Access to credit: hindrance to technology transfer?

Technology development and transfer has been identified as a key element in the Bali Action Plan. In the negotiations on a global climate treaty the developing nations have put forth ideas and plans to ensure that intellectual property rights (IPRs) do not become a barrier to transfer of climate friendly technology. In this discussion paper, this question of technology transfer, intellectual property rights is addressed in the context of climate change. Patent statistics shows the dominance of developed countries in specific technologies. The analysis on specific technologies indicates that IPRs is an important issue in development and transfer of technology and it is a barrier. Data indicates that although developing countries have made some progress, the dominance of developed countries in terms of patents, royalty and licensing income and expenditure on Research and Development remains as before. The historical experience is that stronger IPRs do not always result in more technology transfer and technology absorption. Hence the argument that developing countries should provide stronger protection of IPRs to encourage technology transfer has to be challenged. The technology transfer under UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol has been minimal and insufficient to meet the needs of developing countries. The harmonization of IPRs through TRIPS has limited the options of countries to use compulsory licensing and competition policy. TRIPS has not facilitated technology transfer, particularly to Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and the North-South divide on this issue has resulted in a stalemate. Under these circumstances it is futile to expect that TRIPS alone will result in more transfer of climate-friendly technologies. Using Common But Differentiated Responsibility principle in technology development and transfer is desirable. Many proposals and suggestions have been made to stimulate technology development and transfer. Montreal Protocol is a successful example that is relevant in the context of climate change. The proposals including the proposals made by developing countries deserve a serious consideration and innovative solutions have to be found. Humanity does not have the luxury of finding solutions over a century to solve problems created by global climate change. Developing countries need both development and access to technologies that will facilitate the transition to less carbon intensive economy within the next two or three decades. So it is essential that IP issues do not become a barrier in this transition. The challenge of climate change calls for out of the box thinking to find solutions that can make a difference. The IPR issues in technology transfer need to be tackled by a combination of policy measures, incentives and bringing in changes at the global IP regime under TRIPS.

The transfer of technology from the organizational viewpoint

Technology development and transfer has been identified as a key element in the Bali Action Plan. In the negotiations on a global climate treaty the developing nations have put forth ideas and plans to ensure that intellectual property rights (IPRs) do not become a barrier to transfer of climate friendly technology. In this discussion paper, this question of technology transfer, intellectual property rights is addressed in the context of climate change. Patent statistics shows the dominance of developed countries in specific technologies. The analysis on specific technologies indicates that IPRs is an important issue in development and transfer of technology and it is a barrier. Data indicates that although developing countries have made some progress, the dominance of developed countries in terms of patents, royalty and licensing income and expenditure on Research and Development remains as before. The historical experience is that stronger IPRs do not always result in more technology transfer and technology absorption. Hence the argument that developing countries should provide stronger protection of IPRs to encourage technology transfer has to be challenged. The technology transfer under UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol has been minimal and insufficient to meet the needs of developing countries. The harmonization of IPRs through TRIPS has limited the options of countries to use compulsory licensing and competition policy. TRIPS has not facilitated technology transfer, particularly to Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and the North-South divide on this issue has resulted in a stalemate. Under these circumstances it is futile to expect that TRIPS alone will result in more transfer of climate-friendly technologies. Using Common But Differentiated Responsibility principle in technology development and transfer is desirable. Many proposals and suggestions have been made to stimulate technology development and transfer. Montreal Protocol is a successful example that is relevant in the context of climate change. The proposals including the proposals made by developing countries deserve a serious consideration and innovative solutions have to be found. Humanity does not has the luxury of finding solutions over a century to solve problems created by global climate change. Developing countries need both development and access to technologies that will facilitate the transition to less carbon intensive economy within the next two or three decades. So it is essential that IP issues do not become a barrier in this transition. The challenge of climate change calls for out of the box thinking to find solutions that can make a difference. The IPR issues in technology transfer need to be tackled by a combination of policy measures, incentives and bringing in changes at the global IP regime under TRIPS.

Background and Purpose: Indonesia has patent law for more than three decades and has made adjustments with the Trade related of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) Agreement by revising such patent law several times with the aim of encouraging innovation and technology transfer as promised by the Agreement, but technological capacity and technology transfer are still low. The purpose of this study is to analyse whether the implementation of international patent law in Indonesia facilitates innovation and technology transfer to increase technological capacity.
 
 Methodology: This study used a normative legal research methodology. It used statutory and conceptual approaches. Both approaches were needed to analyse conceptual and theoretical works related to this topic and to examine consistency of applicable laws and policy. Legal resources and legal documents were analysed using descriptive qualitative analysis.
 
 Findings: This study found that the implementation of international patent law to promote innovation and technology transfer in Indonesia was still not easy to be seen because the Indonesian Patent Law was not designed comprehensively to promote innovation and technology transfer and lack of consistency of regulations and policies on technology transfer. It also paid less attention to facilitate international technology transfer.
 
