Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessments of technology transfer activities of US universities and associated impact of Bayh–Dole Act

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Patents and licenses are foundational to successful technology transfer in universities. In this article, the activities and performance of university patenting and licensing are studied to gauge the effectiveness of the Bayh–Dole Act (the “Act”), the most influential piece of US legislation on university technology transfer (UTT). Based on raw data from five sources, the annual numbers of patents granted, licenses signed, startup companies launched, and research expenditures are analyzed. Correlations are performed for all data presented to quantify trends over different time periods. We found that patenting and licensing activities in US universities slowed down greatly after 2000 and remained flat until the period from 2010 to 2012, when activities recover to the level of strength characterizing the period before 2000 and after the enactment of the Act. We identify that economic recessions is the major cause to the flatness of the patenting activities during 2000s. We also explain some of the differences found among different data sources and time periods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ARWU. (2013). Academic Ranking of World Universities, surveyed by Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. Retrieved September 15, 2013 from www.shanghairanking.com.

  • AUTM. (2006). AUTM Licensing Survey: 1991–2005. Association of University Technology Managers, Deerfield, IL. www.autm.net/Surveys.htm.

  • AUTM. (2013). AUTM U.S. Licensing Activity Survey: 2006–2012. Association of University Technology Managers, Deerfield, IL. www.autm.net/Surveys.htm.

  • Breitzman, A. (2013). Patent trends among small and large innovative firms during the 2007–2009 recession. Report for SBA, 1790 Analytics, Haddonfield, NJ. www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/rs411tot.pdf.

  • Britt, R. (2011). Academic research and development expenditures: Fiscal year 2009. Report No. NSF 11-313, US National Science Foundation. www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf11313/.

  • Britt, R. (2012). Universities report highest-ever R&D spending of $65 billion in FY 2011. Report No. NSF 13-305, US National Science Foundation. www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf13305.

  • COGR. (1999). The Bayh–Dole Act: A guide to the law and implementing regulations. Council on Governmental Relations, Association of Research Universities. Retrieved June 10, 2013 from www.cogr.edu/Pubs_intellectual.cfm.

  • Cohen, J. E., & Lemley, M. A. (2001). Patent scope and innovation in the software industry. California Law Review, 89(1), 1–57. Retrieved September 15, 2013 from www.jstor.org/stable/3481172.

  • Cullison, W. E. (1989). The U.S. productivity slowdown: What the experts say. Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, 75(4, July/August), 10–21. www.richmondfed.org/publications/research/economic_review/1989/er750402.cfm.

  • Geiger, R. L. (2005). Ivory tower and industrial innovation: University–industry technology transfer before and after the Bayh–Dole Act. Review of Higher Education, 29(1), 130–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, R., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (1998). Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965–88. Review of Economics & Statistics, 80, 119–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoeyer, K. (2008). The ethics of research biobanking: A critical review of the literature. Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering Reviews, 25(1), 429–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt, J. (2009). A summary of the primary causes of the housing bubble and the resulting credit crisis: A non-technical paper. Journal of Business Inquiry, 8(1), 120–129. www.uvu.edu/woodbury/jbi/volume8/journals/SummaryofthePrimaryCauseoftheHousingBubble.pdf.

  • Hornstein, A., & Krusell, P. (1996). Can technology improvements cause productivity slowdowns? In B. S. Bernanke & J. J. Rotemberg (Eds.), NBER macroeconomics annual 1996 (pp. 209–276). MIT Press. Retrieved September 15, 2013 from http://www.nber.org/chapters/c11030.

  • Ken, Y., Hsu, W.-L., & Tsai, T. Y. (2009). A study on the factors influencing license income of technology commercialization in United States Universities. In Proceedings of the Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), pp 2834–2841.

  • Kendrick, J. W. (1990). International comparisons of productivity trends and levels. Atlantic Economic Journal, 18(3), 42–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoppers, B. M. (1999). Status, sale and patenting of human genetic material: An international survey. Nature Genetics, 22, 23–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolster. (2009). Economic recession not yet visible in European patent statistics. Kolster Oy Ab, Helsinki, Finland, November 5. Retrieved May 15, 2013 from http://www.kolster.fi/eng/news-articles-brochures/.

  • Lowenstein, R. (2004). Origins of the crash: The great bubble and its undoing (pp. 110–120). New York, NY: Penguin (ISBN 1-59420-003-3, ISBN 978-1-59420-003-8).

  • Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., Sampat, B. N., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2004). Ivory tower and industrial innovation: University–industry technology transfer before and after the Bayh–Dole Act. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press. ISBN: 9780804749206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D. C., & Sampat, B. (2005). The Bayh–Dole Act of 1980 and university–industry technology transfer: A model for other OECD governments? Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(1/2), 115–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • NBER. (2013). National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved June 1, 2013 from www.nber.org.

  • Powers, J. B., & McDougall, P. (2005). Policy orientation effects on performance with licensing to start-ups and small companies. Research Policy, 34(7), 1028–1042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resnik, D. B. (2001). DNA patents and human dignity. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 29(1), 152–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schacht, W. H. (2012). The Bayh–Dole Act: Selected issues in patent policy and the commercialization of technology. CRS Report for Congress, No. RL32076, Congressional Research Service, Washington, DC.

  • Stevens, A. (2004). The enactment of Bayh–Dole. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29, 93–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2003). University licensing and the Bayh–Dole Act. Science, 301, 1052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, A. A., & Raudensky, M. (2014). Performance evaluations of technology transfer offices of major US research universities. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 9(1), 93–102. www.jotmi.org/index.php/GT/article/view/1443/899.

  • Tseng, A. A., Raudensky, M., & Li, B. (2013). Impingement flux uniformity in nozzle spraying for industrial applications. Atomization and Sprays, 23(9), 819–840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USPTO. (2013a). U.S. Patent Statistics, calendar years 1963–2012. The United States Patent and Trademark Office. Retrieved May 15, 2013 from www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/us_stat.htm.

  • USPTO. (2013b). USPTO Patent Full-Text and Image Database (PatFT). The United States Patent and Trademark.

  • Van Looy, B., Landoni, P., Callaert, J., van Pottelsberghe, B., Sapsalis, E., & Debackere, K. (2011). Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs. Research Policy, 40, 553–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, P. K., & Singh, A. (2010). University patenting activities and their link to the quantity and quality of scientific publications. Scientometrics, 83(1), 271–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WUR. (2013). World University Ranking reported by Times Higher Education, London, United Kingdom. www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This paper is based on a keynote speech delivered by the first author in 2014 International Conference on Innovation in Economics and Business (ICIEB2014), Barcelona, Spain, February 22, 2014; a short version of this paper has been published on the conference’s online system. The authors are grateful to Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports to provide the government endowed professorship to the first author at Brno University of Technology (BUT) to write this paper under Project No. HEATEAM-CZ.1.07/2.3.00/20.0188. The Honorary Chair Professorships provided by National Taiwan University of Science and Technology (Taipei) and Henan University (Kaifeng) to the first author in 2013 are also acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, 10607, Taiwan, ROC

    Ampere A. Tseng

  2. Brno University of Technology, 616 69, Brno, Czech Republic

    Miroslav Raudensky

  3. Department of Materials Science and Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, 10607, Taiwan, ROC

    Ampere A. Tseng

Authors
  1. Ampere A. Tseng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Miroslav Raudensky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ampere A. Tseng.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tseng, A.A., Raudensky, M. Assessments of technology transfer activities of US universities and associated impact of Bayh–Dole Act. Scientometrics 101, 1851–1869 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1404-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1404-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation