Patents Go to The Market? University-Industry Technology Transfer from a Brazilian Perspective


  • Laís Santana Viana Santa Cruz State University, BR
  • Danilo Moreira Jabur Santa Cruz State University,BR
  • Paulina Ramirez University of Birmingham, UK
  • Gustavo Pereira da Cruz Santa Cruz State University,BR



technology transfer, university-industry, brazilian universities, TTO, Innovation.


The purpose of this paper is to explore the TT between university-industry from a Brazilian perspective, with special reference on the university Intellectual Property – IP and TT legal instruments. The methodology was designed on a quantitative approach aiming to provide a better understanding of the problem. Secondary data collection was performed through documentary analysis that aims to identify and quantify the variables related to patents, licensing and TT agreements. Later, data are grouped, classified and treated, which allowed inference and interpretation. The results show that the TT between university-industry is in an embryonic stage in Brazil, even if occurred a considerable increase of IP required over the last few years. In this context, it is possible to affirm that the academic research outcomes are not being absorbed in an effective way by the industries, and, as a consequence, just an insignificant percentage of the patents go to the market.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Laís Santana Viana, Santa Cruz State University, BR

Postgraduate Program in Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer for Innovation - PROFNIT

Danilo Moreira Jabur, Santa Cruz State University,BR

Postgraduate Program in Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer for Innovation - PROFNIT

Gustavo Pereira da Cruz, Santa Cruz State University,BR

Postgraduate Program in Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer for Innovation - PROFNIT


Ambos, T.C., Mäkelä, K., Birkinshaw, J., d'Este, P. (2008). When does university research get commercialized? Creating ambidexterity in research institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 8, pp. 1424-1447. doi:

Anatan, L. (2015). Conceptual Issues in University to Industry Knowledge Transfer Studies: A Literature Review. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 211, pp. 711-717. doi:

Audretsch, D.B., Lehmann, E.E., Wright, M. (2014). Technology transfer in a global economy. Journal Technology Transfer, 39, pp. 301-312. doi:

AUTM, 2002. The AUTM Licensing Survey: Fiscal Year 2000. Association of University Technology Managers, Norwalk, CT. Retrieved from:

Bekkers, R., & Bodas-Freitas, I. M. (2008). Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter? Research Policy, 37, 1837-1853. doi:

Bessant, J., Rush, H. (1993). Government support of manufacturing innovation: two country level case study. IEEE Transactions of Engineering Management, 40, 1, pp. 79-91. doi: Retrieved from:

Bodas-Freitas, I. M., Geuna, A., & Rossi, F. (2011). Patterns of Collaborations between Regional Firms and Universities: Evidence from the Piedmont region in Italy. Collaborations? LEI & BRICK Working Paper 05/2011, Department of Economics, University of Torino, pp 1-33. Retrieved from:

Bölling, M., & Eriksson, Y. (2016). Collaboration with society: The future role of universities? Identifying challenges for evaluation. Research evaluation, 25(2), 209-218. doi:

Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research policy, 29(4), 627-655. doi:

Brazil. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). Demographic Census 2010. Retrieved from:

Brazil. Federal Law n. 10.973, dated december 2, 2004. Provides incentives for innovation and scientific and technological research in the productive environment and other measures. Presidency of the Republico f Brazil. Brasilia, DF. Retrieved from:

Brazil. Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MCTI). Science, Technology and Innovation for National Development. National Strategy for Science Technology and Innovation 2016 - 2019. Brasília, 2016. Retrieved from:

Buka?a, A. (2008). What innovation and technology transfer really mean?. Journal of Automation Mobile Robotics and Intelligent Systems, 2, 74-76. Retrieved from:

Burhanuddin, M.A., Arif, F., Azizah, V., Prabuwono, A.S. (2009). Barriers and challenges for technology transfer in Malaysian small and medium industries. In Information Management and Engineering, 2009. ICIME'09. International Conference on, pp. 258-261. doi:10.1109/ICIME.2009.39. Retrieved from:

