Innovation in the U.S. Service Sector

This paper contributes to ard a better understanding of innovation in the service sector by focusing on the disparate nature of R&D in the U.S. service sector as learned through case studies of the U.S. telecommunications, financial services, systems integration services, and research and development testing services industries. Based on this understanding of the nature and scope of R&D therein, a new policy-oriented model of innovation specific to the service sector is posited. Also, policy recommendations are offered with regard to the public sector’s collection and interpretation of R&D data related to the service sector.      

New challenges for universities in the knowledge triangle

This paper discusses the role of higher education institutions within the framework of the knowledge triangle between academic education, scientific research and innovation, as it has gained importance in recent years as a framework for innovation policies especially in the OECD and Europe. First, complementary concepts of universities’ outreach activities and extended role model such as ‘third mission’, ‘triple helix’, ‘entrepreneurial or civic university’ models and ‘smart specialization’ are reflected against their fit with the concept of the knowledge triangle, also with respect to new requirements for university governance. Second, a new understanding of spillovers between public sectors research and the business sector according to knowledge triangle is presented.

     

关于数字环境下大学图书馆职能扩展与创新的初步分析

本文通过对数字时代大学图书馆面临的挑战和机遇进行分析,结合当前图书馆建设的实践,指出与其他馆、出版业以及搜索服务商合作进行数字图书馆建设;参与学术出版,建设大学知识机构库;支持远程访问;实施信息素养教育;构建信息共享空间等职能扩展与创新是大学图书馆创新的主要方面。     

Medical school forensic psychiatry units in health care delivery facilities rather than criminal justice institutions: an alternative model

We have presented a model for developing forensic psychiatric treatment and teaching services of a medical school Department of Psychiatry, but where these services are the basic comprehensive health care delivery system for the entire community. These offer consultative and treatment services for adult and family court clinic, psychiatric forensic services, of forensic psychiatry open bed and medium security-type bed, as well as day hospital and outpatient services. All of these are sited in the normal health care delivery system of the university teaching hospitals and its patient treatment, teaching, and research facilities. Consultative services are offered on request to the criminal justice system, but the basic health care delivery system is controlled administratively by the ordinary university teaching hospital authorities and exists as a one of a kind unit at the Royal Ottawa Hospital. The Royal Ottawa Hospital is a private nonprofit hospital, with its own Board of Trustees, and is affiliated with the medical school, as part of a major university network. We believe it important to present this model for an overall forensic psychiatric service, in contradistinction to the more commonly established forensic psychiatric facilities in state mental hospitals, in a special facility for the criminally insane, or in a criminal justice system institution such as a penitentiary. We believe that our model for forensic psychiatric facilities has great advantages for the patient. Here the patient is treated in a specialized facility (as all psychiatric patients with specialized problems should be); but one which is a specialized forensic facility, within the range of specialized psychiatric facilities that are needed by an urban community.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Effects on academia-industry collaboration of extending university property rights

Several recent studies show European university scientists contributing far more frequently to company-owned patented inventions than they do to patents owned by universities or by the academic scientists themselves. Recognising the significance of this channel for direct commercialisation of European academic research makes it important to understand its response to current Bayh-Dole inspired reforms of university patenting rights. This paper studies the contribution from university scientists to inventions patented by dedicated biotech firms (DBFs) specialised in drug discovery in Denmark and Sweden, which in this respect share a number of structural and historic characteristics. It examines effects of the Danish Law on University Patenting (LUP) effective January 2000, which transferred to the employer university rights to patents on inventions made by Danish university scientists alone or as participants in collaborative research with industry. Sweden so far has left property rights with academic scientists, as they also were in Denmark prior to the reform. Consequently, comparison of Danish and Swedish research collaboration before and after LUP offers a quasi-controlled experiment, bringing out effects on joint research of university IPR reform. In original data on all 3,640 inventor contributions behind the 1,087 patents filed by Danish and Swedish DBFs 1990–2004, Difference-in-Difference regressions uncover notable LUP-induced effects in the form of significant reductions in contributions from Danish domestic academic inventors, combined with a simultaneous substitutive increase of non-Danish academic inventors. A moderate increase in academic inventions channelled into university owned-patents does appear after LUP. But the larger part of the inventive potential of academia, previously mobilised into company-owned patents, seems to have been rendered inactive as a result of the reform. As a likely explanation of these effects the paper suggests that exploratory research, the typical target of joint university-DBF projects in drug discovery, fits poorly into LUP’s requirement for ex ante allocation of IPR. The Pre-LUP convention of IPR allocated to the industrial partner in return for research funding and publication rights to the academic partner may have offered more effective contracting for this type of research. There are indications that LUP, outside the exploratory agenda of drug discovery, offers a more productive framework for inventions requiring less complicated and uncertain post-discovery R&D.

The commercialization of academic patents: black boxes,pipelines, and Rubik’s cubes

Drawing on histories of technological innovation originating from research by faculty at The Pennsylvania State University and Johns Hopkins University, this paper presents evidence for a “technology” as well as an “intellectual property rights” research approach to the commercialization of academic patents. By describing how inventor and firm activities and strategies affect the technical development and commercial positioning of university patents, a technology focus adds depth to the general proposition that university patents are embryonic technologies. It likewise serves as an analytical probe to reconsider other mainstream propositions about university technology transfer.     

Innovation in the public sphere: reimagining law and economics to solve the National Institutes of Health publishing controversy

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) are responsible for the largest proportion of biological science funding in the United States. To protect the public interest in access to publicly funded scientific research, the NIH amended terms and conditions in funding agreements after 2009, requiring funded Principal Investigators to deposit published copies of research in PubMed, an Open Access repository. Principal Investigators have partially complied with this depository requirement, and the NIH have signaled an intent to enforce grant agreement terms and conditions by stopping funding deposits and engaging in legal action.The global economic value of accessible knowledge offers a unique opportunity for courts to evaluate the impact of enforcing ‘openness’ contract terms and conditions within domestic and international economies for public and economic benefit. Through judicial enforcement of Open Access terms and conditions, the United States can increase economic efficiency for university libraries, academic participants, and public consumers, while accelerating global innovation, improving financial returns on science funding investments, and advancing more efficient scientific publishing models.     

Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: a conceptual framework

The characteristics and behavior of university spinoff activity is an important subject in economic and management studies literature. Such studies merit research because it is suggested that university innovations stimulate economies by spurring product development, by creating new industries, and by contributing to employment and wealth creation. For this reason, universities have come to be highly valued in terms of the economic potential of their research efforts. The aim of this paper is to offer a framework for the study of academic entrepreneurship that explains different aspects of university spinoff behavior in a coherent way. We suggest that the existing literature on this topic can be categorized into six separate streams and synthesized in a framework that captures the determinants and consequences of spinoff activity.      

Reframing the Role of Universities in the Development of Regional Innovation Systems

The role of universities in regional innovation has evolved over the last 20 years. This evolution has seen the emergence of a third role of universities that has re-shaped and transformed their two traditional functions of teaching and research. This paper proposes a conceptual framework for analysing variation in the roles performed by universities in the development of regional innovation systems. This framework is based on the triple helix model of university, industry, government relations, the literature on university engagement and the innovation systems literature, more generally. The framework is applied to a comparative study of three non core-metropolitan universities in Australia. A number of insights and issues are drawn in regard to conceptualising the role of universities in regional systems.     

Measuring the Economic Impact of University-Based Research

University research has propelled the United States into world-class leadership, but continuing that momentum in the 21st century requires major funding. Both the public and private sector have risen to meet that financial challenge through increased support of university-based research. Since 1995, New York Governor George E. Pataki and the New York Legislature have fostered the growth of high technology and biotechnology industries by investing more than $1 billion in superlative research laboratories and academic centers. However, with this increased outlay comes the demand for greater accountability. Both public and private stakeholders expect applied research to have economic impact through a unique combination of good science plus good business producing wealth and opportunity for all citizens. However, measuring the economic impact of university research proves difficult. This paper suggests a possible method for a public funding agency to quantify and tabulate research outputs such that economic impacts are reported as a percent return on investment or ROI. With this model, multiple stakeholders can evaluate divergent research technologies using a measurement that is familiar to scientists, business leaders, elected officials, and the public.     

