1. Tõnis Mets Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia Aleksei Kelli, Ave Mets University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia Tiit Tiimann Kaunas, May 28-29, 2015 Strategic indicators of patenting in transition: What to measure? 1

2. Research and Innovation Policy Monitoring Programme TIPS Commissioned by the Estonian Ministry of Education and Research. Aims to provide high quality research competencies for policymaking and strategic development of Estonian research, development and innovation (RDI) policy. Implemented by the University of Tartu and Tallinn University of Technology.

3. Budget and Financing Period: January 2011 – August 2015 Total budget: EUR 1 272 412 Financiers: European Social Foundation (85%) National structural funds (10%) Own financing from two universities (5%)

4. Work Packages 1. Intellectual property rights (IPR) in research and development 2. Public funding of research activities in Estonia 3. Leadership and management models of Estonian research and development institutions 4. Management of cooperation between higher education institutions and industry 5. Complex analysis of research, development and innovation policy 6. Internationalisation of research, development and innovation activities 7. Designing the Estonian research, development and innovation strategy for 2014–2020

5. Programme Outputs Policy recommendations for policymakers Public dissemination of research results through workshops, conferences, written reports, published articles, policy papers etc → fosters co-operation between government offices, universities and the private sector and increases the role of science and research as a supporter of the Estonian economy Main conferences: Cross-border regional co-operation with Nordic countries on RDI policies (2013), 60 participants Estonian research as a holder of the continuity of our state: challenges and opportunities (2014), 120 participants Business–research cooperation: myths and reality (2015), 190 participants

6. Problem (of IP) & Aim The role of IP/patenting in welfare and economic development? Intensity of patenting is low in low- income regions inhibiting high-tech production. Statistical approach, however, does not provide any insights into the real contribution of IP and how to reach welfare goals. Approximately half of PCT patent applications belong to universities in the Baltic States. The aim of the paper is to conceptualize and suggest strategic indicators of IP for the small efficiency- driven economy on the example of Estonia. 6

7. Patents and economic development 7 Based on WIPO

8. 8 Quantitative indicators Innovation Union Scoreboard (EU 2015)

9. Qualitative indicators IP strategy in R&D strategy framework Active & non-linear: the substantial role of IP (decisive in some sectors) in R&D strategy design, planning and funding decisions and supporting collaborative research – “soft & hard measures”. Regular sector R&D and IP audit, and prognosis, including due diligence and feasibility study for research programs and industry sector Support measures (state order) for IP-based knowledge transfer and spin-off programs. IP support for SMEs 9

10. Cases of two universities Uppsala University Re-orientation from IP profit (earning income) to innovation support by universities Indirect TT “soft measures” AIMday ® University of Tartu 10

11. Patent applications of personnel of the Uppsala & Tartu universities 11

12. Patent applications per 100 articles of the WoS by the personnel of Uppsala & Tartu u-s 12

13. Sizes of patent families of two universities by classes, filings 2000-2010 13

14. Discussion and conclusion Evaluation of the university-industry collaboration should not be limited by direct commercialisation or knowledge (IP) transfer indicators (IP licensing, sales, spin-offs). Real (not formal) collaboration between academia and firms as indirect commercialization should be counted. The patenting intensity of personnel of the Estonian university is comparable to their Swedish colleagues University institutional patent ownership rule works with only 1/3 of patent applications 14

15. Discussion and conclusion Using only registered IPR (quantitative indicator), especially in small (innovation) transition country, is not informative for strategy purposes. Strategy models and qualitative behavioural patterns of benchmark countries are the best start point for building up own IP indicators’ system. More important is to follow qualitative patterns of pathways reaching innovation-based economic development. Wise usage of patentometrics. Aligning public R&D and industry? 15

16. Q&A, your advice? Strategic indicators of patenting in transition: What to measure? 16