Show simple item record

Tendencias y panorama científico de la investigación sobre comercialización universitaria de patentes: una revisión bibliométrica

dc.contributor.authorCordero Díaz, Marling Carolina
dc.contributor.authorCastro Silva, Hugo Fernando
dc.contributor.authorRodríguez Cañas, Gonzalo Andrés
dc.coverage.spatialColombiaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2026-04-09T15:31:36Z
dc.date.available2026-04-09T15:31:36Z
dc.date.issued2025-05-01
dc.identifier.issn2346-030Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioinstitucional.ufpso.edu.co/xmlui/handle/20.500.14167/6180
dc.description.abstractLa investigación analiza los factores que influyen en la comercialización exitosa de patentes universitarias mediante el método de coocurrencia, mapeando la estructura intelectual del campo a través de redes de palabras clave. Se consideraron conceptos como patentes universitarias, propiedad intelectual, transferencia de tecnología, innovación y emprendimiento universitario. La metodología incluyó análisis de co-palabras y la visualización con el software VOSviewer®, a partir de publicaciones en Scopus entre 2000 y 2024. Se aplicaron técnicas de normalización de términos para garantizar precisión. Los resultados muestran que Estados Unidos, Reino Unido y China lideran la producción científica y la colaboración internacional, mientras que África y América Latina presentan baja participación en estas redes. Se identificaron clústeres temáticos que agrupan áreas como ecosistemas de emprendimiento universitario, gestión de la propiedad intelectual, redes colaborativas e innovación tecnológica. La discusión resalta las brechas regionales y la concentración del conocimiento en economías avanzadas. Se concluye que se requieren políticas que equilibren la protección de la propiedad intelectual con la innovación abierta, especialmente en sectores emergentes y sostenibles.en_US
dc.language.isospaen_US
dc.relationhttps://revistas.udes.edu.co/aibi/article/view/5835en_US
dc.titleTendencias y panorama científico de la investigación sobre comercialización universitaria de patentes: una revisión bibliométricaen_US
dc.title.translatedTrends and the Scientific Landscape of Research on University Patent Commercialization: A Bibliometric Reviewen_US
dc.contributor.cvlacMarling Carolina Cordero Díaz [0001381724]en_US
dc.contributor.cvlacHugo Fernando Castro Silva [0001388686]en_US
dc.contributor.cvlacGonzalo Andrés Rodríguez Cañas [0001619363]en_US
dc.contributor.googlescholarMarling Carolina Cordero Díaz [77h-CJwAAAAJ]en_US
dc.contributor.googlescholarHugo Fernando Castro Silva [vxtjgAoAAAAJ]en_US
dc.contributor.googlescholarGonzalo Andrés Rodríguez Cañas [p581b8EAAAAJ]en_US
dc.contributor.orcidMarling Carolina Cordero Díaz [0000-0002-2913-5588]en_US
dc.contributor.orcidHugo Fernando Castro Silva [0000-0001-6020-402X]en_US
dc.contributor.orcidGonzalo Andrés Rodríguez Cañas [0000-0001-9310-2425]en_US
dc.contributor.researchgateMarling Carolina Cordero Díaz [Marling-Cordero-Diaz]en_US
dc.contributor.researchgateHugo Fernando Castro Silva [Hugo-Castro-Silva]en_US
dc.contributor.researchgateGonzalo Andrés Rodríguez Cañas [Gonzalo-Rodriguez-Canas]en_US
dc.contributor.scopusMarling Carolina Cordero Díaz [57205117978]en_US
dc.contributor.scopusHugo Fernando Castro Silva [57205121211]en_US
dc.description.abstractenglishThis research analyzes the factors influencing the successful commercialization of university patents using the co-occurrence method to map the intellectual structure of the field through keyword networks. Key concepts such as university patents, intellectual property, technology transfer, innovation, and university entrepreneurship were considered. The methodology included co-word analysis and visualization with the VOSviewer® software, based on Scopus publications from 2000 to 2024. Term normalization techniques were applied to improve accuracy. The results reveal that the United States, the United Kingdom, and China lead scientific production and international collaboration, while Africa and Latin America show limited participation in these networks. Thematic clusters were identified, reflecting areas such as university entrepreneurship ecosystems, intellectual property management, collaborative networks, and technological innovation. The discussion highlights regional gaps and the concentration of knowledge in advanced economies. The study concludes that policies balancing intellectual property protection with open innovation are required, particularly in emerging and sustainable sectors.en_US
