IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genres/12672.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

U.S. Universitiesï¾’ Net Returns from Patenting and Licensing: A Quantile Regression Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Bulut, Harun
  • Moschini, GianCarlo

Abstract

In line with the rights and incentives provided by the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, U.S. universities have increased their involvement in patenting and licensing activities through their own technology transfer offices. Only a few U.S. universities are obtaining large returns, however, whereas others are continuing with these activities despite negligible or negative returns. We assess the U.S. universitiesï¾’ potential to generate returns from licensing activities by modeling and estimating quantiles of the distribution of net licensing returns conditional on some of their structural characteristics. We find limited prospects for public universities without a medical school everywhere in their distribution. Other groups of universities (private, and public with a medical school) can expect significant but still fairly modest returns only beyond the 0.9th quantile. These findings call into question the appropriateness of the revenue-generating motive for the aggressive rate of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities.

Suggested Citation

  • Bulut, Harun & Moschini, GianCarlo, 2006. "U.S. Universitiesï¾’ Net Returns from Patenting and Licensing: A Quantile Regression Analysis," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12672, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:isu:genres:12672
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/papers/paper_12672.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. He X. & Hu F., 2002. "Markov Chain Marginal Bootstrap," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 97, pages 783-795, September.
    2. 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.
    3. Beath, John & Owen, Robert F. & Poyago-Theotoky, Joanna & Ulph, David, 2003. "Optimal incentives for income-generation in universities: the rule of thumb for the Compton tax," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1301-1322, November.
    4. Siegel, Donald S. & Waldman, David & Link, Albert, 2003. "Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 27-48, January.
    5. Silverberg, Gerald & Verspagen, Bart, 2007. "The size distribution of innovations revisited: An application of extreme value statistics to citation and value measures of patent significance," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 139(2), pages 318-339, August.
    6. Moshe Buchinsky, 1998. "Recent Advances in Quantile Regression Models: A Practical Guideline for Empirical Research," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(1), pages 88-126.
    7. Koenker,Roger, 2005. "Quantile Regression," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521845731, January.
    8. Link, Albert N. & Scott, John T. & Siegel, Donald S., 2003. "The economics of intellectual property at universities: an overview of the special issue," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1217-1225, November.
    9. Saul Lach & Mark Schankerman, 2004. "Royalty Sharing and Technology Licensing in Universities," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(2-3), pages 252-264, 04/05.
    10. Thursby, Jerry G & Jensen, Richard & Thursby, Marie C, 2001. "Objectives, Characteristics and Outcomes of University Licensing: A Survey of Major U.S. Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 59-72, January.
    11. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2007. "University licensing," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 23(4), pages 620-639, Winter.
    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. Peter Tinnemann & Jonas Özbay & Victoria A Saint & Stefan N Willich, 2010. "Patenting of University and Non-University Public Research Organisations in Germany: Evidence from Patent Applications for Medical Research Results," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(11), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Birgitte Andersen & Federica Rossi, 2011. "Intellectual property governance and knowledge creation in UK universities," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(8), pages 701-725, September.
    3. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & Aldo Geuna & Federica Rossi, 2011. "University–Industry Interactions: The Unresolved Puzzle," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 11, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    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. H. Bulut & G. Moschini, 2009. "US universities' net returns from patenting and licensing: a quantile regression analysis," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 123-137.
    2. Reinhilde Veugelers, 2014. "The Contribution of Academic Research to Innovation and Growth. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 71," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 50856, April.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. repec:wip:wpaper:4 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Jisun Kim & Tugrul Daim, 2014. "A new approach to measuring time-lags in technology licensing: study of U.S. academic research institutions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(5), pages 748-773, October.
    7. Stefan Krabel & Alexander Schacht, 2012. "The Influence of Leadership on Academic Scientists' Propensity to Commercialize Research Findings," Jena Economics Research Papers 2012-027, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    8. Darcy, Jacques & Kraemer-Eis, Helmut & Debande, Olivier & Guellec, Dominique, 2009. "Financing Technology Transfer," EIF Working Paper Series 2009/02, European Investment Fund (EIF).
    9. Devrim Göktepe-Hulten & Prashanth Mahagaonkar, 2010. "Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: in the expectation of money or reputation?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 401-423, August.
    10. Bai, Xue-Jie & Li, Zhen-Yang & Zeng, Jin, 2020. "Performance evaluation of China's innovation during the industry-university-research collaboration process—an analysis basis on the dynamic network slacks-based measurement model," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    11. William R. Meek & Matthew S. Wood, 2016. "Navigating a Sea of Change: Identity Misalignment and Adaptation in Academic Entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 40(5), pages 1093-1120, September.
    12. Markman, Gideon D. & Phan, Phillip H. & Balkin, David B. & Gianiodis, Peter T., 2005. "Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 241-263, March.
    13. 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.
    14. Scott Shane & Sharon Dolmans & Joseph Jankowski & Isabelle Reymen & A. Romme, 2015. "Academic entrepreneurship: Which inventors do technology licensing officers prefer for spinoffs?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 273-292, April.
    15. Janet Bercovitz & Maryann Feldman, 2008. "Academic Entrepreneurs: Organizational Change at the Individual Level," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 69-89, February.
    16. Phil Yihsing Yang & Yuan-Chieh Chang, 2010. "Academic research commercialization and knowledge production and diffusion: the moderating effects of entrepreneurial commitment," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(2), pages 403-421, May.
    17. Horner, Sam & Papageorgiadis, Nikolaos & Sofka, Wolfgang & Angelidou, Sofia, 2022. "Standing your ground: Examining the signaling effects of patent litigation in university technology licensing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    18. Benjamin Yeo, 2019. "What Drives University Technological Innovation Outcomes? A Re-Vitalised Investigation," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(03), pages 1-28, September.
    19. Paul Heisey & Sarah Adelman, 2011. "Research expenditures, technology transfer activity, and university licensing revenue," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 38-60, February.
    20. Annelore Huyghe & Mirjam Knockaert & Evila Piva & Mike Wright, 2016. "Are researchers deliberately bypassing the technology transfer office? An analysis of TTO awareness," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 589-607, October.
    21. Christian Sandström & Karl Wennberg & Martin W. Wallin & Yulia Zherlygina, 2018. "Public policy for academic entrepreneurship initiatives: a review and critical discussion," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1232-1256, October.

    More about this item

    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:isu:genres:12672. 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: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.html .

    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.