The mouse that trolled: the long and tortuous history of a gene mutation patent that became an expensive impediment to Alzheimer's research

This case study presents the tale of the academic discovery of a rare mutation for early-onset Alzheimer''s disease that was patented by a sole inventor and licensed to a non-practicing entity (NPE), the Alzheimer''s Institute of America (AIA). Our aims are (1) to relate this story about patents, research tools, and impediments to medical progress, and (2) to inform ongoing debates about how patents affect research, disposition of university inventions, and the distribution of benefits from publicly funded research. We present an account of the hunt for Alzheimer''s genes, their patenting, assignment, and enforcement based on literature, litigation records and judicial decisions. While AIA''s litigation eventually failed, its suits against 18 defendants, including one university, one foundation, and three non-profit organizations were costly in court years, legal fees, and expert time. Reasons for the failure included non-disclosure of co-inventors, State laws on ownership and assignment of university inventions, and enablement. We discuss the policy implications of the litigation, questioning the value of patents in the research ecosystem and the role of NPEs (“patent trolls”) in biotechnological innovation. The case illustrates tactics that may be deployed against NPEs, including, avenues to invalidate patent claims, Authorization and Consent, legislative reforms specifically targeting NPEs, reforms in the America Invents Act, and judicial action and rules for judicial proceedings. In the highly competitive research environment of Alzheimer''s genetics in the 1990s, patents played a minor, subordinate role in spurring innovation. The case produces a mixed message about the patent system. It illustrates many mistakes in how patents were obtained, administered, and enforced, but, eventually, the legal system rectified these mistakes, albeit slowly, laboriously, and at great cost.     

Public policy for academic entrepreneurship initiatives: a review and critical discussion

This article provides a critical review and discussion of current literature on technology transfer, incubators, and academic entrepreneurship. Drawing upon the notion of robustness in social systems and public choice theory, we review, code, and taxonomize 166 studies to assess the likelihood that these initiatives will generate innovation and economic growth. We find that academic entrepreneurship initiatives are characterized by conflicting goals, weak incentive structures for universities and academics, and are contextually dependent upon factors such as university strength. Our results suggest that there are critical boundary conditions that are unlikely to be fulfilled when universities and policymakers enact policies to support academic entrepreneurship initiatives. Policymakers therefore need to be cautious in the potential design of such initiatives. We discuss how technology transfer from universities might be better achieved through alternative mechanisms such as contract research, licensing, consulting and increased labor mobility among researchers.     

The university’s unknown knowledge: tacit knowledge, technology transfer and university spin-offs findings from an empirical study based on the theory of knowledge

The assumption that research findings provide the basis for spin-off projects at universities has been found up to now in literature and the practice. Supported by the theory of knowledge, the empirical study presented here shows that this idea is too limited. Only 45 % of spin-offs use codified research findings from the university, while 55 % use tacit knowledge that was acquired at the university. These spin-offs use knowledge beyond research findings, starting companies in the shadow of publications by academic institutions and drawing from the realm of tacit knowledge at universities. Tacit start-up knowledge is present in all scientific disciplines of universities; even the exploitation- and patent-oriented engineering sciences account for almost half of the start-ups. Start-ups based on tacit knowledge lead to both technology-oriented and service companies. They also do not differ from codified knowledge-based start-ups in the number of jobs that they create. The discovery of the tacit knowledge spin-offs as a phenomenon has an entire series of implications for the practice and research. The tacit start-up potential was not considered previously in the university promotion instruments and start-up consultancies. Furthermore, we can assume that tacit knowledge-based start-ups are only an initial indication of the innovation potential within the tacit realm of knowledge for universities and research institutes.     

Parting the ivory curtain: understanding how universities support a diverse set of startups

Universities are widely recognized as a critical source of technological innovation and are heralded for the entrepreneurial ventures cultivated within their walls. To date, most research has focused on academic entrepreneurship—new ventures that spin out of academic laboratories. However, universities also give rise to startups that do not directly exploit knowledge generated within academic laboratories. Such firms—and the societal and economic benefits they create—are an important contribution of modern universities. We propose a framework for understanding the full scope of university entrepreneurship and its driving factors, with the goal of providing scholars, university administrators, and policymakers with insights regarding the resources required to foster entrepreneurship from within the ivory tower.     

