1 / 19

Academic Patenting in Sweden: New Evidence from the 2011 Database

Academic Patenting in Sweden: New Evidence from the 2011 Database. Evangelos Bourelos Maureen McKelvey. Swedish Data : 3 sets. 2005: KEINS. Full analysis. List of academics => matching EPO. All positions, most all universities and technical/medical universities

tiara
Download Presentation

Academic Patenting in Sweden: New Evidence from the 2011 Database

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Academic Patenting in Sweden: New Evidence from the 2011 Database • Evangelos Bourelos • Maureen McKelvey

  2. Swedish Data : 3 sets • 2005: KEINS. Full analysis. List of academics => matching EPO. All positions, most all universities and technical/medical universities • 6 universities tend to patent • University invented completely diff uni-owned • Most all uni invented are assigned to firms • 2009: MSc project. Analysis of the 6 unis that patented • 2011: ESF. Full analysis. List of academics => matching EPO. All positions, same univ(minus 1) • Just finishing the database

  3. Swedish ESF 2011 Creation: Continuation of Keins=>ESF • The Data • 27 Universities • 48 220 Employees • 36 231 Academics

  4. Variables for all individual researchers • Name • Surname • Year of Birthday, Birthday • Address-Zip, City • Rank, Position type • University • Discipline • Faculty, Department, Devision • Email, Phone (Personummer)

  5. Matching this list with EPO Data • Data- Retrieved from “DISCO” server • -Clean characters From Swedish letters (Ä,Ö,Å) (Already done in EPO Data) -Split names to eliminate middle initials (Mats j. Andersson  Mats Andersson) • Match according to initials on surname and name (Mats Johansson  MAJO)

  6. Matching • Matching Initials 635 951 Combinations • Calculate Similarity Scores Name, Surname, Address, Zip Code, City Total Similarity Score Left joint from Academic’s database to EPO data If 0 on right side, observation omitted

  7. Filtering • 1. (+) Pairs with SIMILARITY_TOT = 0; (Excluded SLU and UMU where address was missing) 2. (+) Verified inventors in 2005 and or 2009 database 3. (-) Minimum age to file a patent is set at 22 (to improve) 4. (-) Matches in disciplines with very small probability of patenting were excluded. Excluded: Humanities apart from linguistics, Social sciences apart from Business and Economics, applied psychology, media

  8. Filtering Mutual • 4. (+-) Similarity name= similarity surname=0 • 5. (+-) Same University • 6. (+-) Uncommon name • 7. (+-) Criteria 3, 4

  9. Inventors by Year-Country Level

  10. 6 Top Universities

  11. Distribution by Discipline

  12. Number of Patents by field

  13. Distribution by Rank

  14. Age of Inventor • Average inventor born 1960

  15. Some notes on Sweden • Legal framework: Professor’s privilege • Mainly university-invented. if TTO, likely Karolinska • Still owned by companies, skewed to MNCs, plus TTO (Karolinska) but also SMEs and individuals • Top patenting at: Comprehensive universities (Uppsala, Lund, Linköping) as well as specialised medicine (Karolinksa) and specialised engineering (KTH, Chalmers) • From other research: These 6 have high science or publications (exemption of Linköping) and high R&D investment from firms (exemption of Uppsala) • Only 38% by professors – important to include the personnel categories

  16. Increasing-controlling for precision • Manual check/contact for 404 inventors-not existing in previous databases. • Using the co-inventors dimension for verification

  17. Next step • Cross sectional dataset 2005, 2011 • Three level analysis • -Individual Level • Discipline Level • University Level • (potential for country level as well)

  18. Thank you! • Questions? • Comments..

More Related