30 years after Bayh–Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship
Highlights
► We address various aspects of academic entrepreneurship in the 30th anniversary of the Bay-Dole act. ► We describe the evolving role of universities in the commercialization of research results over the last 30 years. ► We synthesize papers from the special section and outline an agenda for future research.
Introduction
In recent years, there has been a rapid increase in technology-based economic development initiatives, focused mainly on stimulating technological entrepreneurship in universities via patenting, licensing, start-up creation, and university–industry partnerships (for reviews of different channels of university technology commercialization see Phan and Siegel, 2006, Lockett et al., 2005, Siegel et al., 2007). We refer to this activity as “academic entrepreneurship,” since the objective of such efforts is commercialization of innovations developed by academic scientists (for a comprehensive review of the literature on academic entrepreneurship, see Rothaermel et al., 2007).
The 30-year anniversary of the Bayh–Dole Act 1980 is an opportune time to assess the antecedents and consequences of academic entrepreneurship. The Bayh–Dole Act contributed to significant changes in how universities commercialize and diffuse technologies developed in their research laboratories and elsewhere on campus. While there is a consensus that these trends have profound managerial and policy implications for those involved in university research and commercialization (Siegel et al., 2007), some question whether the current institutional arrangements for research commercialization are socially optimal (Litan et al., 2007, Kenney and Patton, 2009).
On the positive side, there is the potential for promoting technology commercialization and generating revenue for the university, which is typically re-invested in academic research (Siegel et al., 2004). On the other hand, there has been some concern regarding the dangers of university commercialization, many of which pre-date the enactment of Bayh–Dole (Mowery et al., 2004). This concern has increasingly been narrowed down to particular practices, such as the transfer of materials, publication delays, and material transfer agreements (Blumenthal et al., 1997, Louis et al., 2001, Mowery and Ziedonis, 2007, Walsh et al., 2007).
There is also some debate regarding the contribution that the Bayh–Dole Act has made to society more generally (Verspagen, 2006). The evidence remains mixed on the societal impact, with the strongest criticisms resulting from anecdotal observations (e.g., Press and Washburn, 2000). Academic research has found little systematic evidence of a destruction of the open culture of science or to support the assertion that universities are performing less basic research (Thursby and Thursby, this special section; Welsh et al., 2008).
Given the debate regarding these issues in the scientific literature and the attention of different stakeholders worldwide, it is timely to reassess progress and rethink the direction of policy and practice. An assessment of institutional and public policies and managerial practices can yield new insights for reforming existing policies and creating new mechanisms to support academic entrepreneurship. This special section aims to contribute to such a reassessment.
In the following section, we provide a background to the emergence of academic entrepreneurship offering a qualitative assessment of its antecedents and consequences and focusing on changes in legislation governing the ownership of intellectual property at universities. Section 3 proposes an integrative framework for developing academic entrepreneurship competencies. This is followed by a description of the papers contained in the special section. Next, we outline an agenda for additional research on academic entrepreneurship. The final section considers policy implications.
Section snippets
Rationale for academic entrepreneurship
There is widespread global agreement on the value of promoting the commercialization of knowledge and research generated at public and private universities. A re-conceptualization of the role of public research systems began during the late 1970s in the U.S., following growing concern about the apparent deterioration of national comparative advantage in manufacturing and, in particular, the increasing competition from Japanese firms (Coriat and Orsi, 2002, Florida and Kenney, 1990).
Forms of academic entrepreneurship
While recognizing that it is difficult from an empirical point of view to make an assessment of the benefits related to Bayh–Dole Act like laws, there is consensus that this legislation represents an important trigger for a re-evaluation of the role of the university in society. Recent studies of the manner by which university-generated knowledge diffuses to society have recognized that the university has a multi-faceted role in transferring knowledge (Bishop et al., 2011, Lester, 2005, Wright
Papers in the special section
The 30th anniversary of the enactment of Bayh–Dole is an opportune time to re-evaluate the managerial and policy implications of academic entrepreneurship. An assessment of institutional and public policies and managerial practices can yield new insights for reforming existing policies and creating new mechanisms to support academic entrepreneurship. The special section contains articles that address these issues. They include multiple levels of analysis and examine various aspects of research
Future research agenda
In this section, we outline a future research agenda on academic entrepreneurship, in terms of the three levels of analysis identified above: system, university and individual. For each level we consider further research in terms of general issues as well as in respect of the different dimensions of knowledge and technology transfer from universities. We also highlight a number of measurement and method issues that arise in conducting further research. The main research questions we identify
Conclusions and policy implications
The evidence reviewed in this article and the special section of the journal indicates that the rise of commercialization associated with the Bayh–Dole Act has not resulted in less basic research (Thursby and Thursby, this special section). Bayh–Dole may have also stimulated an increase in start-up activity at universities, which is accelerating due to a growing emphasis on that dimension on university technology commercialization. The social networks that spawn such activity are critical, but
References (101)
- et al.
Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data
Research Policy
(2004) - et al.
Institutional changes and the commercialization of academic knowledge: a study of Italian universities’ patenting activities between 1965 and 2002
Research Policy
(2006) Implementing Bayh–Dole-like laws: faculty problems and their impact on university patenting activity
Research Policy
(2009)- et al.
The mechanisms of collaboration in inventive teams: composition, social networks, and geography
Research Policy
(2011) - et al.
Gaining from interactions with universities: multiple methods for nurturing absorptive capacity
Research Policy
(2011) How do technology clusters emerge and become sustainable?: social network formation and inter-firm mobility within the San Diego biotechnology cluster
Research Policy
(2007)- et al.
Spinning out new ventures: a typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions
Journal of Business Venturing
(2005) - et al.
Establishing a new regime of intellectual property rights in the United States
Origins, Content and Problems Research Policy
(2002) - et al.
University–industry linkages in the UK: what are the factors determining the variety of interactions with industry?
Research Policy
(2007) - et al.
Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?
Research Policy
(2003)
Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity
Research Policy
The role of social embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship: a comparison of electrical engineering and computer sciences at UC Berkeley and Stanford
Research Policy
Reconsidering the Bayh–Dole Act and the current university invention ownership model
Research Policy
The role of intermediation and absorptive capacity in facilitating university–industry linkages – an empirical study of TAMA in Japan
Research Policy
The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: managerial and policy implications
Research Policy
Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-off companies
Research Policy
Science-based technologies: university–industry interactions in four fields
Research Policy
Assessing value-added contributions of university technology business incubators to tenant firms
Research Policy
Conceptualising the heterogeneity of research-based spin-offs: a multi-dimensional taxonomy
Research Policy
The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life
Research Policy
Measuring knowledge spillovers: what patents, licenses and publications reveal about innovation diffusion
Research Policy
From separate systems to a hybrid order: accumulative advantage across public and private science at Research One universities
Research Policy
Engaging the scholar: three forms of academic consulting and their impact on universities and industry
Research Policy
Collaborative, pre-competitive R&D and the firm
Research Policy
University-incubator firm knowledge flows: assessing their impact on incubator firm performance
Research Policy
Knowledge interactions between universities and industry in Austria: sectoral patterns and determinants
Research Policy
Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study
Research Policy
Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies
Journal of Engineering and Technology Management
Where excludability matters: material versus intellectual property in academic biomedical research
Research Policy
Close enough but not too far: assessing the effects of university–industry research relationships and the rise of academic capitalism
Research Policy
Mid-range universities’ in Europe linkages with industry: knowledge types and the role of intermediaries
Research Policy
How do threshold firms sustain corporate entrepreneurship? The role of boards and absorptive capacity
Journal of Business Venturing
Where do resources come from? The role of idiosyncratic situations
Strategic Management Journal
When does university research get commercialized? Creating ambidexterity in research institutions
Journal of Management Studies
University affiliated venture capital funds
Health Affairs
Bridging the valley of death: lessons learned from 14 years of commercialization of technology education
Academy of Management Learning and Education
Academic entrepreneurs: organizational change at the individual level
Organization Science
Why did universities start patenting?: institution-building and the road to the Bayh–Dole Act
Social Studies of Science
Withholding research results in academic life science: evidence from a national survey of faculty
Journal of the American Medical Association
A theoretical framework for the evaluation of university–industry relationships
R&D Management
Yale recovers lucrative patent decision resolves dispute with Nobel Laureate over mass spec technique
Chemical & Engineering News
Technology transfer from Italian universities: is an entrepreneurial model starting up?
Academic spin-offs, formal technology transfer and capital raising
Industrial and Corporate Change
New trends in technology management education: a view from Europe
Academy of Management Learning and Education
From vulnerable to venerated: the institutionalization of academic entrepreneurship in the life sciences
Research in the Sociology of Organization
Overcoming weak entrepreneurial infrastructure for academic spin-off ventures
Journal of Technology Transfer
MIT and the Rise of Entrepreneurial Science
Factors fostering academics to start up new ventures: an assessment of Italian founders’ incentives
Journal of Technology Transfer
Cited by (591)
From chalkboard to boardroom: Unveiling the role of entrepreneurship in bolstering academic achievement among professors
2024, Journal of Business ResearchInvestigating how social context moderates the relationship between intentions and behaviors in student entrepreneurship: Case of Tunisian students
2024, International Journal of Management Education