Total Pageviews

Monday, November 30, 2015

Methodology: Ranking the World’s Most Innovative Universities

Reuters list of top 100 innovative universities has 2 Korean institutes, 1 from China and nil from India. The criteria used will give us an idea of distance to be traveled to get into the top 100.
The list was reduced to just those institutions that filed 70 or more patents. Each candidate university was then evaluated using various indicators such as:
 Patent Volume
(Source: Derwent World Patents Index, Derwent Innovations Index0
The number of basic patents (patent families) filed by the organization. This is an indication of research output that has a potential for commercial value. The number is limited only to those patents that are registered with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)

Patent Success
(Source: Derwent World Patents Index, Derwent Innovations Index)
The ratio of patent applications to grants over the assessed timeframe. This indicates the university’s success in filing applications that are then accepted.

Global Patents
(Source: Derwent World Patents Index, Derwent Innovations Index)
The percentage of patents for which coverage was sought with the U.S., European and Japanese patent offices. Filing an international patent is an expensive and laborious process and filing in multiple countries or regions is an indication that the invention is considered to be nontrivial and has commercial value.

Patent Citations
(Source: Patents Citation Index)
The total number of times a patent has been cited by other patents. As part of the patent inspection process, the patent office examiner will cite significant prior art. The number of times a patent has been cited is an indication that it has an impact on other commercial R&D.

Patent Citation Impact
(Source: Patents Citation Index)
This is an indication of how much impact a patent has had. Because it is a ratio (or average), it is not dependent on the size of the organization. Note that the indicator Percent of Patents Cited (listed below) is closely related to this indicator, therefore these two indicators are given half the weighting of all others.

Percent of Patents Cited
(Source: Patents Citation Index)
This indicator is the proportion of patents that have been cited by other patents one or more times. As mentioned, it is closely tied to the Patent Citation Impact indicator.

Patent to Article Citation Impact
(Source: Patents Citation Index, Derwent World Patents Index, Web of Science Core Collection)
Similar to Patent Citation Impact, this indicator measures the average number of times a journal article has been cited by patents. This unique indicator demonstrates that basic research conducted in an academic setting (as recorded in scholarly articles) has had influence and impact in the realm of commercial research & development (as measured by patents).

Industry Article Citation Impact
(Source: Web of Science Core Collection)
Article-to-article citations are an established indicator of influence and research impact. By limiting the citing articles only to those from industry, this indicator reveals the influence and impact that basic research conducted in an academic setting has had on commercial research.

Percent of Industry Collaborative Articles
(Source: Web of Science Core Collection)
The percentage of all articles of a university that contain one or more co-authors from a commercial entity. This indicator shows the percentage of research activity that is conducted in collaboration with industry, suggesting potential future economic impact of the research project jointly undertaken.

Total Web of Science Core Collection Papers
(Source: Web of Science Core Collection)
The total number of journal articles published by the organization. This is a size-dependent measure of the research output of the university.

Saturday, November 14, 2015

World Intellectual Property Report 2015

Published every two years, the report looks at trends and interesting topics in IP. 2015's theme is 'Breakthrough Innovations' and examines key technologies that have had transformative economic effects.The report's concept is to gain better understanding of how breakthrough innovations come about and the relationship with IP. The report develops six case studies -- three past and three current breakthrough technologies -- to trace their economic impact and the factors which facilitated their development. 
The three historical are airplanes, antibiotics and semiconductors; the three current are 3d printing, nanotechnology and robotics. Each of these case studies is detailed from a historical perspective, complemented with statistical analysis of related patents and patent mapping, and an analysis of the relationship between the innovation and IP.The six case studies included in this report point to a number of well-known elements of success:

  • Governments have been the main source of funding for scientific research that was often instrumental in inventive breakthroughs. In many cases, governments have also played a crucial role in initially moving promising technology from the laboratory to the production stage – often motivated by national defense and industrial policy interests.
  • Competitive market forces and efforts on the part of firms were equally crucial, especially in commercializing promising ideas and engaging in follow on innovation that facilitated scaled-up production, cost reductions and wide-scale adoption of new technologies.
  • Linkages between the various innovation actors mattered. They ranged from informal knowledge exchanges, professional networks and worker movements to formal university–industry licensing frameworks and R&D collaborations. They promoted the sharing of knowledge among researchers and connected the upstream and downstream activities that helped transform promising ideas into commercial technologies.

China emerges as an important origin of patents in 3D printing, nanotechnology and robotics. In particular, looking at first patent applications filed since 2005, Chinese applicants account for more than a quarter of first filings worldwide in the case of 3D printing and robotics – the highest share among all countries. In the case of nanotechnology patent filings since 2005, Chinese applicants make up close to 15 percent of fillings worldwide – the third largest origin of patents. 

