During , mid s; the Meiji Era, these were integrated with the universities.
- Nanotechnological Basis for Advanced Sensors.
- The Transfer of Technology between Germany and Japan from 1890–1945?
- Charles Darwin and The Origin of Species.
- Project MUSE - In This Issue.
- Aborted Tech Transfer from Nazi Germany U | SNA Japan.
- There Were Giants Upon the Earth: Gods, Demigods, and Human Ancestry: The Evidence of Alien DNA.
However, there was no central support to these institutes. There was no budget allocation for these universities. Other than these universities, some research institutes still existed independently. Rapid militarization and expansionist policies of the empire during the beginning of20th century, boosted the research and technological development in areas of nuclear power, aerospace , communication systems and electrical technology.
Also, Japan fought from the side of Allied forces during the first World War. That was one of the important factor in development of Japanese technology. However, during second World War, Japan was amongst the Axis countries. Destruction in the second World War was on much higher degree after which Japan had to start again from the scratch. It was like a clean slate where a new story awaited to be scripted. Germany had an established system of technological innovation in the form of many research institutes, universities and societies like Kaiser-Wilhelm Society. However, due to division of Germany into Eastern and Western front and strict research based policies post-war, the research was mostly restricted to basic fields of science and not applied sciences.
However, industry now started playing bigger role in technological innovation.
Join Kobo & start eReading today
Over the time in latter 20th century, reconstruction of higher educational system was undertaken by the government. It opened its technological floodgates to this country. Formation of MITI Ministry of International Trade and Industry played a key central role in controlling and propagating research-based education in universities and interface between industry and educational institutes and research institutes.
In , the Industrial Structure Research Committee recommended that the Minister of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry MITI implement targeted research projects based on Industry-University-State cooperation, the objective being the development of innovative technology.
This was a very important reform in the direction of technological advancement and self-sustainability of the industries in Japan. Different approaches by both countries in development of system of research and innovation also resulted in different capabilities and attitudes in researches carried out in both the countries. In Japan, the development and introduction of new products is planned and prepared very thoroughly, especially through market research and information gathering. In Germany, product innovation is often stimulated by direct contacts to customers or an intrinsic motivation to improve existing or create new technologies.
During the s, progress in CAD software development acceler- ated due to close working relations between faculty members and CAD engineers at several leading electronics companies, many of whom were graduates of the Berkeley program.http://badgebasics.com/631.php
Technology Transfer Out of Germany After 1945
After several stages of software refinement by university scientists, colleagues in industry agreed to evalu- ate the software. The university received valuable feedback from several industrial laboratories. In the early stages of these collaborations, disagreements arose often concerning intellectual property rights. Faculty members believed that restrictions on intellectual property would inhibit the open exchange of ideas and prototype software.
The university team adopted a policy of making source code available to others and of placing its work in the. Experiences like this indicate that, apart from copyrights, protections on intellectual property rarely are important to successful software development. Leading firms in the U. SRC in Soon thereafter, the fed- eral government became an SRC sponsor. The goal of SRC is to foster graduate education and research in fields relevant to the semiconductor industry. Additional research support came from the Advanced Re- search Projects Agency.
With these new resources, research and proto- typing of new, improved CAD tools accelerated. Direct design synthesis of chips from formal specifications became an additional goal. Berkeley continued to distribute software, including source code, to sponsoring firms.
- Fragments of the World: Uses of Museum Collections.
- Technology Transfer out of Germany after 1st Edition (Hardback) - Routledge;
Feedback from many users contrib- uted importantly to the evolution of improved tools. No one expected that the university could be the long-term provider of support, documentation, training, and service for industrial software. Semiconductor manufacturers recognized it would be wasteful for every user of CAD software to create their own software development and sup- port capability.
Vendors of earlier computer-based drafting software did not aggressively pursue the new generation of design software. So, about , entrepreneurs including several graduates of the Berkeley CAD program established a successful new business supplying CAD soft- ware and support. Several other similar firms subsequently entered the market. Even today, many of the commercial CAD software modules have roots in the early Berkeley prototypes. Technical goals have evolved to include process and device mod- eling, multichip assemblies, boards, and miniaturized interconnection technologies.
Other focus areas are performance-driven design and very-low-power design for portable equipment. The patterns of sponsor- ship and interaction with industry continue much as they have in the past. Yet these six institutions accounted for over 56 percent of total gross royalties received by U. Some universities that encourage the formation of new companies and spin-offs often take equity in these new ventures in lieu of some or all of the royalties to which they would be entitled from license fees for a patented process or product. When these equities are eventually sold, universi- ties receive additional income, sometimes years after the original invention.
