1. Francesco Lissoni   GREThA-Université Bordeaux IV;  KITES-Università Bocconi, Milan Academic Patenting in Europe (APE-INV): An Overview

2. APE-INV ‘s main features Database Harmonization project [which]... … aims at re-classifying patents by inventors [and] … promote(s) the collection of cross-country data … on European universities’ contribution to patenting Research Networking Programme … no direct funding of research activities … provision of infrastructure and discussion forums … to help laying the foundations of national research initiatives

3. APE-INV ‘s sponsors

4. Background: From university patents to academic inventors Trajtenberg M., Henderson R., Jaffe A. (1992) “Ivory Tower Versus Corporate Lab: An Empirical Study of Basic Research and Appropriability”, NBER Working Paper Series 4146   Balconi, M., Breschi, S., & Lissoni, F. (2004). Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data. Research Policy, 33(1), 127-145   Lissoni, F., Llerena, P., McKelvey, M., & Sanditov, B. (2008). Academic patenting in Europe: new evidence from the KEINS database. Research Evaluation, 17(2), 87-102. Azoulay, P., Ding, W., & Stuart, T. (2007). The determinants of faculty patenting behavior: Demographics or opportunities? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 63(4), 599-623 … many more papers based on INVENTOR DATA

5. 5 Patent applications Standardisation of company names/addresses/parent co. Company-level data INVENTOR DISAMBIGUATION Inventor-level data set: ID, address(es) Publicaton number, priority date, IPC class, citations etc. INVENTOR-BASED DATA

6. 6 INVENTOR-PROFESSOR MATCHING EXERCISE

7. What did we know (that we did not know before…)? Academic patenting is not just university patenting  IP ownership Academic patenting is not just a US phenomenon “Open Science” vs “Private technology”: Complementarity at the individual level Trade-off at the systemic level What didn’t we know (yet..)? Inventors’ incentives and strategies Ownership: How good are universities as IP asset managers? Academic patenting outside the US: Is it increasing? In quantity? In quality? We need longitudinal data! Inventor data: How to improve quality? How to get feedbacks?  APE-INV project!

8. APE-INV’s objectives MAIN: M1.to share expertise and methods for the creation of an inventors’ database ; M2.to share expertise and methods for matching the inventors’ database with national databases of academic scientists  produce comparable counts of acad. patenting activity  collect auxiliary information on academic inventors; M3.to produce a freely available database on “academic patenting in Europe” SUBSIDIARY S1. to produce one or more joint publications ; S2. to devise a method for collecting the database users’ feedbacks on the quality of the data.

9. M1.creation of an inventor database S2. method for collecting the database users’ feedbacks  Data repository and feedback platform 2806516 inventors  2032701/2481582 individuals  2200000 patents (EPO applications, 1978-2010)  Reference source: Worldwide Patent Statistical Database (PatStat), issued by the European Patent Office (EPO) M2. produce comparable counts of academic patenting M3. free database on “academic patenting in Europe”  APE-INV country datasets: “PUBLN_NR” + “Academ. dummy” BOTH ON APE-INV website’s DB pagewebsite’s DB page (  front page http:/www.academicpatenting.eu)http:/www.academicpatenting.eu Activities & achievements, by objective

10. 10

13. S1. to produce one or more joint publications Activities & achievements, by objective (cont.)

14. Academic Patenting In Europe: A Reassessment of Evidence and Research Practices Francesco Lissoni Academic Inventions Outside the University: Investigating Patent Ownership in the UK Cornelia Lawson University autonomy, the professor privilege and academic patenting: Italy, 1996-2007 Francesco Lissoni, Michele Pezzoni, Bianca Potì & Sandra Romagnosi When Do Universities Own Their Patents? An Explorative Study of Patent Characteristics and Organizational Determinants in Germany Anja Schoen & Guido Buenstorf Academic Inventors, Scientific Impact and The Institutionalisation of Pasteur´S Quadrant In Spain Catalina Martínez, Joaquín M. Azagra-Caro & Stéphane Maraut The Impact of Academic Technology: Do Modes of Involvement Matter? The Flemish Case Julie Callaert, Mariette Du Plessis, Bart Van Looy & Koenraad Debackere Academic Inventors, Technological Profiles and Patent Value: An Analysis of Academic Patent Owned by Swedish-Based Firms Daniel Ljungberg, Evangelos Bourelos & Maureen Mckelvey What Determines University Patent Commercialization? Empirical Evidence on the Role of IPR Ownership Paola Giuri, Federico Munari & Martina Pasquini