The development of University Technology Transfer stakeholder relationships at a regional level: Lessons for the future

The increasing importance placed upon regional development and the knowledge-based economy as economic growth stimuli has led to a changing role for Universities and their interaction with the business community through (though not limited to) the transfer of technology from academia to industry. With the emergence of Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) replacing the Regional Development Agencies (RDAs), there is a need for policy and practice going forward to be clearly informed by a critique of TTO (Technology Transfer Office)–RDA stakeholder relationship in a lessons learned approach so that LEPs can benefit from a faster learning curve. Thus, the aim of this paper is to examine the stakeholder relationship between three regional universities in the context of its TTO and the RDA with a view to determining lessons learned for the emerging LEP approach. Although the issues raised are contextual, the abstracted stakeholder conceptualisation of the TTO–RDA relationship should enable wider generalisation of the issues raised beyond the UK. Stakeholder theory relationship and stage development models are used to guide a repeat interview study of the TTO and RDA stakeholder groupings. The findings, interpreted using combined category and stage based stakeholder models, show how the longitudinal development of the TTO–RDA stakeholder relationship for each case has progressed through different stakeholder pathways, and stages where specific targeting of funding was dependant on the stakeholder stage. Greater targeted policy and funding, based on the stakeholder relationship approach, led to the development of joint mechanisms and a closer alignment of performance measures between the TTO and the RDA. However, over-reliance on the unitary nature of the TTO–RDA relationship may lead to a lack of cultivation and dependency for funding from other stakeholders.

Technology transfer in Britain: the case of monoclonal antibodies

In 1975 two Cambridge scientists published a short article in Nature which announced the discovery of monoclonal antibodies. The article concluded ‘Such cultures could be valuable for medical and industrial use’. The interest which developed by the end of the decade in the industrial and financial possibilities of the new prospects opening up in biotechnology was to throw the apparent ‘failure’ to follow‐up the potentialities of this discovery into a public prominence rarely achieved by scientific discoveries. By the time Mrs Thatcher came to power it had become a scandal, another example of Britain's apparent inability to exploit effectively the brilliance of its scientific base. It was to explore both the process of scientific discovery and the conditions in Cambridge which nurtured it, and the issues which this particular discovery raised in the area of technology transfer (and the changes of policy that ensued), that the Wellcome Trust's History of Twentieth Century Medicine Group and the Institute of Contemporary British History organised this special witness seminar. It was held at the Wellcome Trust in London on 24 September 1993. The seminar was chaired by Sir Christopher Booth and introduced by Dr Robert Bud of the Science Museum. Those participating included the two authors of the Nature article, Dr César Milstein and Dr Georges Köhler, who received a Nobel Prize for their research, Dr Basil Bard (National Research Development Corporation [NRDC] 1950–74), Sir James Gowans (Secretary of the Medical Research Council [MRC] 1977–87), Sir John Gray (Secretary of the MRC 1968–77), John Newell (BBC World Service science correspondent 1969–79), Dr David Owen (MRC), and Dr David Secher (Laboratory of Molecular Biology [LMB], Cambridge). There were also contributions from Dr Ita Askonas (former head of immunology at the National Institute for Medical Research), Dr John Galloway (former member of MRC headquarters staff), Dr David Tyrrell (former Director, MRC Common Cold Unit), Professor Miles Weatherall (head of Therapeutic Research Division, Wellcome Research Laboratories 1967–75), Dr Guil Winchester (post‐doctoral fellow, Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine), and Dr Peter Williams (former Director of the Wellcome Trust). The organisers would like to thank the Wellcome Trust for hosting and sponsoring the seminar. We would like to dedicate this publication to the memory of Georges Köhler, who sadly died in April 1995 before this could appear.

Conflict of Interest in University Technology Transfer

Étude de cas / Case study

Technology transfer in the fish curing industry in india

Curing is the oldest and cheapest method of preservation of fish allover the world. Fish curing industry has not shown much improverrent from its primitive nature because this industry is mainly handled by illiterate and less educated fishermen/fisherwomen. They do not know much about,the importance of scientific methods of fish curing. The cured fish produced by them is unhygienic and poor in quality. Because of the negligenence and ignorance of the fish curers, a considerable quanti ty of this protein rich food is spoiled and lost every year. Research has been conducted extensively in the Cen tral and State sectors and various remedial measures have been suggested :to improve the fish curing industry in India. Inspi te of the preJudioa against cured fish because of their existing low quality, research work in recent years have indicated that their quality can be greaUy improved and shelf-life prolonged if the me thods are standardised. To achieve this aim, Cen tral and s tate Departments have already made considerable efforts to transfer the improved methods ~ the fish curing industry by way of traininq courses, demonstrations, Lab, to Land Prograrrmesi film shows, exhibitions, personal discussion etc. As the result of this, fish curers have started adopting the improved practices in fish curing. Still there seems to be a considerable qap between the techmology available and the technology adopted in this field. A comprehensive study on the extent of adoption of improved practices in fish curing and the factors involved in low or non-adoption of certain aspects is lackin~ at present. This gap has to be filled up. The possihle methods for the effective transfer of technology for the production and distribution of high quali ty cured fish products and improvement of soclo-economic condition of fishermen engaqed in fish curing have to be identified.

Repensando la transferencia tecnológica: una reconsideración de la teoría del desarrollo, el Banco Mundial y la tecnología = Rethinking Technology Transfer: A Review of Development

Esta tesis es, ante todo, un examen de la progresión histórica de la Teoría del Desarrollo y de la relación entre Tecnología y Desarrollo desde el inicio enunciativo de las nociones sobre estados “desarrollados” y “subdesarrollados.” Con una revisión pormenorizada de los informes “working papers” del Banco Mundial de los últimos años de la década de los 90 sobre Tecnología y Desarrollo, la tesis tiene como base un estudio histórico que se extiende hasta el presente. Este trabajo es una crítica de las políticas de Desarrollo, y específicamente, una crítica de la ideología de los últimos 50 años, su enfoque pide que el lector examine cómo el Banco Mundial plantea, en el presente, la Transferencia Tecnológica. La tesis se pregunta si el Banco Mundial es un organismo “actualizado” acerca de su visión en torno al Desarrollo, y busca examinar como la Tecnología presenta desafíos significativos para el futuro de las Relaciones Internacionales, así como de las relaciones entre los estados ricos y los estados pobres tecnológicamente hablando.

Cost-sharing of agricultural technology transfer in Nigeria: perceptions of farmers and extension professionals

Cost-sharing, which involves government-farmer partnership in the funding of agricultural extension service, is one of the reforms aimed at achieving sustainable funding for extension systems. This study examined the perceptions of farmers and extension professionals on this reform agenda in Nigeria. The study was carried out in six geopolitical zones of Nigeria. A multi-stage random sampling technique was applied in the selection of respondents. A sample size of 268 farmers and 272 Agricultural Development Programme (ADP) extension professionals participated in the study. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used in analysing the data generated from this research. The results show that majority of farmers (80.6%) and extension professionals (85.7%) had favourable perceptions towards cost-sharing. Furthermore, the overall difference in their perceptions was not significant (t =0.03). The study concludes that the strong favourable perception held by the respondents is a pointer towards acceptance of the reform. It therefore recommends that government, extension administrators and policymakers should design and formulate effective strategies and regulations for the introduction and use of cost-sharing as an alternative approach to financing agricultural technology transfer in Nigeria.