dc.subject.proposalinnovación universitariaen_US
dc.subject.proposalredes de colaboración científicaen_US
dc.subject.proposalanálisis bibliométricoen_US
dc.subject.proposalcomercialización de patentesen_US
dc.subject.proposaltransferencia de tecnologíaen_US
dc.subject.proposalemprendimiento universitarioen_US
dc.subject.proposalpropiedad intelectualen_US
dc.subject.proposalinnovación abiertaen_US
dc.subject.keywordsuniversity innovationen_US
dc.subject.keywordsscientific collaboration networksen_US
dc.subject.keywordsbibliometric analysisen_US
dc.subject.keywordspatent commercializationen_US
dc.subject.keywordstechnology transferen_US
dc.subject.keywordsuniversity entrepreneurshipen_US
dc.subject.keywordsintellectual propertyen_US
dc.subject.keywordsopen innovationen_US
dc.publisher.facultyFacultad ingenieríasen_US
dc.type.redcolhttp://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ARTen_US
dc.relation.referencesL. Villafaña-Díaz et al., “Evaluación tecnológica y comercial de patentes universitarias a partir de la identificación de oportunidades comerciales en transferencia de tecnología”, CienciaUAT, vol. 17, núm. 1, pp. 107–122, dic. 2022, doi: 10.29059/cienciauat.v17i1.1597.en_US
dc.relation.referencesOrganización Mundial De La Propiedad Intelectual, Informe mundial sobre lapropiedad intelectual en 2022 /. Unknown, 2022. doi: 10.34667/TIND.45358.en_US
dc.relation.referencesJ. Wang y Y. Qian, “The Impact of University Patent Ownership on Commercialization”, marzo de 2023, National Bureau of Economic Research: 31021. doi: 10.3386/w31021.en_US
dc.relation.referencesF. Brescia, G. Colombo, y P. Landoni, “Organizational structures of Knowledge Transfer Offices: an analysis of the world’s top-ranked universities”, J. Technol. Transf., vol. 41, núm. 1, pp. 132–151, feb. 2016, doi: 10.1007/s10961-014-9384-5.en_US
dc.relation.referencesS. Fernández López, L. Otero González, D. Rodeiro Pazos, y A. Rodríguez Sandiás, “Determinantes de la capacidad de las universidades para desarrollar patentes”, Rev. Educ. Super., vol. 38, núm. 149, pp. 7–30, mar. 2009.en_US
dc.relation.referencesJ. Friedman y J. Silberman, “University Technology Transfer: Do Incentives, Management, and Location Matter?”, J. Technol. Transf., vol. 28, núm. 1, pp. 17–30, ene. 2003, doi: 10.1023/A:1021674618658.en_US
dc.relation.references“An Assessment of the Determinants of University Technology Transfer -José L. González-Pernía, Graciela Kuechle, Iñaki Peña-Legazkue, 2013”. Consultado: el 23 de agosto de 2025. [En línea]. Disponible en: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0891242412471847.en_US
dc.relation.referencesR. Grimaldi, M. Kenney, D. S. Siegel, y M. Wright, “30 years after Bayh–Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship”, Res. Policy, vol. 40, núm. 8, pp. 1045–1057, oct. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.04.005.en_US
dc.relation.referencesJ. Wolszczak-Derlacz, “The determinants of European universities patenting and co-patenting with companies”, J. Technol. Transf., vol. 50, núm. 2, pp. 620–636, abr. 2025, doi: 10.1007/s10961-024-10112-7.en_US
dc.relation.references“Academic Technology Transfer and Commercialization of University Research | NSF -National Science Foundation”. Consultado: el 23 de agosto de 2025. [En línea]. Disponible en: https://www.nsf.gov/academic-technology-transfer-commercialization-university.en_US
