Hayter & Albert N. Link, 2022. "From discovery to commercialization: accretive intellectual property strategies among small, knowledge-based firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 1367-1377, March.
    7. Soares, Thiago J. & Torkomian, Ana L.V., 2021. "TTO's staff and technology transfer: Examining the effect of employees' individual capabilities," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    8. Nugent, Annita & Chan, Ho Fai, 2023. "Outsourcing university research commercialization to a sophisticated technology transfer office: Evidence from Australian universities," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    9. Arman Yalvac Aksoy & Catherine Beaudry, 2021. "How are companies paying for university research licenses? Empirical evidence from university-firm technology transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 2051-2121, December.
    10. João M. Lopes & Márcio Oliveira & Jorge Lopes & Umer Zaman, 2021. "Networks, Innovation and Knowledge Transfer in Tourism Industry: An Empirical Study of SMEs in Portugal," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, April.
    11. Brown, Austin R. & Wood, Matthew S. & Scheaf, David J., 2022. "Discovery sells, but who’s buying? An empirical investigation of entrepreneurs’ technology license decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 403-415.
    12. Catalina Martínez & Valerio Sterzi, 2021. "The impact of the abolishment of the professor’s privilege on European university-owned patents," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3), pages 247-282, March.
    13. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Doherr, Thorsten & Hussinger, Katrin & Schliessler, Paula & Toole, Andrew A., 2016. "Knowledge Creates Markets: The influence of entrepreneurial support and patent rights on academic entrepreneurship," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 131-146.
    14. Tommaso Minola & Davide Hahn & Lucio Cassia, 2021. "The relationship between origin and performance of innovative start-ups: the role of technological knowledge at founding," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 553-569, February.
    15. Andreas Panagopoulos & Elias Carayannis, 2013. "A policy for enhancing the disclosure of university faculty invention," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 341-347, June.
    16. Annita Nugent & Ho Fai Chan & Uwe Dulleck, 2022. "Government funding of university-industry collaboration: exploring the impact of targeted funding on university patent activity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 29-73, January.
    17. Taouaf, Ilham & Elyoussoufi Attou, Omar & El Ganich, Said & Arouch, Moha, 2021. "The Technology Transfer Office (TTO): Toward a Viable Model for Universities in Morocco," Cuadernos de Gestión, Universidad del País Vasco - Instituto de Economía Aplicada a la Empresa (IEAE).
    18. Véronique Schaeffer & Sıla Öcalan-Özel & Julien Pénin, 2020. "The complementarities between formal and informal channels of university–industry knowledge transfer: a longitudinal approach," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 31-55, February.
    19. James A. Cunningham & Paul O’Reilly, 2018. "Macro, meso and micro perspectives of technology transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 545-557, June.
    20. Christopher S. Hayter, 2016. "A trajectory of early-stage spinoff success: the role of knowledge intermediaries within an entrepreneurial university ecosystem," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 633-656, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Economic impact; Technology transfer; Biomedical innovation; Artificial retina; Markov chain; Monte Carlo;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:kap:jtecht:v:43:y:2018:i:6:d:10.1007_s10961-017-9610-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.