Comparative Study of Technology Transfer Practices in Europe and the USA

Abstract

This paper provides a comparative analysis of technology transfer practices in the European Union (EU), with special emphasis on Spain, and the USA. In EU member states hundreds of policy measures and support schemes for innovation have been implemented or are under discussion. In particular, two aspects of innovation are being specifically developed by each country because of their relevance to the global economy: industry-science relationships and the protection of intellectual property rights. This study first presents an overview of the evolution of the regulatory framework and the current legal status in the EU with regard to these key issues. The USA continues to record impressive statistics concerning the transfer of the results of academic research for commercial application and the exploitation of intellectual property rights. To identify the key factors in its success, some distinct characteristics of the US regulatory environment are presented. Finally, the paper identifies the crucial steps that need to be taken in the next phase of global interaction between science and industry and international patent systems so as to manage a worldwide network of innovation that will encourage a growing competitive economy.

Keywords

technology transfer Fifth Framework Programme European innovation policy research and development Innovation Relay Centres

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

AUTM (2002), AUTM Licensing Survey: FY 2000, Association of University Technology Managers, Northbrook, IL.

EC (1995a), Green Paper on Innovation, COM (95) 688 final, European Commission, Brussels.

EC (1995b), Bulletin of European Union, Supplement 5/95.

EC (1996), The First Action Plan for Innovation in Europe – Innovation for Growth and Employment, COM (96) 589 final, European Commission, Brussels.

EC (2000a), Innovation in a Knowledge-Driven Economy, Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, COM (2000) 567 final, European Commission, Brussels.

EC (2000b), Proposal for a Council Regulation on the Community Patent, COM (2000) 412 final, European Commission, Brussels.

EC (2001a), Innovation Scoreboard, SEC (2001) 1414, European Commission, Brussels.

EC (2001b), European Trend Chart of Innovation: Innovation and IPR, Trend Report, December 2000–April 2001, European Commission, Brussels.

EC (2001c), European Trend Chart of Innovation: Country Report – Spain, January 2001–June 2001, European Commission, Brussels.

10.

EC (2002a), Decision No 1513/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 Concerning the Sixth Framework Programme of the European Community for Research, Technological Development, and Demonstration Activities Contributing to the Creation of the European Research Area (2002–2006), COM (2001) 709 (published in the Official Journal on 29 August 2002), European Commission, Brussels.

11.

EC (2002b), Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Patentability of Computer-Implemented Inventions, 15 COM (2002) 92 final, European Commission, Brussels.

12.

Eurostat (2000), Towards a European Research Area: Science, Technology and Innovation, Eurostat, Brussels.

13.

Innovation/SMES (2001), European Trend of Innovation: Innovation Policy in Europe (2001), Innovation/SMES Programme, European Commission, Brussels.

14.

MIT (1999), Guide to the Ownership, Distribution and Commercial Development of MIT Technology, http://web.mit.edu/tlo/www/guide.toc.html.

15.

Pennsylvania State University (2002), The Bayh–Dole Act – A Guide to the Law and Implementing Regulations, PennState online, http://infoserv.rttonet.psu.edu/spa/bayh.htm.

16.

Stajano Attlio (2000), Making Academia Aware of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) – Comparing US and EU Experiences, http://www.cordis.lu/patinnova99/src/prog.htm.

17.

Tsekouras George Papaioannou Theo , co-chairmen (2001), Trend Chart, 3rd Benchmarking Workshop: ‘Innovation Policies to Promote a more Active Use of Intellectual Property Rights’, 6 September.

18.

University of California (2002), University Technology Transfer – Questions and Answers, Office of Technology Transfer, University of California, http://www.ucop.edu/ott.tech.htm.