 Contributions: This study suggests that Indonesia needs comprehensiveness and consistency of all prevailing laws and regulation related to technology transfer, research and development, particularly patent law, to fully use flexibility provided by the TRIPs Agreement to enhance national technological capacity and innovation.
 
 Keywords: Indonesian Patent Law, innovation, International Patent Law, technology transfer, TRIPs Agreement.
 
 Cite as: Barizah, N. (2021). International patent law and its implementation in Indonesia: Can it facilitate technology transfer? Journal of Nusantara Studies, 6(1), 156-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol6iss1pp156-175

To help stem the continuing decline of biodiversity, effective transfer of technology from resource-rich to biodiversity-rich countries is required. Biodiversity technology as defined by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is a complex term, encompassing a wide variety of activities and interest groups. As yet, there is no robust framework by which to monitor the extent to which technology transfer might benefit biodiversity. We devised a definition of biodiversity technology and a framework for the monitoring of technology transfer between CBD signatories. Biodiversity technology within the scope of the CBD encompasses hard and soft technologies that are relevant to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, or make use of genetic resources, and that relate to all aspects of the CBD, with a particular focus on technology transfer from resource-rich to biodiversity-rich countries. Our proposed framework introduces technology transfer as a response indicator: technology transfer is increased to stem pressures on biodiversity. We suggest an initial approach of tracking technology flow between countries; charting this flow is likely to be a one-to-many relationship (i.e., the flow of a specific technology from one country to multiple countries). Future developments should then focus on integrating biodiversity technology transfer into the current pressure-state-response indicator framework favored by the CBD (i.e., measuring the influence of technology transfer on changes in state and pressure variables). Structured national reporting is important to obtaining metrics relevant to technology and knowledge transfer. Interim measures, that can be used to assess biodiversity technology or knowledge status while more in-depth indicators are being developed, include the number of species inventories, threatened species lists, or national red lists; databases on publications and project funding may provide measures of international cooperation. Such a pragmatic approach, followed by rigorous testing of specific technology transfer metrics submitted by CBD signatories in a standardized manner may in turn improve the focus of future targets on technology transfer for biodiversity conservation.

Technology development and transfer is an important feature of both the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its Kyoto Protocol. Although the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) does not have an explicit technology transfer mandate, it may contribute to technology transfer by financing emission reduction projects using technologies currently not available in the host countries. This article analyses the claims about technology transfer made by CDM project participants in their project design documents. Roughly one-third of all CDM projects, accounting for almost two-thirds of the annual emission reductions, involve technology transfer. Technology transfer varies widely across project types and is more common for larger projects and projects with foreign participants. Equipment transfer is more common for larger projects, while smaller projects involve transfers of both equipment and knowledge or of knowledge alone. Technology transfer does not appear to be closely related to country size or per-capita GDP, but a host country can influence the extent of technology transfer involved in its CDM projects.

Preface. Abbreviations. Introduction. Part I: The International Deep Sea-Bed Regime under the 1982 LOS Convention. I. Legal Status of the Deep Sea-Bed Mineral Resources. II. Basic Features of the Mining Regime: the Parallel System and the International Sea-Bed Authority. III. The Issue of National Legislation. Part II: Transfer of Technology Relating to Activities in the Area under the Law of the Sea Convention. IV. Transfer of Technology in International Law. V. General Principles on Transfer of Deep Sea-Bed Mining Technology in the Law of the Sea Convention. VI. Transfer of Technology Rules in Article 5 of Annex III. Part III: Towards a Final Agreement. VII. The Work of the Preparatory Commission. VIII. In Search of a Universally Accepted Regime. Bibliography. Appendix I: Deep Sea-Bed Mining Companies. Tables. Appendix II: The U.S. Proposal on `Fair and Reasonable Commercial Terms and Conditions'. Appendix III: Draft Transfer of Technology Provisions by Special Commission 3 of the PrepCom. Appendix IV. The 1994 Agreement Relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982. Index.

Among socio-economic, technological and managerial reasons, ineffective transfer of farm technology are important causal factors for poor performance of agriculture. Transfer of technology has been the major obstacle in achieving the targets in past. Present study deals with level of adoption of modern agricultural technology, access and quality of modern technology, outreach of agricultural extension institutions and problems faced by extension officials in transfer of farm technology in Bihar. Study is based on primary data obtained through survey of farm households, agricultural scientists and extension officers in Bihar. Study revealed the coverage of agricultural development programmes limited to few villages, and line departments still dominating technology transfer arena. Institutions like ATMA and KVK were limited to few activities only. Adoption level of artificial insemination is comparatively high due to active participation of cooperatives and private sector, but less than one fourth of farmers could adopt advanced horticulture and modern crop seeds in Bihar. Small size of land holding and fragmented land emerged as main constraint to adoption of modern horticultural technology in Bihar. While analyzing use of modern varieties of principal crops, comparatively high level of adoption on small and medium farms was observed. Dissemination of information about modern agricultural development projects/schemes is a necessary factor for adoption of modern technology. ATMA and KVK have performed better in dissemination of the information, however, inadequate staff, infrequent supervision and lack of conveyance facility are most important constraints faced in transfer of technology in Bihar.