Casali, Giovana F. Rossi, Silva, Orlando Monteiro da, & Carvalho, Fátima M. A.. (2010). Regional innovation system: study of Brazilian regions. Journal of Contemporary Economics, 14(3), 515-550. doi:

Chapple, W., Lockett, A., Siegel, D., Wright, M. (2005). Assessing the relative performance of U.K. University technology transfer offices: Parametric and non-parametric evidence. Research Policy, 34, 3, pp. 369-384. doi:

Clarysse, B., Tartari, V., & Salter, A. (2011). The impact of entrepreneurial capacity, experience and organizational support on academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40, 1084-1093. doi:

Crespi, G. A., Geuna, A., & Nesta, L. (2007). The mobility of university inventors in Europe. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 32(3), 195-215. doi:

Crespi, G., D’Este, P., Fontana, R., & Geuna, A. (2011). The impact of academic patenting on university research and its transfer. Research policy, 40(1), 55-68. doi:

Cruz, G., & Bezerra, N. V. S. (2017). Innovation in renewable energies: reflections and study of technological prospection. SENAC Technical Bulletin, 43(1). Retrieved from:

Cruz, G; Menuchi, L. N. S. (2016), Technology transfer and biodiversity: Analysis of Brazilian legislation through the access and benefits sharing perspective. International Journal of Recent Advances in Multidisciplinary Research, v. 4, n. 1, 2017. Retrieved from:

Dooley, L., & Kirk, D. (2007). University-industry collaboration: Grafting the entrepreneurial paradigm onto academic structures. European Journal of Innovation Management, 10(3), 316-332. doi:

Dutta, S., Lanvin, B., & Wunsch-Vincent, S. (2015). The Global Innovation Index 2015 (GII). Effective Innovation Policies for Development, Cornell University, INSEAD, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Fontainebleau, Ithaca, and Geneva. Retrieved from:

Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university–industry linkages. Research Policy, 27, pp. 823-833.doi:

Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Research groups as ‘quasi-firms’: the invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32, 109-121. doi:

Etzkowitz, H., Leydesdorff, L. (1998). The Triple Helix as a Model for Innovation Studies. Science & Public Policy, 25, 3, pp. 195-203.doi:

Etzkowitz, H., Leydesdorff, L. (1999). The Future Location of Research and Technology Transfer, Journal of Technology Transfer, 24, pp. 111-123. doi:

Etzkowitz, H., Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research policy, 29, 2, 109-123. doi:

Fontana, R., Geuna, A., & Matt, M. (2006). Factors affecting university–industry R&D projects: The importance of searching, screening and signalling. Research policy, 35(2), 309-323. doi:

Fujino, A., & Stal, E. (2007). Management of intellectual property in the Brazilian public university: guidelines for licensing and commercialization. Business Review, 12(1), 104-120. doi:

Geisler, E., Turchetti, G. (2015). Commercialization of Technological Innovations: The Effects of Internal Entrepreneurs and Managerial and Cultural Factors on Public–Private Inter-Organizational Cooperation. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 12, 02, 1550009. doi:

Gervais, M.J., Marion, C., Dagenais, C., Chiocchio, F., Houlfort, N. (2016). Dealing with the complexity of evaluating knowledge transfer and innovation performance: Evidence from Chinese firms. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 73, pp. 666-678. doi:

Geuna, A., & Nesta, L. J. (2006). University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence. Research policy, 35(6), 790-807. doi:

Geuna, A., Muscio, A. (2009). The Governance of University Knowledge Transfer: A Critical Review of the Literature. Minerva, March, pp. 93-114. doi:

Greene, K. (1994). Technology and innovation in context: the Roman background to mediaeval and later development. Journal of Roman Archaeology, 7, pp. 22-33. doi:

Guan, J.C., Mok, C.K., Yam, R.C.M., Chin, K.S.M., Pun, K.F. (2006). Technology transfer and innovation performance: Evidence from Chinese firms. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 73, pp. 666-678. doi:

Günsel, A. (2015). Research on Effectiveness of Technology Transfer from a Knowledge Based Perspective. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 207, 777–785. doi:

Hertzfeld, H. R., Link, A. N., & Vonortas, N. S. (2006). Intellectual property protection mechanisms in research partnerships. Research Policy, 35(6), 825-838. doi:

Holt, R. (1990). Milling Technology in the Middle Ages: The Direction of Recent Research Journal. Industrial Archaeology Review, 13, pp.1-25. doi:

INPI. National Institute of Industrial Property (2016). Technology transfer. Retrieved from:

Jafari, M., Akhavan, P., & Rafiei, A. (2014). Technology Transfer Effectiveness in Knowledge-Based Centers Providing a Model Based on Knowledge Management. International Journal of Scientific Knowledge. Retrieved from:

Kenney, M., & Mowery, D. C. (Eds.). (2014). Public universities and regional growth: Insights from the University of California. Stanford University Press.

Kim, Y., & Vonortas, N. S. (2006). Technology licensing partners. Journal of Economics and Business, 58(4), 273-289. doi:

Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., & Bozeman, B. (2007). An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 1-15. doi:

Macho-Stadler, I., Pérez-Castrillo, D., & Veugelers, R. (2007). Licensing of university inventions: The role of a technology transfer office. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 25(3), 483-510. doi:

Markman, G. D., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2008). Research and technology commercialization. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8), 1401-1423. doi:

Markman, G.D., Gianiodis, P.T., Phan, P.H., Balkin, D.B. (2005). Innovation speed: Transferring university technology to market. Research Policy, 34, pp. 1058-1075. doi:

Mattila, M., & Lehtimaki, H. (2016). Networks in Technology Commercialization. South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases, 5(1), 43-54. doi:

Mazzucato, M., & Penna, C. (2016). The Brazilian innovation system: a mission-oriented policy proposal. Retrieved from:

Molas-Gallart, J., Castro-Martínez, E. (2007). Ambiguity and conflict in the development of ‘Third Mission’indicators. Research Evaluation, 16, 4, pp. 321-330. doi:

Mowery, D. C., & Ziedonis, A. Z. (2015). Markets versus spillovers in outflows of university research. Research Policy, 44, 50-66. doi:

Muscio, A., Quaglione, D., & Vallanti, G. (2014). University regulation and university–industry interaction: a performance analysis of Italian academic departments. Industrial and Corporate Change Advance, 1, 1-33. doi:

National Confederation of Industry, Social Service of Industry, National Service of Industrial Learning, Brazilian Service of Support to Micro and Small Companies (CNI, 2016.).Performance of Brazil in the global index of innovation 2011-2016. Brasilia, DF. Retrieved from:

OECD. (2007). Higher education and regions: Globally competitive, locally engaged. Retrieved from:

Pausits, A. (2015). The Knowledge Society and Diversification of Higher Education: From the Social: Contract to the Mission of Universities. In: Curaj, A. et al. (Org.) The European Higher Education Area: Between Critical Reflections and Future Policies. Springer. doi:

Perkmann, M., & Schildt, H. (2015). Open data partnerships between firms and universities: The role of boundary organizations. Research Policy, 44(5), 1133-1143. doi:

Perkmann, M., Fini, R., Ross, J., Salter, A., Silvestri, C., Tartari, V. (2015). Accounting for universities’ impact: Using augmented data to measure academic engagement and commercialization by academic scientists. Research Evaluation, 24, 4, pp. 380-391. doi:

Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Broström, A., D’Este, P., Krabel, S. (2013). Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations. Research policy, 42, 2, pp. 423-442. doi:

Phan, P. H., & Siegel, D. S. (2006). The effectiveness of university technology transfer. Foundations and Trends® in Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 77-144. doi:

Piirainen, K. A., Andersen, P. D., & Andersen, A. D. (2016). Foresight and the third mission of universities: The case for innovation system foresight. Foresight, 8(1), 1-34. doi:

