Harvard Business School, Boston, MA 02163, USA.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA.
Science. 2017 Apr 7;356(6333):78-81. doi: 10.1126/science.aal0010. Epub 2017 Mar 30.
Scientists and policy-makers have long argued that public investments in science have practical applications. Using data on patents linked to U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants over a 27-year period, we provide a large-scale accounting of linkages between public research investments and subsequent patenting. We find that about 10% of NIH grants generate a patent directly but 30% generate articles that are subsequently cited by patents. Although policy-makers often focus on direct patenting by academic scientists, the bulk of the effect of NIH research on patenting appears to be indirect. We also find no systematic relationship between the "basic" versus "applied" research focus of a grant and its propensity to be cited by a patent.
长期以来,科学家和政策制定者一直认为,对科学的公共投资具有实际应用价值。本文利用 27 年间与美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)拨款相关联的专利数据,大规模核算了公共研究投资与后续专利之间的联系。研究发现,大约 10%的 NIH 拨款直接产生专利,但 30%的拨款产生的文章随后被专利引用。尽管政策制定者通常关注学术科学家的直接专利申请,但 NIH 研究对专利的影响大部分是间接的。我们也没有发现拨款的“基础”与“应用”研究重点与被专利引用的倾向之间存在系统关系。