Abstract
American universities are purported to excel at technology transfer. This assumption, however, masks important features of American innovation. Attempts to emulate the US example must recognize the heterogeneity of its industries and institutions of higher education. Stanford University and the biomedical cluster in Boston, Massachusetts, illustrate the diversities that characterize this dynamic system.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 121-142 |
| Number of pages | 22 |
| Journal | Minerva |
| Volume | 45 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jun 2007 |
Funding
We got the inter-institutional agreement with the University of California worked out. The research at Stanford had been sponsored by the National Institutes of Health, and by the National Science Foundation and the American Cancer Society at the University of California at San Francisco. The American Cancer Society had never released rights in an invention before. So I contacted them and explained the situation. I said that what I would like to do is have it managed under our institutional patent agreement with the NIH. And I explained the patent Earlier versions of this essay were presented by the first author at a conference on Science and the Creation of Value at Uppsala University, Sweden, in 2005, and at the Copenhagen Business School. We appreciate comments provided by Ingrid Erickson, Kathy Ku, Roy MacLeod, Richard Nelson, and Minerva®s referees. Research support has been provided by the Hewlett and Merck Foundations and the National Science Foundation.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Education
- Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
- General Social Sciences
