IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ulp/sbbeta/2010-06.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The determinants of scientific research agenda: Why do academic inventors choose to perform patentable versus non-patentable research?

Author

Listed:
  • Hussler Caroline
  • Pénin Julien

Abstract

This paper explores the determinants of scientific research agenda. By using an original dataset that includes extensive information about 269 French academic inventors, we analyze why scientists choose to perform patentable versus non-patentable research. Usually economic studies tackle this problem by using the number of invented patents as a proxy of researchers’ willingness to perform patentable research. The originality of the paper is that, in addition to the number of invented patents, we rely on a survey-base dependant variable that indicates whether or not scientists acknowledge orienting deliberately their research towards patentable areas. Our results indicate that past experience with respect to patenting activity matters: academic inventors who have already experienced a successful technology transfer are more inclined to orient their research towards patentable domains. Similarly, the institutional environment plays an explanatory role, whereas conversely, scientific discipline, age and individual research performance do not seem to affect the decision to orient research towards patentable areas. Yet, age and scientific performance positively influence the number of patents scholars effectively invent.

Suggested Citation

  • Hussler Caroline & Pénin Julien, 2010. "The determinants of scientific research agenda: Why do academic inventors choose to perform patentable versus non-patentable research?," Working Papers of BETA 2010-06, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    • Handle: RePEc:ulp:sbbeta:2010-06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://beta.u-strasbg.fr/WP/2010/2010-06.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicolas Carayol, 2004. "Academic incentives and research organization for patenting at a large French university," Post-Print hal-00279232, HAL.
    2. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Glänzel, Wolfgang & Hussinger, Katrin, 2009. "Heterogeneity of patenting activity and its implications for scientific research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 26-34, February.
    3. Carayol, Nicolas & Dalle, Jean-Michel, 2007. "Sequential problem choice and the reward system in Open Science," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 167-191, June.
    4. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2003. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Nicolas Carayol, 2007. "Academic Incentives, Research Organization And Patenting At A Large French University," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 119-138.
    6. 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.
    7. Stefano Breschi & Francesco Lissoni & Fabio Montobbio, 2005. "From Publishing to Patenting : do Productive Scientists Turn into Academi Inventors ?," Revue d'Économie Industrielle, Programme National Persée, vol. 110(1), pages 75-102.
    8. Joaquín Azagra-Caro & Nicolas Carayol & Patrick Llerena, 2006. "Patent Production at a European Research University: Exploratory Evidence at the Laboratory Level," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 257-268, March.
    9. Kira R. Fabrizio, 2007. "University patenting and the pace of industrial innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 505-534, August.
    10. Nicola Baldini, 2008. "Negative effects of university patenting: Myths and grounded evidence," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 75(2), pages 289-311, May.
    11. Patrick Cohendet & Matthieu Farcot & Julien Pénin, 2009. "Intellectual property in a knowledge-based economy : Patents to include vs. patents to exclude," Working Papers of BETA 2009-15, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    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. Meixing Dai, 2012. "External Constraint and Financial Crises with Balance Sheet Effects," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4), pages 567-585, March.
    2. Pénin, Julien, 2011. "Sur les conséquences du brevet d’invention dans la science : résultats d’une enquête auprès des inventeurs académiques français," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 87(2), pages 137-173, juin.

    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. Cornelia Lawson, 2013. "Academic Inventions Outside the University: Investigating Patent Ownership in the UK," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 385-398, July.
    2. Landry, Réjean & Saïhi, Malek & Amara, Nabil & Ouimet, Mathieu, 2010. "Evidence on how academics manage their portfolio of knowledge transfer activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1387-1403, December.
    3. Julien Pénin, 2009. "On the consequences of university patenting: What can we learn by asking directly to academic inventors?," Working Papers of BETA 2009-04, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    4. Hottenrott, Hanna & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2010. "Industry funding of university research and scientific productivity," ZEW Discussion Papers 10-105, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Heike Grimm & Johannes Jaenicke, 2015. "Testing the causal relationship between academic patenting and scientific publishing in Germany: Crowding-out or reinforcement?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 512-535, June.
    6. Cornelia Lawson, 2013. "Academic patenting: the importance of industry support," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 509-535, August.
    7. 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.
    8. René Carraz, 2013. "Academic patenting and the scientific enterprise: Lessons from a Japanese university," Working Papers of BETA 2013-12, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    9. 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.
    10. Crespi, Gustavo & D'Este, Pablo & Fontana, Roberto & Geuna, Aldo, 2011. "The impact of academic patenting on university research and its transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 55-68, February.
    11. Nicolas Carayol & Elodie Carpentier, 2022. "The spread of academic invention: a nationwide case study on French data (1995–2012)," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1395-1421, October.
    12. Hanna Hottenrott & Cornelia Lawson, 2014. "Research grants, sources of ideas and the effects on academic research," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 109-133, March.
    13. 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.
    14. Buenstorf, Guido, 2009. "Is commercialization good or bad for science? Individual-level evidence from the Max Planck Society," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 281-292, March.
    15. Fini, Riccardo & Lacetera, Nicola & Shane, Scott, 2010. "Inside or outside the IP system? Business creation in academia," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 1060-1069, October.
    16. Nasirov, Shukhrat & Joshi, Amol M., 2023. "Minding the communications gap: How can universities signal the availability and value of their scientific knowledge to commercial organizations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    17. Francesco Lissoni, 2013. "Intellectual property and university–industry technology transfer," Chapters, in: Faïz Gallouj & Luis Rubalcaba & Paul Windrum (ed.), Public–Private Innovation Networks in Services, chapter 7, pages 164-194, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Larsen, Maria Theresa, 2011. "The implications of academic enterprise for public science: An overview of the empirical evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 6-19, February.
    19. Öcalan-Özel, Sıla & Pénin, Julien, 2019. "Invention characteristics and the degree of exclusivity of university licenses: The case of two leading French research universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1445-1457.
    20. Pénin, Julien, 2011. "Sur les conséquences du brevet d’invention dans la science : résultats d’une enquête auprès des inventeurs académiques français," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 87(2), pages 137-173, juin.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    University; patent; scientific agenda; technology transfer; academic inventors.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    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:ulp:sbbeta:2010-06. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bestrfr.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.