From patent counting towards the system of IP strategic indicators

Abstract

The strategies of the European Union and its Member States suppose that intellectual property (IP) created as a result of R&D is the engine of economic growth and welfare in society. Studies based on the European Regional Innovation Scoreboard (RIS) have demonstrated that R&D investments, support to the high technology industry and patenting intensity of the public sector differ in high-and low-income European countries. This fact refers to the need for adequate IP strategic indicators' system facilitating innovation in less developed countries. The paper aims to conceptualize and suggest a strategic indicators' system of IP for a small efficiency-driven economy. In contrast to the rather modest level of patenting by industry, universities of the Baltic States file approximately 50 % of PCT patent applications. Therefore, it is crucial to overcome barriers, hindering universities' IP commercialization. Academia-Industry collaboration includes two types of IP strategies: Active non-linear and Passive linear behavioural models of universities and public sector. An essential part of the active approach focuses on the "soft measures" for networking with firms in collaborative platforms such as AIMday® at the Uppsala University in Sweden. The proposed IP strategy system involves qualitative and quantitative indicators at the state as well as university and company level. The comparison of academic publishing and patenting by the staff of Tartu and Uppsala universities testifies to their rather same levels of productivity. Three times wider patent families of the inventions of Uppsala origin characterize actors' market ambition as well as the strength of the University-Industry linkages that are more developed in Uppsala than in Tartu.

Socioeconomic Impacts of University–Industry Collaborations–A Systematic Review and Conceptual Model

“…Intellectual property (47.87%) and spin-offs (45.75%) stood out from the rest of the dominant mechanisms. The relevance of intellectual property has been noted by Perkmann et al [33], Mets et al [39], Jones and De Zubielqui [40], and Secundo et al [41]. Licensing intellectual property provides legal rights that give companies access to technological solutions in the universities' intellectual property [9].…”

Intellectual Property Commercialization in the Creative Industry: An Integrative Literature Review

“…These sub-categories were then organized into four main categories of phases in IP commercialization: ideation, development, creation, and commercialization (Table 2). (Ravi & Janodia, 2022); (Hayter & Link, 2022), (Mets et al, 2016), (Maslak & Pererva, 2023), (Damij et al, 2022), (Kodynetz & Maidanyk, 2019), (Pererva & Maslak, 2022) Identification Ideation…”

“…Research, Product development (Deshpande & Nagendra, 2020), (Tsybulev, 2014), (Maslak & Pererva, 2023), (Mets et al, 2016), (Kusmintarti et al, 2022), (Kruachottikul et al, 2023), (Vimalnath et al, 2022), (Park & Kang, 2015) R&D Development…”

Explanatory models of regional innovation performance in Europe: policy implications for regions

“…Thus, policies should encourage the creation of these networks among SMEs to allow firms to create more innovative products and processes (Pires et al 2020). The ability to create and implement intellectual property is also among the most significant drivers of an innovation system and the number of scientific publications, PCT patent applications, licence and patent revenues are considered the main indicators for driving innovation (studies using the Regional Innovation Scoreboard show how high-tech industries exhibited a high patenting intensity) (Mets et al 2016).…”