dc.relation.referencesP. K. Wong y A. Singh, “Do co-publications with industry lead to higher levels of university technology commercialization activity?”, en First International Technology Management Conference, San Jose, CA, USA: IEEE, jun. 2011, pp. 592–600. doi: 10.1109/ITMC.2011.5996031.en_US
dc.relation.referencesR. Trequattrini, A. Lardo, B. Cuozzo y S. Manfredi, “Intangible assets management and digital transformation: Evidence from intellectual property rights-intensive industries,” Meditari Accountancy Research, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 989–1006, 2022, doi: 10.1108/MEDAR-03-2021-1216.en_US
dc.relation.referencesM. Peris-Ortiz, J. Alonso Gómez, J. M. Merigó-Lindahl y C. Rueda-Armengot, Eds., Entrepreneurial Universities: Exploring the Academic and Innovative Dimensions of Entrepreneurship in Higher Education. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2017, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-47949-1.en_US
dc.relation.referencesR. P. O’Shea, T. J. Allen, A. Chevalier, y F. Roche, “Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities”, Res. Policy, vol. 34, núm. 7, pp. 994–1009, sep. 2005, doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.05.011.en_US
dc.relation.referencesF. Rossi y A. Rosli, “Indicators of university–industry knowledge transfer performance and their implications for universities: Evidence from the UK”, Stud. High. Educ., vol. 40, núm. 10, pp. 1970–1991, 2015, doi: 10.1080/03075079.2014.914914.en_US
dc.relation.referencesJ. A. Cunningham, E. E. Lehmann, M. Menter, y N. Seitz, “The impact of university innovation support structures on the performance of spin-offs”, Res. Policy, vol. 48, núm. 9, p. 103806, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2019.103806.en_US
dc.relation.referencesS. F. López, L. O. González, D. R. Pazos, y A. R. Sandiás, “Determinantes de la capacidad de las universidades para desarrollar patentes”, Rev. Educ. Super., vol. XXXVIII(1), núm. 149, pp. 7–30, 2009.en_US
dc.relation.referencesD. S. Siegel, D. Waldman, y A. Link, “Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study”, Res. Policy, vol. 32, núm. 1, pp. 27-48, ene. 2003, doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00196-2.en_US
dc.relation.referencesJ. Bercovitz y M. Feldman, “The mechanisms of collaboration in university–industry research partnerships”, Res. Policy, vol. 40, núm. 4,pp. 547–560, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.01.011.en_US
dc.relation.referencesA. Alexander, K. Miller, y S. Fielding, “University technology transfer and sustainable innovation ecosystems: A global bibliometric analysis”, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, vol. 182, p. 121857, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121857.en_US
dc.relation.referencesA. Geuna y F. Rossi, “Changes to university IPR regulations in Europe and the impact on academic patenting”, Res. Policy, vol. 40, núm. 8, pp. 1068–1076, oct. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.05.008.en_US
dc.relation.referencesB. Bozeman, “Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory”, Res. Policy, vol. 29, núm. 4, pp. 627–655, abr. 2000, doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00093-1.en_US
dc.relation.referencesJ. G. Thursby, R. Jensen, y M. C. Thursby, “Objectives, Characteristics and Outcomes of University Licensing: A Survey of Major U.S. Universities”, J. Technol. Transf., vol. 26, núm. 1, pp. 59–72, ene. 2001, doi: 10.1023/A:1007884111883.en_US
dc.relation.referencesD. S. Siegel y M. Wright, “Academic Entrepreneurship: Time for a Rethink?”, Br. J. Manag., vol. 26, núm. 4, pp. 582–595, 2015, doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.12116.en_US
dc.relation.referencesH. Etzkowitz y L. Leydesdorff, “The dynamics of innovation: from National Systemsand ‘Mode 2’ to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations”, Res. Policy, vol. 29, núm. 2, pp. 109–123, feb. 2000, doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4.en_US