This paper addresses key issues to consider in designing international policies and institutions to encourage technology innovation and transfer of clean energy technologies. The first part of the paper presents a conceptual framework so-called Research & Development, Demonstration, Deployment, Diffusion, and Commercial maturity, “RDD&D chain”. The RDD&D chain indicates that there are several stages in technological development. The paper recognizes that different policy measures need to be designed for each stage of technological development. At the diffusion stage of technological development, the paper argues that while it is important to provide the private sector with economic incentives through economic policy instruments such as clean development mechanism, it is not enough for clean energy technologies to be successfully installed in the developing countries. It points out that there is a strong need for institutional support for accessing information on technologies and enhancing local capacity to handle such technologies at the diffusion stage. The second part of the paper describes barriers that hamper innovation and transfer of technologies in the developing countries. The paper highlights a lack of the enabling environment in the developing countries as a main barrier in transferring technologies at the diffusion stage. It emphasizes that the institutional support for improving the enabling environment and enhancing capacity of the developing countries is also essential for successful innovation and transfer of technologies at this stage.

Gutterman and Erlich provide a clear, concise summary of all the important legal and business issues that may arise in technology transfer arrangements. Discussed are the law of technology transfer, including federal legislation and intellectual property law; the fundamentals of establishing a technology transfer, including confidentiality agreements, due diligence investigations, and selection of technology partners; legal and business issues involved in licensing and research and development arrangements, including university research arrangements; and steps to be taken by federal laboratory managers, the Federal government, and private firms to improve technology transfer. This work is important reading for executives, entrepreneurs, lawyers, accountants, and other professionals involved in transfer arrangements, and also for venture capitalists and investment bankers seeking a broad overview of technology-driven transactions. Academic lawyers and their students will also find this book valuable. The nation's ability to facilitate the transfer of its valuable, publicly funded technology and related know-how from its national research laboratories and universities to the private sector for commercial usage will be key to its future economic growth and global business competitiveness. This work is a comprehensive guide to all of the essential legal and business considerations that entrepreneurs and managers must take into account in the course of structuring technology transfers. The book is intended to provide readers with a clear and concise summary of the basic building blocks of effective technology transfer, including applicable federal laws and regulations, intellectual property law, licensing agreements, research and development arrangements, and the strategies that may be adopted for improving technology transfer in the future. This book takes the reader through each transaction on a step-by-step basis, beginning with partner selection and preliminary activities, and includes comprehensive model contract provisions. In addition, the book analyzes how the federal laboratories, the government, and firms in the private sector can improve the quantity and quality of technology transfer in the years to come.

Indonesia’s fresh milk production is only able to fulfil 22% of national milk demands. With growing milk consumption and the national target of fulfilling at least 60% of national demands from domestic production by 2025, boosting the productivity of dairy farms becomes important. This requires more adoption of productivity-enhancing technologies, techniques, and better farm management practices by dairy farms. However, as dairy farmers are predominantly smallholders, investing in technologies is a challenge due to cost, small production scale, and a lack of information and awareness. Partnering with the private sector offers a solution, as evidenced by case studies of technology and knowledge transfers from major milk-processing companies such as Cimory, Frisian Flag Indonesia [FFI], and Nestlé), and international development organizations operating in West Java and East Java. An example of collaboration is a support for digitalization in milk collection points (MCP). The system assigns a price that reflects the quality of milk from each farmer, therefore incentivizing investment in technology, equipment upgrading, and better management by farmers to improve milk quality and production. Different contract mechanisms are applied for the technology transfers—some are put alongside a supplier agreement with mandatory supply requirements while the others are delivered as grants and loans tied to a commitment to maintaining quality and standards. Meanwhile, public efforts for promoting technology adoption are mostly delivered as free technology provision. Provision of subsidized or free technologies is only effective at introducing technology in the short term but it leads to pseudo-adoption behaviors; in the long term, the technologies are often disregarded. Comparisons between government and private technology transfer programs also reveals a disconnect. Government assistance often is delivered as technology or equipment grants implemented through a few vendors. The national programs overlap with local government programs and lack proper monitoring and evaluation or user training. In contrast, programs from the private sector and donors utilize a market-based and commercial or semi-commercial approach, which involves multiple stakeholders, and include standardized training and after-sale services. Public and private programs often overlap and promote conflicting knowledge. To improve technology adoption by dairy farms, the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) should acknowledge and facilitate the private sector’s role in technology and knowledge transfers. This can be achieved by first providing a stronger legal basis in the next Ministry of Agriculture Strategic Plans (Renstra) and by revising and enforcing MoA 13/2017 on Partnerships in Animal Husbandry Businesses. This would lead to implementing technology and knowledge transfers as a possible partnership scheme between firms and farms. Reducing fragmentation and overlaps can be achieved by mapping existing technology transfers from the private sector, donors, and local governments. The ministry should refrain from delivering similar assistance that has been provided by other stakeholders and aim instead to complement and facilitate them through a market-based approach.

