National Survey of Research Commercialisation - Australian ...
National Survey of Research Commercialisation - Australian ...
National Survey of Research Commercialisation - Australian ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
3. COUNTRY COMPARISONS<br />
INTRODUCTION<br />
The <strong>National</strong> <strong>Survey</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Research</strong> <strong>Commercialisation</strong> generated information about the<br />
extent <strong>of</strong> research commercialisation activity occurring in universities, medical research<br />
institutes and CSIRO in Australia.<br />
An analysis was undertaken to compare that information with information about<br />
commercial activities occurring in similar institutions in the USA and Canada. Data<br />
from CSIRO were excluded from this analysis.<br />
The data presented in Section 2 <strong>of</strong> this report were collected using a questionnaire<br />
that was based on the questionnaire used in the Association <strong>of</strong> University Technology<br />
Managers (AUTM) Licensing <strong>Survey</strong> <strong>of</strong> technology licensing and related performance for<br />
US and Canadian academic and non-pr<strong>of</strong>it institutions and patent management firms.<br />
This was to enable Year 2000 data collected from <strong>Australian</strong> institutions in the <strong>National</strong><br />
<strong>Survey</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Research</strong> <strong>Commercialisation</strong> to be compared directly with that for US and<br />
Canadian institutions collected in the AUTM Licensing <strong>Survey</strong>: Fiscal Year 2000.<br />
For the purposes <strong>of</strong> this comparative analysis, data for Australia comprised that<br />
from all universities and medical research institutes that responded to the <strong>National</strong><br />
<strong>Survey</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Research</strong> <strong>Commercialisation</strong>. Data for the USA and Canada comprised<br />
that for all institutions that responded to the AUTM Licensing <strong>Survey</strong>: Fiscal<br />
Year 2000 — a list <strong>of</strong> respondent institutions can be found in the full report for<br />
that survey (Association <strong>of</strong> University Technology Managers, 2002).<br />
The indicators that were used to undertake the country comparisons were:<br />
number <strong>of</strong> US patents issued in Year 2000;<br />
number <strong>of</strong> licences executed in Year 2000;<br />
amount <strong>of</strong> adjusted gross income from licences in Year 2000; and<br />
number <strong>of</strong> start-up companies that were formed in Year 2000.<br />
Country comparisons were made on the basis <strong>of</strong> ratios <strong>of</strong> each <strong>of</strong> these indicators to<br />
research expenditure, as a way <strong>of</strong> adjusting absolute levels <strong>of</strong> commercialisation activity<br />
in these four areas in the three countries relative to the magnitude <strong>of</strong> expenditures on<br />
research in those countries.<br />
For each country, research expenditure was the sum <strong>of</strong> the research expenditures <strong>of</strong><br />
institutions in that country that responded to the relevant survey.<br />
For each country, research expenditure expressed in local currency was converted to US<br />
dollars by dividing that expenditure by the purchasing power parities (PPPs) developed<br />
39