Search results

The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, it aims to furnish empirical evidence on science, technology and innovation governance in the ASEAN Member States (AMS). This is followed by the understanding of the evolution of technology commercialization activities in Indonesia, the Philippines, Cambodia, Laos and Brunei. Second, the study analyzes the activities of academic-industry technology transfer, barriers in the commercialization of research outputs from universities and its implications in the six AMS countries. The criterion to choose these ASEAN countries is to understand the significance of policy implications and technology transfer in the economy of developing nations/low-middle-income nations.

The qualitative data was retrieved from various secondary and published literature sources. The information from the official ministry website was referred to along with the reports published in various countries.

The evidence suggests that the nature and extent of technology dissemination are based on policies that are triggered by the primary goals at the national level. The primary goals for supporting science and technology differ in terms of financial budget for stimulating R&D; diffusion of technology transfer; managerial gaps in business; systems for facilitating change; and human resources and intellectual assets. The paper concludes by recommending a few strategies to improve STI among low-middle-income countries among AMS.

This paper is an original contribution, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, on the effectiveness of public policies for academic technology commercialization among low-middle-income countries among AMS.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse innovation policies in India from 1958 to 2020. A policy tools framework was developed to compare the innovation policies in India. India developed and implemented four innovation policies from 1958 to 2013. The recent policy change was brought in the year 2020 with releasing the draft of the Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (STIP 2020). The authors analysed the recent draft of STIP 2020 with the earlier four innovation policies.

Innovation policies implemented from 1958 to 2013 in India were studied and analysed in the “text as a data approach” and a comparative policy analysis tool was designed for this purpose. The recent draft of STIP 2020 was evaluated and the provisions of the fifth draft of STIP 2020 were compared with the previous four innovation policies' design and formulation. The CPA tool design consists of five broad themes Awareness and capacity building; Finance and infrastructure; Resource management and governance; Outreach and networking; and Policy implementation and evaluation.

Draft STIP 2020 has many features similar to earlier policies. However, policy has focused on bringing in more clarity about national challenges, goals and objectives, yet it needs better implementation to achieve stated outcomes more effectively and efficiently. New initiatives include strengthening the innovation system with open science, improving STI education, expanding the financial landscape, establishing national STI observatory acting as a central repository of all data related to the STI ecosystem and accountable research ecosystem, promoting translational and foundational research of global standards, promoting entrepreneurship, self-reliance, mainstream science communication and public engagement and decentralised institutional mechanisms. Thus, the STIP 2020 is ambitious in its approach to promoting STI in India and needs a supportive mechanism to achieve the stated objectives.

Current comparative policy analysis focused only on identifying similarities and differences among innovation policies implemented in India from 1958 to 2020 and its evolutionary changes in policy and its instruments choice. The recent draft STIP 2020 is not approved and has no update regarding its approval and implementation by the government. The revised and yet to implement STIP 2020 may have variances in the policy instruments. The earlier policies are so broad and without specific problem statements. They were released as statements and resolutions which makes it is challenging to understand the impact of each policy. Similar policy tools in STI 2013 and STIP 2020 were only considered to observe the policy instrument choice. The achievements of the innovation policies implemented before STIP 2020 are not included. Evolutionary changes in the problem statements and policy tools prescribed in innovation policies are studied.

Department of Science and Technology, Government of India, released a draft of STIP in 2020. The draft of STIP was evaluated with previous Innovation Policies. To the authors’ understanding, this is the first attempt to evaluate the STIPs of India using the “text as a data” approach. The tool can be validated by using it for CPA of innovation policies of other emerging, developed and least developed economies to understand cross-country variations in policy instrument choice by policymakers.

Protection of intellectual property (IP) is important to leverage its commercial potential. This study aims to examine and comprehend the level of understanding of intellectual property rights (IPR) among Indian academics. The study covers three main aspects – awareness level of IP among Indian academics, comprehending if the current state of knowledge about IP is useful for commercialization and whether the current knowledge of IP activities among Indian academics is sufficient to support their professional career and generate revenues from their inventions.

A structured methodology was contemplated and applied. A cross-sectional study with a convenience sampling method was adopted. The duration of the study was six months from March to August 2021. A total of 500 Indian academics were approached, of which 116 responded with a response rate of 23.4%. A structured questionnaire was administered to the participants to understand their level of knowledge about IP. Furthermore, the data analysis was performed based on descriptive analysis.

The study findings revealed that the awareness among the participants about IP was minimal. The underlying reasons could be academics did not focus on generating IP through novel research, awareness of basic knowledge about IP was considerably low and inadequate to support their professional career, primary focus was on which publications are considered as one of the important criteria for performance management, national policies do not encourage collaborative research between university and industry that may lead to potential IP generation and the Indian academic set-up expects multitasking by its faculty members.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is an original contribution, based on the study carried out by the authors to understand the awareness of IP activities among Indian academics.