Home > IP Topics Index > Putting Intellectual Property to Work: Experiences from Around the World > From University to Industry: Technology Transfer at Unicamp in Brazil > Editor's Summary, Implications and Best Practices

While discussions continue about IP capacity building in developing countries, some leading institutions are simply forging ahead and building their own capacity. The State University of Campinas, or Unicamp, one of the leading research universities in Brazil, is an example. A large university with a diversity of affiliated research institutes, Unicamp has moved up the patenting league tables in recent years to become the single largest patenter in Brazil. The university’s current portfolio includes almost 50 granted, and 400 filed patents. Unicamp emphasizes chemistry, which accounts for close to half of its portfolio, and engineering, which accounts for another third. In addition, Unicamp conducts significant research in the life sciences, as indicated by one of the case studies in the chapter, a soy-based phytoestrogen for hormonal therapy licensed to a Brazilian pharmaceutical company.

These major advances in technology transfer at Unicamp are largely due to the efforts of its new technology transfer office, Inova Unicamp, founded in 2003. Inova began its operations by assessing all of the technologies being researched in Unicamp’s many laboratories and institutes. It then aggressively pursued new patent applications and licensing deals for the most promising technologies. In the short space of two and a half years, the office signed 128 technology transfer agreements with both private industry and government agencies. It also saw ten startup companies in the university’s business incubator become self-sustaining.

What lies behind these successes in Brazil? New public policy. In particular, the work of Inova is directly informed by two pieces of legislation. A 1996 law gave the university ownership rights to employee inventions. A 2004 law on innovation, however, gives the university the option to either hand over title to the employee inventor(s), or share 5%-33% of any royalties with them. In addition, the government has instituted a number of sector-specific incentives to support innovation in Brazil, including tax deductions on royalty payments, R&D investments, and foreign IP filing fees, as well as subsidies to firms to help pay scientists’ salaries.

The 2004 innovation law requires all government universities and R&D institutions to open an IP management or technology transfer office. One major consequence of these policies will likely be increased patenting and licensing activities at universities throughout Brazil. Currently, Unicamp’s rapid establishment of a functioning technology transfer office stands as a sterling example for other institutions in Brazil to emulate. Indeed, it is the prototype for the twenty first century.

Key Implications and Best Practices

Given that IP management is heavily context specific, these Key Implications and Best Practices are intended as starting points to be adapted to specific needs and circumstances.

For Government Policymakers

• The right policy mix, including support for research, availability of IP protection, clarity of ownership, and incentives for development, can begin moving technologies from the university into the local economy.
• Provide tax incentives to entities that invest in R&D, build IP and technology transfer offices and invest in IP education and training of their personnel.

For Senior Management (university president, R&D manager, etc)

• If it is supported by a clear mandate and given the resources and authority to get the job done, a single technology transfer office, with a core team comprising dedicated and capable professionals, can realize significant technology transfer results in a timely manner.
• In general, long lag times are typical for the start of a technology-licensing program, but this may be partly offset by an early surge of licenses from ongoing research programs whose commercial potential had not yet been considered.

For Scientists

• Scientists may be concerned about not having either the option of owning and managing intellectual property or maintaining an independent relationship with industry. These concerns can be offset by a favorable institutional royalty sharing policy and a capable technology transfer office that serves scientists well.

For Technology Transfer Officers

• As long as an institution undertakes research with commercial potential, the basic tools of patent prosecution and licensing will be very useful within a variety of research environments.
• Since there are likely to be many promising technologies that have not been previously properly assessed for commercial potential, significant progress can be made in a short amount of time, especially at the beginning of a new technology transfer program.