Generate+Ideas+and+Inventions

The Impact of Research and Development Incentives on Colombia’s Manufacturing Sector: What Difference Do They Make?
@http://www.merit.unu.edu/MEIDE/papers/2011/1297959159_VM.pdf

Tags:

Promoting Intellectual Property Monetization in Developing Countries: A Review of Issues and Strategies to Support Knowledge-driven Growth
@http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/07/24/000158349_20120724142020/Rendered/PDF/WPS6143.pdf

This paper outlines and evaluates several intellectual property monetization strategies available to patent holders in developing countries that help generate domestic innovation and knowledge-driven growth by promoting more active technology markets. Based on a review of World Intellectual Property Report indicators, the patent ownership gap between a sample of developed and developing countries has narrowed gradually for more technologically-sophisticated developing countries. However, based on complementary International Monetary Fund Balance of Payments data, the patent commercialization divide (as indicated by licensing income) has been widening. The paper argues that patents, and all forms of intellectual property, are an enabling mechanism rather than a defensive right: an intangible asset class that can be proactively nurtured and managed for greater value extraction to stimulate knowledge-based entrepreneurship and growth in developing countries. The paper presents multiple case studies of alternative monetization strategies to address the commercialization divide. These strategies range from private, market-driven options to those requiring a greater amount of public policy support: from patent securitization and patent exchanges (focusing on the United States-initiated Intellectual Property Exchange International and the Shanghai Silicon Intellectual Property Exchange), to the strengthening of technology transfer and commercialization infrastructure (focusing on the experience of the Association of University Technology Managers and Taiwan, China’s Intellectual Property Rights Institute), to patent litigation support (including South Korea’s support of patent infringement lawsuit costs for small and medium enterprises). The paper also highlights areas where further policy research would be helpful.

Tags:intellectual property (IP), securitization, monetization, intangible assets,commercialization, licensing statistics, license revenues, license balance of payments, WIPO, IP and technology commercialization, patent exchanges, AUTM, ITRI, patent litigation support, Bayh-Dole Act, knowledge-driven growth strategies.

Regional R&D Strategy for Innovation in the Western Balkan Countries
@http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/05/29/000425970_20120529102745/Rendered/PDF/691360Regional0n0Report000Mar02012.pdf

Fragments which are of independent value
Implications for Technical Assistance Sections 22 - 26 Resource allocation Sections 35 - 38 Commercialization of Public Research and Collaboration with the Enterprise Sector Sections 39 - 51

Is Bayh-Dole Good for Developing Countries? Lessons from the US Experience
@http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060262

Echoes of Bayh-Dole? A Survey of IP and Technology Transfer Policies in Emerging and Developing Economies
[]

This chapter offers detailed assessments of 18 developing countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, China, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kenya, Malaysia, Mexico, Philippines, Poland, Russia, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Vietnam.

Regarding the availability of intellectual property protections, the survey presented in this chapter finds that countries can be logically sorted into three tiers.


 * 1) The first tier contains the most innovative countries, those with an active IP system used vigorously by domestic patentees.
 * 2) The second tier consists of countries seeking to become more innovative, with IP systems that are only beginning to be used by domestic patentees.
 * 3) The third tier countries are those with limited or nascent IP systems and virtually no domestic patentees.

Almost all first tier innovative countries, about half of second tier countries, and no third tier countries have formally addressed the question of IP ownership through national policy.

This survey also reveals that strong IP protection capabilities are correlated to robust scientific research efforts, to the country’s history of IP laws, and to membership in international trade agreements. Policies in all of these countries are moving towards granting the rights and responsibilities of ownership to research institutions. Finally, strong, sophisticated institutional IP management is correlated to research capacity and to government investment in public sector and university research and development. Overall, vigorous IP protection policies and the capacity to enforce and manage them are mutually strengthening. The biggest factor for this growth is the amount of research and development a country conducts, followed by the ability of its economy to absorb new innovations into existing industries.

Engineering Research Centers Best Practices Manual
Download from @http://www.erc-assoc.org/manual/bp_index.htm

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.3333px;">The National Science Foundation-sponsored Engineering Research Centers (ERCs) are a group of engineering systems-focused, interdisciplinary centers located at universities all across the United States, each in close partnership with industry. Since the ERC Program was founded in 1985, the ERCs collectively have brought significant changes in the culture of academic engineering research and education. This Best Practices Manual was authored independently by staff of the ERCs. It is not an NSF publication and does not necessarily reflect official NSF policy. The document is intended as a "how-to" manual for those involved in, or contemplating involvement in, the operation of an ERC or similar university-industry center. The chapters, presented as separate links at left, are organized according to management roles and functional areas in an ERC. The manual is broken down as follows:

<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.3333px;">Introduction <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.3333px;">Center Leadership & Strategic Direction <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.3333px;">Research Management <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.3333px;">Education Programs <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.3333px;">Industrial Collaboration and Technology Transfer <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.3333px;">Administrative Management <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.3333px;">The NSF/ERC Interface <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.3333px;">Student Leadership Councils <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.3333px;">Multi-University Centers