Search

This article introduces a model for evaluating the development of Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs), grounded in the balance between intellectual property protection and technology transfer. The model is applied to a phase transition taking place in Brazil, where, in accordance to the Technological Innovation Law of 2004, every Brazilian Science and Technology Centre must establish a TTO, responsible for the management of innovation processes in the institution. The model is presented through the analysis of data from twenty-nine TTOs, aiming at: 1) comparing globally the stage of development of twenty-six TTOs from the ecosystem of the State of Minas Gerais, Brazil; 2) analyzing comparatively the historical evolution of four TTO (two from Brazil, one from the USA and one from Germany). The model introduced is not limited to TTO evaluation; it can be applied to study the development of innovation intermediaries in general. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study looks at intellectual property policy and technology transfer (IP&TT) from the perspective of technological Innovation Center at the Federal University of Recôncavo of Bahia (UFRB). The literature review, analysis of Institutional Management of documents and the application of semi-structured interviews with UFRB managers were the methods used to carry out this research. The data indicate that the University has attempted to establish a policy of innovation since 2006, but was unsuccessful, faced with problems like lack of human resources, a protective culture of intellectual property rights, and the gap with the business sector. In 2014, despite the creation of coordinators to act only with the protection of the creations and technology transfer, in addition it needs to adopt other strategies to enhance their innovation policy as: the creation of a Commission of IP&TT; the expansion of table employees with training in IP&TT and actions to strengthen the culture of innovation among academics and businesses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this essay, two major myths related to genetic engineering are confronted: the one that says that it will solve the problem of hunger and nutrition in the Third World, and the one that Genetically Modified Organisms are the same as crops produced through conventional breeding. The promises of more food and of no risks that come from these myths are here severely contested. For the author, taking into account India's reality, Genetically Modified Organisms present a corporate control component over agriculture, especially over small farmers, engaged in the production controlled by global corporations like Cargill, Monsanto and Syngenta. Her critiques pass by the economy of corporate globalization, the new technologies, the monopoly of knowledge, and intellectual property rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]