IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v44y2019i3d10.1007_s10961-017-9634-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Where technology transfer research originated and where it is going: a quantitative analysis of literature published between 1980 and 2015

Author

Listed:
  • Heeyong Noh

    (Ajou University)

  • Sungjoo Lee

    (Ajou University
    Ajou University)

Abstract

This study aims to identify both where technology transfer research originated and where it is going. A quantitative approach was adopted in this study to observe the trends from an objective perspective. To do this, longitudinal bibliographic data of journal papers describing technology transfer from 1980 to 2015 are collected. Topic modeling and co-authorship network analyses are then applied to classify topics and identify an evolution of research groups. First, the principal transfer agent is changed from governmental organizations to universities, as technology donors, while industry plays the role of technology recipients. Second, major technology fields that researchers have focused on follow socially attractive interests. Third, the scope of focus gradually moves from national level research or international transfers to organizational level research. In addition, technology transfer research seems to change from a technology transfer application to a dynamic technology transfer process. In addition, six topics are identified and further discussed to understand future research directions. The research findings are expected to help us understand research trends in technology transfer and, thus, are expected to provide valuable insights to researchers in this field and policy makers who are in charge of developing policies to support technology transfer.

Suggested Citation

  • Heeyong Noh & Sungjoo Lee, 2019. "Where technology transfer research originated and where it is going: a quantitative analysis of literature published between 1980 and 2015," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 700-740, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:44:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s10961-017-9634-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-017-9634-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10961-017-9634-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-017-9634-4?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. Howard Pack & Kamal Saggi, 1997. "Inflows of Foreign Technology and Indigenous Technological Development," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 81-98, February.
    2. 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.
    3. Rebecca Henderson & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1998. "Universities As A Source Of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis Of University Patenting, 1965-1988," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 119-127, February.
    4. Lall, Sanjaya, 1992. "Technological capabilities and industrialization," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 165-186, February.
    5. David Audretsch & Erik Lehmann & Mike Wright, 2014. "Technology transfer in a global economy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 301-312, June.
    6. Owen-Smith, Jason & Powell, Walter W., 2003. "The expanding role of university patenting in the life sciences: assessing the importance of experience and connectivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1695-1711, October.
    7. Owen-Smith, Jason & Powell, Walter W, 2001. "To Patent or Not: Faculty Decisions and Institutional Success at Technology Transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 99-114, January.
    8. Lybbert, Travis J. & Sumner, Daniel A., 2012. "Agricultural technologies for climate change in developing countries: Policy options for innovation and technology diffusion," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 114-123.
    9. 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.
    10. James A. Cunningham & Matthias Menter & Chris Young, 2017. "A review of qualitative case methods trends and themes used in technology transfer research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 923-956, August.
    11. Bart Van Looy & Edwin Zimmermann & Reinhilde Veugelers & Arnold Verbeek & Johanna Mello & Koenraad Debackere, 2003. "Do science-technology interactions pay off when developing technology?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 57(3), pages 355-367, July.
    12. Amesse, Fernand & Cohendet, P., 2001. "Technology transfer revisited from the perspective of the knowledge-based economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1459-1478, December.
    13. Shane, Scott, 2004. "Encouraging university entrepreneurship? The effect of the Bayh-Dole Act on university patenting in the United States," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 127-151, January.
    14. Victor Gilsing & Rudi Bekkers & Bodas Isabel Maria Freitas & Marianne van Der Steen, 2011. "Differences in technology transfer between science-based and development based industries: transfer mechanisms and barriers," Post-Print hal-01487500, HAL.
    15. Mike Wright & Bart Clarysse & Philippe Mustar & Andy Lockett, 2007. "Academic Entrepreneurship in Europe," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4041.
    16. Etzkowitz, Henry & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 109-123, February.
    17. Sampat, Bhaven N., 2006. "Patenting and US academic research in the 20th century: The world before and after Bayh-Dole," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 772-789, July.
    18. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Kim, Linsu & Dahlman, Carl J., 1992. "Technology policy for industrialization: An integrative framework and Korea's experience," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 437-452, October.
    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.
    21. Shahadat Uddin & Liaquat Hossain & Alireza Abbasi & Kim Rasmussen, 2012. "Trend and efficiency analysis of co-authorship network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 687-699, February.
    22. Mike Wright, 2014. "Academic entrepreneurship, technology transfer and society: where next?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 322-334, June.
    23. Albert N. Link & Donald S. Siegel & Barry Bozeman, 2007. "An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 641-655, August.
    24. Newman, Carol & Rand, John & Talbot, Theodore & Tarp, Finn, 2015. "Technology transfers, foreign investment and productivity spillovers," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 168-187.
    25. Yuen-Hsien Tseng & Yu-I Lin & Yi-Yang Lee & Wen-Chi Hung & Chun-Hsiang Lee, 2009. "A comparison of methods for detecting hot topics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(1), pages 73-90, October.
