IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rif/wpaper/8.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Commercialization of academic research. A comparison between researchers in the U.S. and Finland

Author

Listed:
  • Nikulainen, Tuomo
  • Tahvanainen, Antti-Jussi

Abstract

This paper aims to identify factors that relate to scientists’ propensity to make commercially significant scientific discoveries (inventions) and to describe how these inventions are commercialized. Based on a large survey of academics active in different fields of science at U.S. universities, the paper benchmarks the top 20 universities against the rest, identifying the impact of different institutional settings. To highlight the institutional setting, the paper also compares these results to similar survey data from Finland, representing a small, highly educated European country. This comparison addresses the ‘European paradox’ in university technology commercialization, which is characterized by high investments in university research and disappointingly low levels of inventions and related commercialization activity. The results show that the likelihood of making commercially valuable scientific discoveries in the U.S. is driven by motivations related to the identification of commercial opportunities and working in interdisciplinary research environments. There are also significant differences between the various fields of science. In the top U.S. universities, the funding sources for scientists more likely to make inventions are more diversified and unique. The results for Finland are surprisingly similar, suggesting that the cause of the ‘European paradox’ seems to originate in the commercialization of inventions rather than their generation. When focusing on inventors who actively pursue commercial goals, both U.S. and Finnish inventors prefer licensing as the most popular way of taking scientific discoveries to the market. Consulting and entrepreneurship rank second and third, respectively. The countries differ with respect to both the inventors’ motivations to commercialize inventions and their reasons to refrain from it. In Finland, the motivations for not pursuing commercial opportunities are much more prominent than among U.S. scientists.

Suggested Citation

  • Nikulainen, Tuomo & Tahvanainen, Antti-Jussi, 2013. "Commercialization of academic research. A comparison between researchers in the U.S. and Finland," ETLA Working Papers 8, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    • Handle: RePEc:rif:wpaper:8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.etla.fi/wp-content/uploads/ETLA-Working-Papers-8.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David B. Audretsch & Isabel Grilo & A. Roy Thurik (ed.), 2007. "Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurship Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3856, December.
    2. Frank T. Rothaermel & Shanti D. Agung & Lin Jiang, 2007. "University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 691-791, August.
    3. Anthony Arundel & Aldo Geuna, 2004. "Proximity and the use of public science by innovative European firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(6), pages 559-580.
    4. S. Breschi & F. Lissoni & F. Montobbio, 2007. "The Scientific Productivity Of Academic Inventors: New Evidence From Italian Data," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 101-118.
    5. Tahvanainen, Antti-Jussi, 2009. "Finnish University Technology Transfer in a Whirl of Changes - a Brief Summary," Discussion Papers 1188, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    6. Ajay Agrawal & Rebecca Henderson, 2002. "Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 44-60, January.
    7. Mansfield, Edwin & Lee, Jeong-Yeon, 1996. "The modern university: contributor to industrial innovation and recipient of industrial R&D support," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(7), pages 1047-1058, October.
    8. Etzkowitz, Henry & Webster, Andrew & Gebhardt, Christiane & Terra, Branca Regina Cantisano, 2000. "The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 313-330, February.
    9. Dietz, James S. & Bozeman, Barry, 2005. "Academic careers, patents, and productivity: industry experience as scientific and technical human capital," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 349-367, April.
    10. Segarra-Blasco, Agusti­ & Arauzo-Carod, Josep-Maria, 2008. "Sources of innovation and industry-university interaction: Evidence from Spanish firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1283-1295, September.
    11. 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.
    12. Tahvanainen, Antti-Jussi & Nikulainen, Tuomo, 2011. "Commercialization at Finnish Universities - Researchers Perspectives on the Motives and Challenges of Turning Science into Business," Discussion Papers 1234, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    13. Tahvanainen, Antti-Jussi & Hermans, Raine, 2008. "Value Creation in the Interface of Industry and Academy - A Case Study of Intellectual Capital of Technology Transfer Offices At US Universities," Discussion Papers 1148, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    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. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 275-314, Elsevier.
    2. Perkmann, Markus & King, Zella & Pavelin, Stephen, 2011. "Engaging excellence? Effects of faculty quality on university engagement with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 539-552, May.
    3. Pablo D’Este & Puay Tang & Surya Mahdi & Andy Neely & Mabel Sánchez-Barrioluengo, 2013. "The pursuit of academic excellence and business engagement: is it irreconcilable?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 481-502, May.
    4. Kasia Zalewska-Kurek & Klaudia Egedova & Peter A. Th. M. Geurts & Hans E. Roosendaal, 2018. "Knowledge transfer activities of scientists in nanotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 139-158, February.
    5. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.
    6. Dirk Czarnitzki & Christian Rammer & Andrew Toole, 2014. "University spin-offs and the “performance premium”," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 309-326, August.
    7. Riccardo Crescenzi & Andrea Filippetti & Simona Iammarino, 2017. "Academic inventors: collaboration and proximity with industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 730-762, August.
    8. Victoria Galan-Muros & Todd Davey, 2019. "The UBC ecosystem: putting together a comprehensive framework for university-business cooperation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1311-1346, August.
    9. 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.
    10. Aschhoff, Birgit & Grimpe, Christoph, 2014. "Contemporaneous peer effects, career age and the industry involvement of academics in biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 367-381.
    11. Robert Tijssen & Wouter van de Klippe & Alfredo Yegros, 2020. "Localization, regionalization and globalization of university‐business research co‐operation in the United Kingdom," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(5), pages 1215-1236, October.
    12. Compagnucci, Lorenzo & Spigarelli, Francesca, 2020. "The Third Mission of the university: A systematic literature review on potentials and constraints," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    13. Rachel Levy & Pascale Roux & Sandrine Wolff, 2009. "An analysis of science–industry collaborative patterns in a large European University," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 1-23, February.
    14. Magerman, Tom & Looy, Bart Van & Debackere, Koenraad, 2015. "Does involvement in patenting jeopardize one’s academic footprint? An analysis of patent-paper pairs in biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 1702-1713.
    15. Aldo Geuna & Alessandro Muscio, 2008. "The governance of University knowledge transfer," SPRU Working Paper Series 173, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    16. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & M. Ángeles Martínez, 2018. "Does technological diversification spur university patenting?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 96-119, February.
    17. Irene Ramos-Vielba & Nicolas Robinson-Garcia & Richard Woolley, 2022. "A value creation model from science-society interconnections: Archetypal analysis combining publications, survey and altmetric data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(6), pages 1-23, June.
    18. Nelson, Andrew J., 2012. "Putting university research in context: Assessing alternative measures of production and diffusion at Stanford," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 678-691.
    19. Anna Kochenkova & Rosa Grimaldi & Federico Munari, 2016. "Public policy measures in support of knowledge transfer activities: a review of academic literature," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 407-429, June.
    20. Subramanian, Annapoornima M. & Nishant, Rohit & Van De Vrande, Vareska & Hang, Chang Chieh, 2022. "Technology transfer from public research institutes to SMEs: A configurational approach to studying reverse knowledge flow benefits," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    academic inventions; innovation; commercialization of research; academic entrepreneurship;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:rif:wpaper:8. 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: Kaija Hyvönen-Rajecki (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/etlaafi.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.