AUTHORS
Joanna Wolszczak-Derlacz, Aleksandra Parteka, Sabina Szymczak and Piotr Płatkowski
Abstract
Relatively poor transfer of knowledge from higher education to the market remains a concern in Europe, universities being involved in at most 10% of all patented inventions. We examine the role of university funding in patenting, addressing three key research gaps: (i) the limited, country-specific samples rather than pan-European data used in most patent-funding studies; (ii) scarce evidence on the impact of the funding structure on patent quality; and (iii) the lack of precise estimates of interactions between university patenting, funding structures, and regional systems. We fill these gaps thanks to a micro-level database of almost 2,900 higher education institutions (HEIs) in 31 European countries and 295 NUTS2 regions (2011-2019), containing detailed information on their activity as direct patent applicants and various institutional characteristics, including financial records. We show that universities with a greater share of third-party funds (research grants, contracts) apply for more patents and have better quality patents than those that rely mainly on core funding, i.e. national/regional allocations. The HEIs that do patent are richer and have more than twice the share of third-party revenues. This indicates that the very marked core-periphery pattern of university patenting in Europe is related both to the amount of university funding and to its sources. Additionally, we find that regional economic systems also influence the way in which the funding structure impacts university patenting. The positive effect of third-party funding is strongest in the wealthy European regions, less so in developed areas, and negligible in the poorest regions.
Keywords:
Patents, Higher education institutions, University, Funding
Publication Date
June 2025
Working papers present the results of ongoing research and make current research results freely available. Due to their preliminary nature, working papers are subject to ongoing peer review. In this context, updated paper versions may be made available at irregular intervals. It may also be useful to contact the author(s) directly about the results before referring to or citing a paper.
