IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/eurpls/v15y2006i9p1199-1214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Dynamics of Commercialization of Scientific Knowledge in Biotechnology and Nanotechnology

Author

Listed:
  • Mikel Gómez Uranga
  • Goio Etxebarria Kerexeta
  • Jordi Campàs-Velasco

Abstract

We carry out an in-depth study of the growth, diffusion and reinforcement of knowledge in this article. We look for drivers to diffuse knowledge as to collaboration (between different research teams and between university and industry), regulations (on intellectual property rights, governmental), and broad lines of scientific research according to the financing methods used. The studies referred to in this article are linked to the creation and search for better commercialization conditions for the sciences and technologies associated with biosciences and nanosciences. Different paths of knowledge may be identified, according to the case. Certain kinds of drivers may be used more often than others, determined by the type of knowledge being dealt with. For instance, networking and collaboration between different research teams is one of the main activities necessary to innovate and to commercialize the products resulting from knowledge and research in those clusters. In other situations, it may be more suitable to reinforce knowledge diffusion through certain regulations. A case in point is the significance of the Bayh--Dole Act in the US, used to improve relationships between university and industry. Therefore, the aim of this article is to evaluate the type of drivers and the intensity required in each case. In general, in more advanced clusters and territories, drivers are more biased to creating conditions to commercialize science, and to a lesser extent, to government intervention to foster development. The two case studies we have chosen, i.e. the Barcelona biomedical cluster and the biosciences cluster in the Basque Country, call for drivers that are the same in certain regards but vary greatly in intensity. The simultaneous presence of all of these drivers works in an interrelated manner to activate the complex process of commercialization of science.

Suggested Citation

  • Mikel Gómez Uranga & Goio Etxebarria Kerexeta & Jordi Campàs-Velasco, 2006. "The Dynamics of Commercialization of Scientific Knowledge in Biotechnology and Nanotechnology," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(9), pages 1199-1214, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:eurpls:v:15:y:2006:i:9:p:1199-1214
    DOI: 10.1080/09654310701529136
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09654310701529136
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09654310701529136?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. Aldo Geuna & Lionel Nesta, 2003. "University Patenting and its Effects on Academic Research," SPRU Working Paper Series 99, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    2. Edwin Mansfield, 1995. "Innovation, Technology And The Economy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, volume 0, number 298.
    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. Yuan-Cheih Chang & Phil Yihsing Yang & Tung-Fei Tsai-Lin & Hui-Ru Chi, 2011. "How University Departmens respond to the Rise of Academic Entrepreneurship? The Pasteur's Quadrant Explanation," DRUID Working Papers 11-07, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.

    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. David Martimort & Flavio Menezes & Myrna Wooders & ELISABETTA IOSSA & DAVID MARTIMORT, 2015. "The Simple Microeconomics of Public-Private Partnerships," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 17(1), pages 4-48, February.
    2. Fofack, Hippolyte, 2008. "Technology trap and poverty trap in Sub-Saharan Africa," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4582, The World Bank.
    3. Chan, Felix & Marinova, Dora & McAleer, Michael, 2004. "Modelling the asymmetric volatility of electronics patents in the USA," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 169-184.
    4. Pilar Beneito, 2002. "Technological patterns among Spanish manufacturing firms," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 89-115, July.
    5. Joshua Gans & Scott Stern, 2003. "When does funding research by smaller firms bear fruit?: Evidence from the SBIR program," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 361-384.
    6. Kotsemir, Maxim & Meissner, Dirk, 2013. "Conceptualizing the Innovation Process – Trends and Outlook," MPRA Paper 46504, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Magnus Gulbrandsen, 2012. "“But Peter’s in it for the money” – the liminality of entrepreneurial scientists," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20120323, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    8. Yuandi Wang & Ruifeng Hu & Weiping Li & Xiongfeng Pan, 2016. "Does teaching benefit from university–industry collaboration? Investigating the role of academic commercialization and engagement," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1037-1055, March.
    9. Nicola Baldini & Rosa Grimaldi & Maurizio Sobrero, 2007. "To patent or not to patent? A survey of Italian inventors on motivations, incentives, and obstacles to university patenting," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(2), pages 333-354, February.
    10. Dirk Meissner & Maxim Kotsemir, 2016. "Conceptualizing the innovation process towards the ‘active innovation paradigm’—trends and outlook," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-18, December.
    11. 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.
    12. Eric J. Iversen & Magnus Gulbrandsen & Antje Klitkou, 2007. "A baseline for the impact of academic patenting legislation in Norway," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(2), pages 393-414, February.
    13. Van Looy, Bart & Callaert, Julie & Debackere, Koenraad, 2006. "Publication and patent behavior of academic researchers: Conflicting, reinforcing or merely co-existing?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 596-608, May.
    14. Mika Maliranta, 2005. "R&D, International Trade and Creative Destruction—Empirical Findings from Finnish Manufacturing Industries," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 27-58, January.
    15. Diamond, Arthur Jr., 2003. "Edwin Mansfield's contributions to the economics of technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1607-1617, October.
    16. Dora Marinova & Michael McAleer, 2002. "Trends and volatility in Japanese patenting in the USA: An analysis of the electronics and transport industries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 55(2), pages 171-187, August.
    17. Mario Calderini & Chiara Franzoni, 2004. "Is academic patenting detrimental to high quality research? An empirical analysis of the relationship between scientific careers and patent applications," KITeS Working Papers 162, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Oct 2004.
    18. Mario Calderini & Chiara Franzoni & Andrea Vezzulli, 2007. "The Unequal Benefits of Academic Patenting for Science and Engineering Research," KITeS Working Papers 203, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Oct 2007.
    19. Yuandi Wang & Die Hu & Weiping Li & Yiwei Li & Qiang Li, 2015. "Collaboration strategies and effects on university research: evidence from Chinese universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 725-749, May.
    20. Korok Ray, 2007. "Performance Evaluations and Efficient Sorting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 839-882, September.

    More about this item

    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:taf:eurpls:v:15:y:2006:i:9:p:1199-1214. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CEPS20 .

    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.