Insight into the patenting performance of Belgian universities

The objective of this paper is to provide an in-depth analysis of the patenting performances of six Belgian universities over the period 1985-1999. Beside the evolution of the number of patent families, we provide insights about the potential value of these patents (through forward patent citations analysis), about the institutional sources of the knowledge (through non patent citations and backward patent citations), about their international patenting strategy, and the type of co-assignee. The results show that KUL is by far the most productive university in Belgium (both in terms of the number of patent applications and the number of forward citations per patent). This is due to a size effect, a longer history of patenting academic inventions, to a focus on bio-tech patents and to a very productive collaboration with the Institute of Organic Chemistry of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic. There is however a clear indication that a catching up process by other universities is taking place, in terms of both the quantity of patent applications and their quality.

[1]  H. Etzkowitz The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages , 1998 .

[2]  Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie,et al.  What Patent Data Reveal about Universities: The Case of Belgium , 2003 .

[3]  Arvids A. Ziedonis,et al.  Changes in university patent quality after the Bayh-Dole act: a re-examination , 2003 .

[4]  Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie,et al.  The Sources of Knowledge and the Value of Academic Patents , 2003 .

[5]  A. Pakes,et al.  The Value of Patents as Indicators of Inventive Activity , 1986 .

[6]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and , 2000 .

[7]  David C. Mowery,et al.  Learning to Patent: Institutional Experience, Learning, and the Characteristics of U.S. University Patents After the Bayh-Dole Act, 1981-1992 , 2002 .

[8]  Arvids A. Ziedonis,et al.  Academic patent quality and quantity before and after the Bayh-Dole act in the United States , 2002 .

[9]  M. Trajtenberg,et al.  Universities as a Source of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis of University Patenting, 19651988 , 1995, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[10]  Arvids A. Ziedonis,et al.  The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh–Dole act of 1980 , 2001 .

[11]  Z. Griliches Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: a Survey , 1990 .

[12]  D. Harhoff,et al.  Technology policy for a world of skew-distributed outcomes , 2000 .