Pimentel, L. O. (2010). Basic manual of R&D partnership agreements: legal aspects. EDIPUCRS. Retrieved from:

Póvoa, L. M. C., & Rapini, M. S. (2010). Technology transfer from universities and public research institutes to firms in Brazil: what is transferred and how the transfer is carried out. Science and Public Policy, 37(2), 147–159. doi:

Ramirez, P., Love, J. H., & Vahter, P. (2013). Industry–academic links: A new phase in Ireland’s FDI-led industrialisation strategy. European Urban and Regional Studies, 23(2), 167-181. doi:

Ranga, M., Etzkowitz, H. (2013). Triple Helix systems: an analytical framework for innovation policy and practice in the Knowledge Society. Industry & Higher Education, 27, 3, pp. 237-262. doi:

Ranga, M., Temel, S., Murat Ar, I., Yesilay, R.B., Sukan, F.V. (2016). Building Technology Transfer Capacity in Turkish Universities: a critical analysis. European Journal of Education, 51, 1, pp. 09-106. doi:

Reddy, M., Zhao, l. (1990). International technology transfer: A review. Research Policy, 19, 4, pp. 285-307. doi:

Schaeffer, P. R., Dullius, A. C., Maldonado, R., & Zawislak, P. A. (2015). Types of university-industry interaction: A new approach to bridge the gap between universities and industries. XVI Congresso Latino-Iberoamericano de Gestão Tecnologia. ALETC, Porto Alegre, Brasil. Retrieved from:

Shane, S. (2002). Selling University Technology: Patterns from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), 122–137. doi:

Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2007). The Promise of Entrepreneurship as a Field of Research. Entrepreneurship, 171–184. doi:

Siegel, D. S., Veugelers, R., & Wright, M. (2007). Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: Performance and policy implications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 640-660. doi:

Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Link, A. N. (2003). Commercial knowledge transfers from universities to firms: improving the effectiveness of university–industry collaboration. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14(1), 111-133. doi:

Taheri, M., Geenhuizen, M. (2016). Teams' boundary-spanning capacity at university: Performance of technology projects in commercialization. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, in press. doi:

Thursby, J. G., Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: A survey of major US universities. The journal of Technology transfer, 26, 1-2, pp. 59-72. doi:

Torkomian, A. L. V. (2009). Overview of the nuclei of technological innovation in Brazil. Technology transfer. Campinas: Komedi, 21-37. Retrived from:

Verhoeven, D., Bakker, J., & Veugelers, R. (2016). Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators. Research Policy, 45(3), 707–723. doi:

Wahab, S.A., Rose, R.C., Wati, O.S.I. (2012). Defining the Concepts of Technology and Technology Transfer: A Literature Analysis. International Business Research, 5, 1, pp. 61-71. doi:

Wallin, J., Isaksson, O., Larsson, A., & Elfström, B. O. (2014). Bridging the gap between university and industry: three mechanisms for innovation efficiency. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 11(01), 1440005. doi:

Walter, S. G., Schmidt, A., & Walter, A. (2016). Patenting rationales of academic entrepreneurs in weak and strong organizational regimes. Research Policy, 45(2), 533-545. doi:

Warren, L., Kitagawa, F., & Eatough, M. (2010). Developing the Knowledge Economy through University Linkages. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 11(4), 293–306. doi:

Wright, M., Birley, S., Mosey, S. (2004). Entrepreneurship and University Technology Transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29, pp. 235-246. doi:

Zhao, L., Reisman, A. (1992). Toward Meta Research on Technology Transfer. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 39, 1, pp. 13-21. doi: Retrieved from:




How to Cite

Viana, L. S., Jabur, D. M., Ramirez, P., & da Cruz, G. P. (2018). Patents Go to The Market? University-Industry Technology Transfer from a Brazilian Perspective. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 13(3), 24–35.



Research Articles

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.