Sadly India does not figure anywhere, neither in patent generation nor as destination for patent protection. 

Friday, November 13, 2015


In India, we think preferential treatment to local innovation is stupid economics and sinful global behavior. How did the Chinese manage to support local innovations with a public procurement policy consistent with international treaties? Some excerpts from the PhD Thesis of Radomir Tylecote.
  • The Chinese government has created demand-side innovation policies to help give indigenous innovators a favourable environment, including procurement preference for domestic innovative products, and technical standard-setting.
  • In 1992, Beijing published the Government Procurement Law, mandating (with exceptions) that government procurement purchases should be limited to domestic products , with support for enterprises used to support those which purchase domestic high technologies.
  • In public procurement, the World Trade Organisation’s Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) does not apply to all government procurement, and GPA coverage to each member state is based on negotiation (WTO members are not yet required to join the GPA, and China is currently negotiating GPA accession, meaning it can include preferences for domestic goods and companies in state procurement practices.
  • Procurement policy was reinforced from January 2005, as the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) issued the Opinion on Accelerating the Large Company Strategy in the Electronics and Information Industry, stating that support should be provided “to the leading large companies”.
  • In 2009 the Circular on Carrying out the Work on Accreditation of National Indigenous Innovation Products, (a.k.a. Circular 618, by MOST, the NDRC, and the MOF) created a national-level “catalogue” of preferred procurement products in the six high-tech areas of computing and application equipment, communications, modern office equipment, software, new energy, and high-efficiency and energy-saving products.
  •   An upgraded catalogue following the Circular listed 240 forms of industrial equipment in 18 areas that Chinese firms are encouraged to manufacture, to upgrade China’s manufacturing base, including solar PV. Participating firms were offered subsidies and tax incentives, alongside priority in procurement. 
  • This was followed in November 2009 by the Indigenous Innovation Product Accreditation Policy, whereby state-procured products had to contain Chinese IP. Beijing’s municipal procurement catalogue contained 42 products and just one from a foreign-invested manufacturer; Shanghai’s had 258, with two from foreign-invested firms; Nanjing’s list had none. 
  • These initiatives have been pursued in different ways by different levels of state. Procurement has built a platform to take Chinese firms from early innovation to market entry, and demonstrates a more direct approach among local government, and province-level cities in particular (the four major municipalities of Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin and Chongqing) in supporting their high tech firms.

·       The indigenous IP issue fizzled out in 2011, but it had become entrenched in many people’s minds.

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

Innovation Fair-Egypt, 8-10th March 2016

After the great success in the Exhibition "Egypt invents 2015", sponsored by Beni Suef University, The Egyptian Inventor Syndicate and International Federation of Inventors' Association (IFIA), are organising "Egypt Invents 2016, a wholly integrated invention fair providing inventors from all over the world with comprehensive information on the commercialization of inventions, patent information, and technology transfer.

Indian Innovators can also send poster for display. 

Sunday, November 08, 2015

Electronics Development Fund (EDF) policy

As part of the “Digital India” agenda of the Government, it is envisaged to develop the Electronics System Design and Manufacturing (ESDM) sector to achieve “Net Zero Imports” by 2020. Setting up of Electronic Development Fund (EDF) is one of the important strategies which would enable creating a vibrant ecosystem of innovation, research and development (R&D) and with active industry involvement. It is with this objective that an Electronic Development Fund (EDF) is set up as a “Fund of Funds” to participate in professionally managed “Daughter Funds” which in turn will provide risk capital to companies developing new technologies in the area of electronics, nano-electronics and Information Technology (IT). The EDF will also help attract venture funds, angel funds and seed funds towards R&D and innovation in the specified areas. It will help create a battery of Daughter funds and Fund Managers who will be seeking good start-ups (potential winners) and selecting them based on professional considerations.
Target Beneficiaries:
Any Daughter Fund which is registered in India and abides with relevant rules and regulations applicable to such Funds, including SEBI regulations on Venture Funds and is set up to achieve the objectives mentioned above will be eligible for support from the EDF.
Fund Manager:
CANBANK Venture Capital Funds Ltd. (CVCFL) is the Fund Manager for EDF. The role of the Fund Manager of EDF is to consider requests from applicant Venture Funds, Angel Funds and Seed Funds and make recommendations to the Department of Electronics and IT, Government of India. The CVCFL will also be participating in the individual beneficiary Daughter Funds based on the approval of the Department of Electronics and IT.
Time Lines:
The requests for seeking participation by EDF in any Venture Fund, Angel Fund or Seed Fund must be made on or before 31.03.2017
Contact Details:
Shri S. Thiruvadi, MD, CVCFL, Fax: +91-80- 25583909
­Shri P. Sitaram, Executive Vice President, CVCFL,
Shri Prashant Kumar, Scientist-‘D’