What drives patenting and commerzialisation activity at East German universities? The role of new public policy, institutional environment and individual prior knowledge

New public policy enacted in Germany in 2002, intends to increase the number of patent registrations of academic entrepreneurs, and facilitate the commercialization and spillover of innovation generated at public universities. Results from a survey amongst university patentees in two new German Laender, Thuringia and Saxony, accomplished in 2009, are reported focusing on government policy, university support, and the role of technology transfer in an organizational and cultural context. Using a two-step cluster analysis, the survey data are used to profile the patentees and to investigate whether personal attributes and institutional environment contribute to academic entrepreneurship. Empirical findings show that advanced age and non-university working experience contribute significantly to entrepreneurial behavior. New public policy contributes to facilitate patent registrations, but professional expertise for the commercialization of knowledge as well as financial and organizational support schemes needs further improvement. This explains why patent registrations have slightly increased but also why universities report very low levels of commercialization through entrepreneurship. We offer policy recommendations to overcome the existent barriers, among them, the professionalization of technology transfer or targeted marketing for registered patents.     

AI research and data protection: Can the same rules apply for commercial and academic research under the GDPR?

The paper examines how the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is applied to the development of AI products and services, drawing attention to the differences between academic and commercial research. The GDPR aims to encourage innovation by providing several exemptions from its strict rules for scientific research. Still, the GDPR defines scientific research in a broad manner, which includes academic and commercial research. However, corporations conducting commercial research might not have in place a similar level of ethical and institutional safeguards as academic researchers. Furthermore, corporate secrecy and opaque algorithms in AI research might pose barriers to oversight. The aim of this paper is to stress the limits of the GDPR research exemption and to find the proper balance between privacy and innovation. The paper argues that commercial AI research should not benefit from the GDPR research exemption unless there is a public interest and has similar safeguards to academic research, such as review by research ethics committees. Since the GDPR provides this broad exemption, it is crucial to clarify the limits and requirements of scientific research, before the application of AI drastically transforms this field.     

Coexistence, conflict, and cooperation: public policies toward medical devices

Medical devices include thousands of products, many of which have greatly contributed to the quality of health care. As devices have proliferated, so have public policies that affect them. The federal government intervened to promote three fundamental values: safety by federal regulation, innovation through federal funding of research and development, and access by providing services under Medicare. The policies generally coexisted without conflict. However, two recent developments--the advent of cost containment and the expansion of the tort liability system--present a potentially disruptive influence on these policies, and threaten to undermine the values they serve. Because cost restraints are inevitable and the tort system provides consumer protection, the challenge for policymakers is to reconcile them with the values of safety, innovation, and access. The proposals presented here seek to promote coordination to protect those values without imposing unacceptable costs on the health care system.     

Benefactors or Beneficiary—The Role of Industry in the Support of University Research Equipment

This paper examines the role of industry in the support of academic infrastructure, in particular university research equipment. Although the United Kingdom provides the framework for discussion the described situation should be a familiar one in most countries. The argument is constructed around the perceptions, opinions and positions of universities, government and industry. Drawing on results from a survey of academic departments the equipment situation at UK universities is outlined. Following that the position of the Government attempting to attract industrial support for university research equipment is discussed. And finally, industry's views of where the demarcation between public and private responsibility lies are presented.     

Mapping research on strategic alliances and innovation: a co-citation analysis

Using co-citation analysis, the present study attempts to rationalize and organize the combined alliance and innovation literature in order to determine its intellectual structure (i.e. its shared attributes such as models, theories, methods, findings, and implications), as well as to gain a deeper understanding of the most important research trends. More specifically, our goals are: (1) to delineate the intellectual structure of research on alliance and innovation, as represented in the academic literature; (2) to determine the subfields that constitute the intellectual structure and the relationships, if any, between these subfields; (3) to identify contributions that play a pivotal role in bridging two or more conceptual domains of research; and finally, (4) to map the intellectual structure in a two-dimensional space in order to visualize spatial distances between intellectual themes. Implications for future studies are then drawn.