dc.relation.referencesM. Perkmann et al., “Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations”, Res. Policy, vol. 42, núm. 2, pp. 423–442, mar. 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.09.007.en_US
dc.relation.referencesG. J. Zapata Rotundo, A. Hernández Arias, G. J. Zapata Rotundo, y A. Hernández Arias, “Capacidad de absorción: revisión de laliteratura y un modelo de sus determinantes”, RETOS Rev. Cienc. Adm. Econ., vol. 8, núm. 16, pp. 121–140, mar. 2018, doi: 10.17163/ret.n16.2018.09.en_US
dc.relation.referencesN. J. ; W. van Eck L., “VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping”, Scientometrics, vol. 84, núm. 2, pp. 523–538, 2010, doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3.en_US
dc.relation.referencesE. ; D. van Burg J. ;. Kers, J. G., “When do academics patent outside their university? An in-depth case study”, Technovation, vol. 107, p. 102287, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102287.en_US
dc.relation.referencesM. Ranga y H. Etzkowitz, “Triple Helix Systems: An Analytical Framework for Innovation Policy and Practice in the Knowledge Society”, Ind. High. Educ., ago. 2013, doi: 10.5367/ihe.2013.0165.en_US
dc.relation.referencesJ. Lerner, “Understanding the heterogeneity of university research commercialization: place, policy and practice (working paper)”, NBER HBS Work. Pap., 2024, [En línea]. Disponible en: https://faculty.hbs.edu/lerner/papers/24-043.pdf.en_US
dc.relation.referencesU. ; de O. C. da Costa Leonidio D. ;. Gomes de Souza, C., “Universities Patent Quality Indicators (UPQI): A bibliometric and systematic review”, J. Scientometr. Res., vol. 12, núm. 2, p. XX–XX, 2023, doi: 10.5530/jscires.12.2.027.en_US
dc.relation.referencesW. M. Cohen y D. A. Levinthal, “Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective-on Learning and Innovation *”, en Strategic Learning in a Knowledge Economy, Routledge, 2000.en_US
dc.relation.referencesS. A. Zahra y G. George, “Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension”, Acad. Manage. Rev., vol. 27, núm. 2, pp. 185–203, abr. 2002, doi: 10.2307/4134351.en_US
dc.relation.referencesW. ;Liang et al., “Systematic analysis of 50 years of Stanford University technology transfer and commercialization”, Nat. Biotechnol., vol. 40, pp. 1325–1335, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.patter.2022.100584.en_US
dc.relation.referencesH. K. ; J. Hvide B. F., “The impact of patenting on university research: Evidence from faculty careers”, J. Polit. Econ., vol. 126, núm. 2, pp. 671–712, 2018, doi: 10.1086/697902.en_US
dc.relation.referencesJ. West, A. Salter, W. Vanhaverbeke, y H. Chesbrough, “Open innovation: The next decade”, Res. Policy, vol. 43, núm. 5, pp. 805–811, jun. 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.03.001.en_US
dc.relation.referencesH. W. Chesbrough, Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business Press, 2003.en_US
dc.relation.referencesC. Freeman, Technology, policy, and economic performance : lessons from Japan. London ; New York : Pinter Publishers, 1987. Consultado: el 24 de agosto de 2025. [En línea]. Disponible en: http://archive.org/details/technologypolicy00free.en_US
dc.relation.referencesW. W. Powell y S. Grodal, “Networks of Innovators”, en The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, J. Fagerberg y D. C. Mowery, Eds., Oxford University Press, 2006, p. 0. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199286805.003.0003.en_US
dc.relation.referencesV. L. ; M. McDevitt J. ;. Winwood, D. ;. Nijhawan, V. ;. Sherer, T. ;. Ritter, J. F. ;. Sanberg, P. R., “More than money: Theexponential impact of academic technology transfer”, Technol. Innov., vol. 16, núm. 3, pp. 75–84, 2014, doi: 10.3727/194982414X13971392823479.en_US
dc.relation.referencesA. A. ; H. Tseng C. W., “Performance of Technology Transfer Offices: indicators and cross‑case analysis”, J. Technol. Manag. Innov., vol. 9, núm. 2, p. XX–XX, 2014.en_US
dc.relation.referencesM. Castells, The Rise of the Network Society. John Wiley & Sons, 2011.en_US
