Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Intellectual Property and Technological Development: The Challenges of Establishing University Industry Links Beatriz Borher WIPO Rio de Janeiro, May 23,

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Intellectual Property and Technological Development: The Challenges of Establishing University Industry Links Beatriz Borher WIPO Rio de Janeiro, May 23,"— Presentation transcript:

1 Intellectual Property and Technological Development: The Challenges of Establishing University Industry Links Beatriz Borher WIPO Rio de Janeiro, May 23, 2007

2 Why University-industry links are important for innovation? Knowledge – a determinant factor for Competitiveness

3 Fonte: Science and Engineering Indicators 2006 Growth (%) of the World’s Sales - Industrial Sector ( )

4 High-technology share of total manufacturing, by country/region: 1990–2003 Source: National Science board, Science and Engineering Indicators, 2006

5 The Share of the High Technology Sector in the Total of the Industrial Production – 1980, 1990, 2001 Source: National Science Board, Science and Engineering Indicators, 2004

6 R&D Investiment

7

8 R&D expenditures of selected region and countries: 1990–2003 Source: National Science board, Science and Engineering Indicators, 2006

9 Academic R&D as share of total R&D, by country/economy: Most recent year Source: National Science board, Science and Engineering Indicators, 2006

10 Science and Technology shortening distances New Technologies: i.e., Information Technology, Biotechnology A Window of Opportunity - Developing Countries The role of universities and research centers

11 Patenting by Academic institutions increased markedly between 1988 and 2003, quadrupling from about 800 to more than 3,200 patents. The growth of filling concentrates in life science and biotechnology. (National Science Foundation - Science and Engineering Indicators, 2006)

12 Source: National Science Indicator, NSF, 2006 Citations (average per patent)

13

14 Academic patenting and licensing activities: Selected years, 1991–2003 NA = not available NOTES: Number of institutions reporting given in parentheses. See appendix table SOURCE: Association of University Technology Managers, AUTM Licensing Survey (various years). See appendix table Science and Engineering Indicators 2006

15 PCT Ranking 2006 Philips Eletronics(HL)2.495 Matsushita(JP)2.344 Siemens(AL)1.480 Nokia(FI)1.036 Bosch(AL)962 3M(US)727 BASF(AL)714 Toyota(JP)704 Intel(US)690 Motorola(US)637

16 Developing Countries PCT Filling, 2006 Korea5.935 China3.910 India627 Singapure402 South Africa349 Brazil265 Mexico150

17 The first 500 in PCT Emerging Economies China (2) 13° – Huawei Technologies CO 92° – Zie Corporation India (2) 104° - Ronbaxy Lab 155° - Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) Singapure (2) 99° - National University of Singapure 432° - Agency for Science Technology and Research

18 Why University-Industry are particularly important for Developing Countries? High concentration of R&D investments on the public sector New Technologies – Higher Chances for catching-up The need to take advantage of the present assets while working for a change (more investment from the private sector)

19 Patent Filing in Brazil Source: Pedidos de Patente BR publicados, BANCO DE DADOS EPOQUE, INPI. In 1990, 8% of the patents were filed by universities and research centers. In 2003, this share grew to 26%.

20 Many challenges to facilitate university industry links Focus on TTOs International Trend – growing numbers of TTOs in the US, Europe – different models Public Policies for the establishment of TTOs – Bayh Dole, Innovation Law in Brazil The Challenge of structuring TTOs: competencies of managers, accommodating the different cultures (the production of knowledge X the marketing of knowledge)

21 Ownership of academic intellectual property in OECD countries: 2003 Debate during 2001 over awarding ownership to universities Consideration of legislation in 2003 to restrict faculty’s right to retain ownership of publicly funded research. Legislation passed in 2001 to give ownership rights to researchers. Legislation introduced in 2002 to grant ownership to universities and create technology transfer offices Private technology transfer offices authorized in 1998 Legislation passed in 2003 to allow universities to retain ownership of publicly funded research Universities, rather than government, given rights to faculty inventions in 1985 Recent debate and consideration of legislation to allow universities to retain ownership of publicly funded research x = legal basis or most common practice; na = not applicable; o = allowed by law/rule but less common OECD = Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development ownership of intellectual property funded by institutional funds varies, but publicly funded intellectual property belongs to institution performing research. president of national university or interuniversity institution determines right to ownership of invention by faculty member, based on discussions by invention committee. universities have first right to elect title to inventions resulting from federally funded research. Federal government may claim title if university does not. In certain cases, inventor may retain rights with agreement of university/federal partner and government. SOURCES: OECD, Questionnaire on the Patenting and Licensing Activities of PROs (2002); and D.C. Mowery and B.N. Sampat, International emulation of Bayh-Dole: Rash or rational? Paper presented at American Association for the Advancement of Science symposium on International Trends in the Transfer of Academic Research (February 2002). Science and Engineering Indicators 2006

22 Technology Transfer Offices To promote the use of the IP system, facilitating the interaction of the academic community with the private sector to encourage the submission of invention disclosures to evaluate the chances of protection to decide on the value of technology to facilitate the marketing of technology through licensing and through the establishment of start-ups

23 Assessing the impact of Organizational Practices on the Relative Productivity of University Technology Transfer Offices (Siegel, D., Waldman, D., Link, Albert) Research Policy, 32 (2003)

24 StakeholderActionsPrimary Motive (s) - Secondary motive (s) Organizational Culture University - Scientist Discovery of new knowledge Recognition within the scientific community Financial gain and a desire to secure additional research funding Scientific TTOWorks with faculty and firms/entre preneurs to structure deal Protect the university’ s intellectual property Facilitate technological diffusion and secure additional research funding Bureaucratic Firm - entrepreneur Commerci alizes new technology Financial gainMaintain control of proprietary technologies Entrepreneurial Characteristics of UITT Stakeholders

25 Barriers to university-industry links Common vision (TTO+ Firms + University) –Lack of understanding regarding university, corporate, or scientific norms and environments –Insufficient resources devoted to technology transfer by universities. Firm’ s vision –University too aggressive in exercising IPRs –Bureaucracy and inflexibility of university administrators –Poor marketing/technical/negotiation skills of TTOs –Public domain mentality of universities

26 Barriers to university-industry links TTO’ s vision –Insufficient rewards for university researchers –Faculty members/administrators have unrealistic expectations regarding the value of their technologies University’ s vision –Insufficient rewards for university researchers –Bureaucracy and inflexibility of university administrators

27 Conclusion: –the most critical factors are: faculty reward systems (Patents X Paper), TTO staffing-compensation practices (payment by productivity - Avoiding turn-over) cultural barriers between universities and firms The capabilities of TTO staff team (Scientist + Lawyer or Scientist+businessmen-entrepreneurs? >> second option - more efficient in marketing technology

28 WIPO’s programs to support TTOs Successful Technology Licensing (STL) –Different focuses and format tailored to countries’ and Region’ s needs and interests (Brazil, Jamaica, Singapore) Patent Drafting –Program focused on the training of Scientists- entrepreneurs IP Valuation –At the moment, as part of the STL. A program dedicated to the topic is being created IP Network Program –to optimize assets and facilitate assistance

29 Obrigada! Thank you!


Download ppt "Intellectual Property and Technological Development: The Challenges of Establishing University Industry Links Beatriz Borher WIPO Rio de Janeiro, May 23,"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google