1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Over the past 30 years, university patenting has grown dramatically as a result of the US Bayh-Dole Act (1980) and efforts among universities to encourage faculty to pursue intellectual property. Recent reviews of the literature show that university technology transfer is primarily conceptualized in terms a relatively linear process of disclosure, patenting, and licensing. While this is the general pattern for university patenting, many faculty inventions are also patented outside the university. Using data from a national survey of academic patenters, this paper estimates probit and negative binomial regression models to assess individual and organizational factors that contribute to patenting external to the traditional technology transfer process among university scientists. Findings indicate that external patenting is a function of the science, scientist's training, and the lack of a department culture of encouraging patenting via technology transfer offices.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)111-120
Number of pages10
JournalScience and Public Policy
Volume44
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2017

Fingerprint

technology transfer
determinants
university
intellectual property
invention
act
regression
lack
science

Keywords

  • Patenting
  • Technology transfer
  • Technology transfer office
  • Universities

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Geography, Planning and Development
  • Public Administration
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Determinants of external patenting behavior among university scientists. / Hayter, Christopher; Feeney, Mary.

In: Science and Public Policy, Vol. 44, No. 1, 01.02.2017, p. 111-120.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{97e24b42fc1b440e882399c05d5ce9c0,
title = "Determinants of external patenting behavior among university scientists",
abstract = "Over the past 30 years, university patenting has grown dramatically as a result of the US Bayh-Dole Act (1980) and efforts among universities to encourage faculty to pursue intellectual property. Recent reviews of the literature show that university technology transfer is primarily conceptualized in terms a relatively linear process of disclosure, patenting, and licensing. While this is the general pattern for university patenting, many faculty inventions are also patented outside the university. Using data from a national survey of academic patenters, this paper estimates probit and negative binomial regression models to assess individual and organizational factors that contribute to patenting external to the traditional technology transfer process among university scientists. Findings indicate that external patenting is a function of the science, scientist's training, and the lack of a department culture of encouraging patenting via technology transfer offices.",
keywords = "Patenting, Technology transfer, Technology transfer office, Universities",
author = "Christopher Hayter and Mary Feeney",
year = "2017",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/scipol/scw037",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "44",
pages = "111--120",
journal = "Science and Public Policy",
issn = "0302-3427",
publisher = "Beech Tree Publishing",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Determinants of external patenting behavior among university scientists

AU - Hayter, Christopher

AU - Feeney, Mary

PY - 2017/2/1

Y1 - 2017/2/1

N2 - Over the past 30 years, university patenting has grown dramatically as a result of the US Bayh-Dole Act (1980) and efforts among universities to encourage faculty to pursue intellectual property. Recent reviews of the literature show that university technology transfer is primarily conceptualized in terms a relatively linear process of disclosure, patenting, and licensing. While this is the general pattern for university patenting, many faculty inventions are also patented outside the university. Using data from a national survey of academic patenters, this paper estimates probit and negative binomial regression models to assess individual and organizational factors that contribute to patenting external to the traditional technology transfer process among university scientists. Findings indicate that external patenting is a function of the science, scientist's training, and the lack of a department culture of encouraging patenting via technology transfer offices.

AB - Over the past 30 years, university patenting has grown dramatically as a result of the US Bayh-Dole Act (1980) and efforts among universities to encourage faculty to pursue intellectual property. Recent reviews of the literature show that university technology transfer is primarily conceptualized in terms a relatively linear process of disclosure, patenting, and licensing. While this is the general pattern for university patenting, many faculty inventions are also patented outside the university. Using data from a national survey of academic patenters, this paper estimates probit and negative binomial regression models to assess individual and organizational factors that contribute to patenting external to the traditional technology transfer process among university scientists. Findings indicate that external patenting is a function of the science, scientist's training, and the lack of a department culture of encouraging patenting via technology transfer offices.

KW - Patenting

KW - Technology transfer

KW - Technology transfer office

KW - Universities

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85019876590&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85019876590&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/scipol/scw037

DO - 10.1093/scipol/scw037

M3 - Article

VL - 44

SP - 111

EP - 120

JO - Science and Public Policy

JF - Science and Public Policy

SN - 0302-3427

IS - 1

ER -