dc.relation.references“Diffusion of Innovations, by Everett Rogers (1995)”. Consultado: el 24 de agosto de 2025. [En línea]. Disponible en: http://web.stanford.edu/class/symbsys205/Diffusion%20of%20Innovations.htm.en_US
dc.relation.referencesR. G. Fichman, “Journal of the Association for Information Systems”, Consultado: el 23 de agosto de 2025. [En línea]. Disponible en: https://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol5/iss8/1/.en_US
dc.relation.referencesI. Nonaka y H. Takeuchi, The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University Press, 1995. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780195092691.001.0001.en_US
dc.relation.referencesS. Khan, S. K. Sharma, and A. K. Laha “From misalignment to synergy: Analysis of patents from Indian universities & research institutions”, World Pat. Inf., vol. 72, p. 102128, 2023,[On líne]. Available:http://arxiv.org/pdf/2304.12176.en_US
dc.relation.referencesM. Squicciarini, H. Dernis, and C. Criscuolo, Measuring Patent Quality: Indicators of Technological and Economic Value, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, no. 2013/03. Paris, France: OECD Publishing, 2013, doi: 10.1787/5k4522wkw1r8-en.en_US
dc.relation.referencesF. ; H. Poege D. ;. Gaessler, F. ;. Baruffaldi, S., “Science quality and the value of inventions”, Sci. Adv., vol. 5, núm. 12, p. eaay7323, 2019, doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aay7323.en_US
dc.relation.referencesM. Callon, J. P. Courtial, y F. Laville, “Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry”, Scientometrics, vol. 22, núm. 1, pp. 155–205, sep. 1991, doi: 10.1007/BF02019280.en_US
dc.relation.referencesL. Waltman, N. J. van Eck, y E. C. M. Noyons, “A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks”, J. Informetr., vol. 4, núm. 4, pp. 629–635, oct. 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2010.07.002.en_US
dc.relation.referencesY. ; W. Wu E. ;. Huang, W. L., “Commercialization of university inventions: Individual and institutional factors affecting licensing of university patents”, Technovation, vol. 36, pp. 12–25, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2014.09.004.en_US
dc.relation.referencesK. ; M. Lee T. ;. Mortara, L., “Does TTO capability matter in commercializing university technology? Evidence from longitudinal data in South Korea”, Res. Policy, vol. 50, num.1, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2020.104133.en_US
dc.relation.referencesA. Perianes-Rodriguez, L. Waltman, y N. J. van Eck, “Constructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting”, J. Informetr., vol. 10, núm. 4, pp. 1178–1195, nov. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2016.10.006.en_US
dc.relation.referencesI. Zupic y T. Čater, “Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization”, Organ. Res. Methods, vol. 18, núm. 3, pp. 429–472, jul. 2015, doi: 10.1177/1094428114562629.en_US
dc.relation.referencesN. J. van Eck y L. Waltman, “How to normalize cooccurrence data? An analysis of some well-known similarity measures”, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol., vol. 60, núm. 8, pp. 1635–1651, 2009, doi: 10.1002/asi.21075.en_US
dc.relation.referencesL. ; van E. Waltman N. J. ;. Noyons, E. C. M., “A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks”, J. Informetr.,vol. 4, núm. 4, pp. 629–635, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2010.07.002.en_US
dc.relation.referencesD. H. Hsu, “Benchmarking U.S. university patent value and commercialization efforts: A new approach”, Res. Policy, vol. 50, p. 104276, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2020.104076.en_US
dc.relation.references“(PDF) Sustainability in the era of digital transformation and Industry 4.0: Key issues and further conceptual developments”, en ResearchGate. doi: 10.12804/urosario99789585000766.01.en_US
dc.identifier.DOIhttps://doi.org/10.15649/2346030X.5835en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Tendencias y panorama científico ...
Size:
923.6Kb
Format:
PDF
View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record