    26. 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.
    27. Choung, Jae-Yong & Hwang, Hye-Ran & Song, Wichin, 2014. "Transitions of Innovation Activities in Latecomer Countries: An Exploratory Case Study of South Korea," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 156-167.
    28. Li, Jingxun & Lee, Ruby P., 2015. "Can knowledge transfer within MNCs hurt subsidiary performance? The role of subsidiary entrepreneurial culture and capabilities," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 663-673.
    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. Petra Maresova & Ruzena Stemberkova & Oluwaseun Fadeyi, 2019. "Models, Processes, and Roles of Universities in Technology Transfer Management: A Systematic Review," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-36, September.
    2. Uzi Haan & Shuli C. Shwartz & Fernando Gómez-Baquero, 2020. "A startup postdoc program as a channel for university technology transfer: the case of the Runway Startup Postdoc Program at the Jacobs Technion–Cornell Institute at Cornell Tech," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1611-1633, December.
    3. Yutaka Fujioka & Norio Kambayashi, 2022. "Learning by teaching technological knowledge: conceptual skill development in Japanese overseas subsidiaries," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(9), pages 1-32, September.
    4. Arenas Gaitán, Jorge & Ramírez-Correa, Patricio E., 2023. "COVID-19 and telemedicine: A netnography approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    5. Petri Uusitalo & Rita Lavikka, 2021. "Technology transfer in the construction industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1291-1320, October.
    6. Yindan Ye & Kevin De Moortel & Thomas Crispeels, 2020. "Network dynamics of Chinese university knowledge transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1228-1254, August.
    7. Matricano, Diego, 2022. "The influence of gender on technology transfer processes managed in Italian Young Innovative Companies: A stochastic frontier analysis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    8. Modic, Dolores & Suklan, Jana, 2022. "Multidimensional experience and performance of highly skilled administrative staff: Evidence from a technology transfer office," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    9. Kalantaridis, Christos & Küttim, Merle, 2023. "Multi-dimensional time and university technology commercialisation as opportunity praxis: A realist synthesis of the accumulated literature," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    10. Knut Blind & Maximilian Laer, 2022. "Paving the path: drivers of standardization participation at ISO," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1115-1134, August.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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, April.
    4. Walter, Sascha G. & Schmidt, Arne & Walter, Achim, 2016. "Patenting rationales of academic entrepreneurs in weak and strong organizational regimes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 533-545.
    5. Buenstorf, Guido & Schacht, Alexander, 2013. "We need to talk – or do we? Geographic distance and the commercialization of technologies from public research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 465-480.
    6. 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.
    7. James A. Cunningham & Matthias Menter & Chris Young, 2017. "A review of qualitative case methods trends and themes used in technology transfer research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 923-956, August.
    8. James A. Cunningham & Erik E. Lehmann & Matthias Menter & Nikolaus Seitz, 2019. "The impact of university focused technology transfer policies on regional innovation and entrepreneurship," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(5), pages 1451-1475, October.
    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. Tüzin Baycan & Roger Stough, 2013. "Bridging knowledge to commercialization: the good, the bad, and the challenging," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 50(2), pages 367-405, April.
    11. repec:wip:wpaper:4 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. 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.
    13. Kenney, Martin & Patton, Donald, 2011. "Does inventor ownership encourage university research-derived entrepreneurship? A six university comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1100-1112, October.
    14. Christian Fisch & Tobias Hassel & Philipp Sandner & Joern Block, 2015. "University patenting: a comparison of 300 leading universities worldwide," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 318-345, April.
    15. Uwe Cantner & Martin Kalthaus & Indira Yarullina, 2022. "Outcomes of Science-Industry Collaboration: Factors and Interdependencies," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-003, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    16. Min, Jae-Woong & Vonortas, Nicholas S. & Kim, YoungJun, 2019. "Commercialization of transferred public technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 10-20.
    17. Battaglia, Daniele & Paolucci, Emilio & Ughetto, Elisa, 2021. "The role of Proof-of-Concept programs in facilitating the commercialization of research-based inventions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    18. Chang, Yuan-Chieh & Yang, Phil Yihsing & Martin, Ben R. & Chi, Hui-Ru & Tsai-Lin, Tung-Fei, 2016. "Entrepreneurial universities and research ambidexterity: A multilevel analysis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 7-21.
    19. Grimpe, Christoph & Hussinger, Katrin, 2008. "Formal and Informal Technology Transfer from Academia to Industry: Complementarity Effects and Innovation Performance," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-080, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    20. Lee Davis & Maria Larsen & Peter Lotz, 2011. "Scientists’ perspectives concerning the effects of university patenting on the conduct of academic research in the life sciences," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 14-37, February.
    21. Igors Skute & Kasia Zalewska-Kurek & Isabella Hatak & Petra Weerd-Nederhof, 2019. "Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 916-947, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technology transfer; Research trends; Topic modeling; Co-authorship network; Emerging topics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • N01 - Economic History - - General - - - Development of the Discipline: Historiographical; Sources and Methods
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:44:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s10961-017-9634-4. 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.