Abstract
University technology transfer activities are increasingly important as a source of regional economic development and revenue for the university. We use regression analysis, a two-stage model and the most recent data to examine the determinants of technology transfer. Our analysis strongly support four factors, not previously examined in the literature, enhancing university technology transfer: greater rewards for faculty involvement in technology transfer, location of the university in a region with a concentration of high technology firms, a clear university mission in support of technology transfer and the experience of the university's technology transfer office.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM). The AUTM Licensing Survey, 1991-95, 1996, 1997, 1998 and 1999.
Bayh-Dole Act, 1980, Patent and Trademark Act Amendments, P.L.96-517.
Carlsson, B. and A.C. Fridh, 2002, ‘Technology Transfer in United States Universities: A Survey and Statistical Analysis’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics 12, 199–232.
DeVol, R.C., 1999, America's High-Tech Economy, Milken Institute.
Foltz, J., B. Barham, and K. Kim, 2000, ‘Universities and Agricultural Biotechnology Patent Production’, Agribusiness 16(1), 82–95.
Jensen, R. and M. Thursby, 2001, ‘Proofs and Prototypes for Sale: The Licensing of University Inventions’, American Economic Review 91(1), 240–259.
National Research Council, 1995, Research-Doctorate Programs in the U.S.: Continuity and Change. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.
Parker, D., D. Zilberman, and F. Castillo, 1998, ‘Offices of Technology Transfer’, Choices 13(1), 19–25.
Parker, D.D. and D. Zilberman, 1993, ‘University Technology Transfers: Impacts on Local and U.S.Economies’, Contemporary Policy Issues 11(2), 87–99.
Poyago-Theotoky, J., J. Beath, and D. Siegel, 2002, ‘Universities and Fundamental Research: Reflections on the Growth of University-Industry Partnerships’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 18(1), 10–21.
Rogers, E.M., Y. Yin, and J. Hoffmann, 2000, ‘Assessing the Effectiveness of Technology Transfer Offices at U.S. Research Universities’, The Journal of the Association of University Technology Managers 12, 47–80.
Schmidt, P., 2001, ‘States Push Public Universities to Commercialize Research’, The Chronicle of Higher Education, March 29, A26–27.
Siegel, D., D. Waldman, and A.N. Link, 2002a, ‘Assessing the Impact of Organizational Practices on the Relative Productivity of University Technology Transfer Offices: An Exploratory Study’, Research Policy, forthcoming.
Siegel, D.S., D.A. Waldman, L.E. Atwater, and A.N. Link, 2002b, ‘Improving the Effectiveness of Commercial Knowledge Transfers from Universities to Firms’, Journal of High Technology Management Research, forthcoming.
Thursby, J. and S. Kemp, 2002, ‘Growth and Productive Efficiency of University Intellectual Property Licensing’, Research Policy 31, 109–124.
Thursby, J., R. Jensen, and M. Thursby, 2001, ‘Objectives, Characteristics and Outcomes of University Licensing:A Survey of Major U.S. Universities’, Journal of Technology Transfer 26(1, 2), 59–72.
Tornquist, K. and L. Kallsen, 1994, ‘Out of the Ivory Tower: Characteristics of Institutions Meeting the Research Needs of Industry’, Journal of Higher Education 65(5), 523–539.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Friedman, J., Silberman, J. University Technology Transfer: Do Incentives, Management, and Location Matter?. The Journal of Technology Transfer 28, 17–30 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021674618658
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021674618658