European Commission publishes draft report on exploitation of publicly funded R&D

Between 12 May 2006 and 31 July 2006, the Commission carried out an online consultation in relation to knowledge transfer and industry-PRO relations. The aim of the consultation was to gain an insight into the views of PROs and industry on various issues, including means to facilitating co-operation between the two and the legislative issues affecting any collaboration.

The Commission has now published a draft report summarising the outcome of this consultation; 199 responses were received in total from a wide selection of interested parties including universities and other PROs (i.e. Cancer Research UK), companies and governmental bodies. The Commission felt that the consultation clearly showed that the exploitation of publicly funded research results was deemed to be an important driver for EU competitiveness, highlighting a number of key issues that need to be addressed if closer PRO-industry links are to be achieved:

Facilitating co-operation between PROs and industry

• 72% of respondents felt that the due to different agendas and expertise, aligning the interests of PROs and industry was problematic. This was particularly evident with regard to valuing of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) resulting from R&D and the distribution of any financial rewards.
• 76% of respondents felt that transnational collaboration, where not part of a long-term, structural alliance, was unattractive due to the added complexities often involved primarily; cultural differences, legal differences and the difficulties encountered in trying to locate a partner.
• A large proportion of respondents felt that technology transfer officers should have some, even if not mandatory, form of accreditation or qualification.
• PROs feel there is a difficulty in balancing the need to keep their research results confidential in preparation for using them commercially and the PRO researchers desire to give such results open access.

Legislative issues affecting Pro-industry co-operation

• A large number of the respondents made it clear, that although not solely responsible, the differences between legislative frameworks caused a strong disincentive to transnational collaboration. The two legal issues which seemed to come out on top as the most problematic were the disparities in IPR ownership and joint ownership; with 53% and 43% respectively highlighting these two areas.
• The commission sought the views of PROs and industry as to whether some sort of harmonisation of legislation was required in order to attain greater industry-PRO co-operation across Euorpe. In response approximately 50% felt that some form of either European or National action on the basis of voluntary Community recommendations was required; most significantly in the vicinity of patent law, with a large proportion of the responses highlighting the need for harmonisation through the EPLA or the delivery of a Community Patent.
• Approximately 54% of respondents indicated that they would like to see an increase in funding from Public Authorities for knowledge transfer activities. Furthermore, significant support was shown for the drafting of voluntary guidelines on knowledge transfer in order to identify best practises on how to align interests between PROs and industry.
• In the US, the Bayh-Doyle Act states that where R&D is federally funded, there is a presumption of IPR ownership in favour of small businesses and not for profit organisations. The Commission put the question to PROs and industry as to whether a similar legislation should be introduced in Europe in order to require PROs to exploit their research results. The Consultation, on this issue, was unable to supply a conclusive answer; with just under 50% responding negatively and the remainder positively. However, amongst those responding positively there was disagreement as to whether any such legislation should be introduced on a National or an EC level.

The commission concluded that although the majority of public authorities are actively encouraging closer PRO-industry transnational co-operation, a number of significant barriers to collaboration still exist:

Cultural differences still remain a significant barrier, particularly in relation to revenue sharing and costs. The consultation concluded that in order to overcome these cultural differences there was a need for:

• Both PROs and industry to have a common starting point for discussions, irrespective of nationality;
• PRO staff to be given better incentives through both career progression and financial rewards, in order to encourage participation in collaboration;
• An increase in the number of knowledge transfer officers and an improvement in their access to training;
• Increased transnational staff exchanges between the public and private sectors; and
• A greater level of funding for knowledge transfer activities.

The Consultation has clearly uncovered the barriers to co-operation that exist in relation to legislative differences and concluded that the Commission would need to consider ways in which to harmonise the rules covering IPR ownership and joint ownership. However, the commission made it clear that this would not be done in the immediate future due to the inconclusive response to the ‘European Bayh-Doyle’ question.

The Commission concluded that there was nevertheless an urgent need to produce guidance on facilitating PRO-industry collaboration. Therefore the Commission intends to develop a Communication on knowledge transfer, focusing on the actions that need to be undertaken by public authorities and the stakeholders themselves, in order to facilitate the needed links between industry and the PROs. In addition to this, the Commission intends to deliver over the next few months a strengthened ‘Marie Curie’ scheme (a training and career development programme aimed at individual researchers) in order to promote an increase in public-private sector staff exchanges across Europe. It also states that it will provide a new Competitiveness and Innovation programme (CIP), which it purports, will further facilitate transnational networking and partner finding through the ‘Innovation Relay Centre’ network.