Technological capability and technology transfer both play important roles in achieving low-carbon development targets and the concepts of both have appeared in national development and climate policy debates. Yet, they differ. Improving capabilities and transfer mechanisms are two differing approaches to technological development. Technology transfer is associated with a key political dynamic within international climate policy, in that developing countries request support from industrialised countries. Whereas technological capability focuses on building internal capabilities and is often framed in the context of national industrial policy plans rather than relying on external support. We argue that technology development, a combination of these approaches, can contribute to South Africa's low-carbon development through innovation and technology-based mitigation actions that increase domestic technological capabilities. Technological capability needs to become a determinant of mitigation action to effectively contribute to achieving South Africa's low-carbon development goals. International technology transfer and cooperation should contribute to boosting domestic capabilities to advance technological development. Technology transfer based on pure sales will not contribute to achieving long-term low-carbon development goals.

Technology Transfer Models Between Industrial Biotechnology Companies and Academic Spin-Offs

All of Africa’s emerging economies are faced with developmental challenges, which can be partly ameliorated using effective University–Industry technology transfer. While technology transfer remains at the infant stage, sparsely documented, and with no complex ongoing processes in many African societies, Universities in Africa are making efforts in University–Industry collaborations aimed at bringing significant improvements to the continent in a bid to drive national innovation and regional economic development. In this paper, we attempt to evaluate the progress made so far by Nigerian Universities in technological innovation transfer, in order to suggest ways for possible future progress. To do this, crucial technology transfer resource factors (inputs), namely, the number of linkage projects funded by the “African Research Council” (ARC), consortium membership of the University’s technology transfer office, and the number of doctoral staff at the University’s technology transfer office, were checked against a set of performance measures (number of executed licenses, amount of licensing royalty income, number of spin-offs created, and the number of spin-offs created with university equity), using data envelopment analysis and multiple regression, respectively. Results suggest that Universities that possess better resource factors reported higher outputs on most of the performance indicators applied. In addition, it was observed that Universities with greater ability to effectively transfer knowledge had higher technology commercialization performance and financial sustainability. The implication of these results is that Universities in Africa need to develop in line with the technology transfer resource (input) factors suggested within this study, as this is the way to go for better performance.

Objective — improvement of information provision for pediatric endocrinologists.Materials and methods. Abstracts of reports for scientific researches (39) and researches (79) conducted in Ukraine in 2001–2017, research informational and innovational resources provided in record cards, their semantic, informational, scientometric, bibliometric, patent, statistical analysis methods; pediatric endocrinologist surveys (50).Results and discussion. It has been established that, in economic aspect, transfer of technology can be commercial and non-commercial. In the area of children and adolescents health care, non-commercial transfer is primarily used, instrument of which is scientific technical information: scientific and occupational journals, their databases and databanks, patent publications, reference books, reports and contributions to conferences, workshops, symposiums, trade shows, internship of scientists and specialists in universities and organizations; scientific technical information exchange.It has been established that implementation of new methods of prevention, diagnostics, treatment and organizational decision-making in the area of pediatric endocrinology includes three major steps: acquisition of primary information on medical technologies through means of scientific communication; organization of their implementation at a workplace and handling of material, technical, legal, financial and personnel issues as to their use (making an appropriate agreement), as well as designer supervision.We have conducted informational and analytical evaluation of research process and non-commercial transfer of knowledge and technology in pediatric endocrinology in Ukraine in 2001–2017.Analysis of researches indicates an increase in scientific research and research quantity (1.5 times), shows their topical direction, indicates structure of created scientific product (publications, intellectual property items, guidance documents etc.), and establishes ways of scientific result usage by pediatric endocrinologists.Conclusions. In Ukraine, there is a stable process of research in essential directions of pediatric endocrinology. Appropriate informational and innovational resources are being generated. However, their usage by specialists is associated with a number of outstanding issues, including development of a conceptual construct, imperfection of channels for transferring scientific product to the professional community, absence of methodology for assessment of non-commercial transfer of medical technology. Further research of this issue will help to improve transfer of knowledge and technology not only in separate areas of pediatric endocrinology, but in children and adolescents health care in general.