IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/gemptp/hal-00749152.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Which Model of Technology Transfer for Nanotechnology? A Comparison with Biotech and Microelectronics

Author

Listed:
  • Corine Genet

    () (Global Health - MTS - Management Technologique et Strategique - Grenoble École de Management (GEM))

  • Khalid Errabi

    () (MTS - Management Technologique et Strategique - Grenoble École de Management (GEM))

  • Caroline Gauthier

    () (Global Health - MTS - Management Technologique et Strategique - Grenoble École de Management (GEM))

Abstract

Nanotechnologies are often presented as breakthrough innovations, where technology transfer and knowledge-bridging will play a pivotal role in the industrial dynamics. This article investigates the model of knowledge transfer in the nanotechnologies in depth, by comparing it with the models of two recently emerged technologies: biotech and microelectronics. Our results show that the nanotechnology transfer model is very different from that involved in biotechnology evolution: while small-medium firms play a valuable technology-bringing role, the central function of "translating" new knowledge between public research and industry is carried by the larger firms, just as it was in the early stages of the microelectronics sector. These results suggest that specific policy initiatives to facilitate biotech's transfer are inappropriate to boost the diffusion of nanotechnology.

Suggested Citation

  • Corine Genet & Khalid Errabi & Caroline Gauthier, 2012. "Which Model of Technology Transfer for Nanotechnology? A Comparison with Biotech and Microelectronics," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00749152, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:gemptp:hal-00749152
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2011.10.007
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: http://hal.grenoble-em.com/hal-00749152
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hal.grenoble-em.com/hal-00749152/document
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rothaermel, Frank T. & Thursby, Marie, 2007. "The nanotech versus the biotech revolution: Sources of productivity in incumbent firm research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 832-849, July.
    2. Niosi, Jorge & Reid, Susan E., 2007. "Biotechnology and Nanotechnology: Science-based Enabling Technologies as Windows of Opportunity for LDCs?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 426-438, March.
    3. Mangematin, Vincent & Lemarie, Stephane & Boissin, Jean-Pierre & Catherine, David & Corolleur, Frederic & Coronini, Roger & Trommetter, Michel, 2003. "Development of SMEs and heterogeneity of trajectories: the case of biotechnology in France," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 621-638, April.
    4. Vincent Mangematin & Khalid Errabi & Caroline Gauthier, 2011. "Large players in the nanogame: dedicated nanotech subsidiaries or distributed nanotech capabilities?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 640-664, December.
    5. Orsenigo, L. & Pammolli, F. & Riccaboni, Massimo, 2001. "Technological change and network dynamics: Lessons from the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 485-508, March.
    6. Mogoutov, Andrei & Kahane, Bernard, 2007. "Data search strategy for science and technology emergence: A scalable and evolutionary query for nanotechnology tracking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 893-903, July.
    7. Zucker, Lynne G. & Darby, Michael R. & Furner, Jonathan & Liu, Robert C. & Ma, Hongyan, 2007. "Minerva unbound: Knowledge stocks, knowledge flows and new knowledge production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 850-863, July.
    8. Gambardella,Alfonso, 1995. "Science and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521451185, December.
    9. Mowery, David C., 1983. "Innovation, market structure, and government policy in the American semiconductor electronics industry: A survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 183-197, August.
    10. Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2008. "Mapping the nanotechnology enterprise: a multi-indicator analysis of emerging nanodistricts in the US South," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 209-223, April.
    11. Greis, Noel P. & Dibner, Mark D. & Bean, Alden S., 1995. "External partnering as a response to innovation barriers and global competition in biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 609-630, July.
    12. Vincent Mangematin & Khalid Errabi, 2012. "The Determinants of Science-Based Cluster Growth: The Case of Nanotechnology," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 30(1), pages 128-146, February.
    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. Wipo, 2015. "World Intellectual Property Report 2015 - Breakthrough Innovation and Economic Growth," WIPO Economics & Statistics Series, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, number 2015:944, July.
    2. Coccia, Mario & Wang, Lili, 2015. "Path-breaking directions of nanotechnology-based chemotherapy and molecular cancer therapy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 155-169.
    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. repec:eee:tefoso:v:131:y:2018:i:c:p:94-110 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Caroline Gauthier & Corine Genet, 2014. "Nanotechnologies and Green Knowledge Creation: Paradox or Enhancer of Sustainable Solutions?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 124(4), pages 571-583, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Nanotechnology; Biotechnology; Microelectronics; Technology transfer;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:gemptp:hal-00749152. 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: (CCSD). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.