Equity Ownership in Start-Up Companies It is estimated that academic licensing has contributed to the establishment of 1, new companies since , or 28 percent of these were established. Although a small number of universities have a long history of taking equity positions in companies engaged in the commercialization of new technology, it is only recently that significant numbers of universities have en- gaged in this type of technology transfer activity.
As of , over 50 universi- ties had reported negotiating more that licenses with equity, 99 of these in alone Association of University Technology Managers, There are many reasons why universities have chosen in recent years to enter into the venture capital business. Second, acquiring equity in companies can be a way to hedge against the risk of having university-owned patents infringed upon or rendered obsolete.
Third, by accepting stock in licensee companies in lieu of royalties, universities are able to negotiate mutually beneficial deals with cash-strapped start-ups. Fourth, some universities view their venture fund activi- ties as a way to attract and retain high-powered faculty this is said to be particu- larly important for medical schools.
The Russians in Germany — Norman M. Naimark | Harvard University Press
Fifth, taking equity in companies often provides universities with increased opportunity for sharing research instruments and facilities. And last, but by no means least, by acquiring equity stakes in local start-up companies, universities are able to make a highly visible commitment to the local or regional economy, thereby generating good will with current or po- tential future patrons within state administrations or legislatures. MIT, for example, is said to invest roughly 10 percent of its endowment in venture capital projects.
The second route, the establishment of administra- tively separate or independent organizations, provides a mechanism that a al- lows the university to bring in outside venture-capital expertise unfettered by university policies, b offers an effective structure within which participants in new business ventures can communicate and negotiate, and c helps shield the university from commercial concerns financial risks, perceived conflicts of in- terest , etc. As noted in Table 2. While the average industry share of total sponsored academic research was 6.
Mean- while, total research funding at other top research universities, including the University of Wisconsin at Madison, the University of California at San Fran- cisco, the University of California at San Diego, and the University of Texas at Austin, averaged industry shares of less than 4 percent.
Company-sponsored research at U. The distinction between the two instruments is subtle and varies among institutions. In general, research contracts, more than research grants, obligate university-based researchers to provide their corporate sponsor with more-frequent and more-formal reports on their progress.
Contracts also usually specify particular deliverables, whereas grants are generally more open ended. National statistics on the sponsorship of academic research do not distin- guish between contracts and grants because of the definitional vagaries and re- porting inconsistencies among institutions. However, at several top-ranked insti- tutions, including MIT and the University of California at Berkeley, the vast majority of industry-sponsored research is in the form of grants National Acad- emy of Engineering, b.
For example, companies providing research grants to university-based researchers may receive favorable consider-. For example, at the University of California at Berkeley and MIT, some engineering departments have agreed to accept visiting fellows from major industrial donors National Academy of Engineering, b. Each of these is dis- cussed below. More than 1, centers located at more than universities and colleges throughout the United States are thought to have met those criteria in More than half of these centers had been established since Figure 2.
That same year, Attending the workshop were a dozen key technical managers from various firms in the U.
Exchange Discount Summary
The goal of the workshop was to identify topics suitable for Ph. Based upon the list of suggested topics, Professor Kryder wrote a proposal for a university-based Magnetics Technology Center, which would conduct research on magnetic storage technologies, including magnetic recording, magneto-optic recording and magnetic bubble memories. The privileges of membership in the center would vary ac- cording to the amount a firm contributed.
This arrangement would make it possible for the center to pursue patents and copyright protection for intellectual property, and provide that benefit to its industrial sponsors, without requiring the segregation of the research projects for individual sponsors. Thus, all sponsors would gain access to the research in the center in proportion to their contributions.
The CMU administration was highly supportive of the effort and com- mitted to build a clean room for the center. Throughout the remainder of the average number of companies participating in each center was UIRCs vary significantly in size, whether measured in terms of overall re- search budget or the number of academic researchers or industrial partners in- volved.
Nearly 23 percent of all centers, however, had bud-. A number of other corporations joined at the affiliate and associate member levels. Professor Kryder used this funding to seed research efforts by CMU faculty who had expertise relevant to magnetic data storage technolo- gies.
Recommended For You
Some of the faculty had a background in magnetics research, but the majority had never worked on magnetic-storage technologies before. Most learned the requirements of magnetic storage technologies very quickly and have since become experts in the field. Following the initial NSF award, the industrial sponsors of the center formed the National Storage Industry Consortium NSIC , with the goal of providing leveraged funding for research on data storage technologies.
Kryder, Carnegie Mellon University. Forty percent of the research conducted by UIRCs is basic research, 40 per- cent is applied research, and 20 percent is development work. In other words, UIRCs perform a significantly higher proportion of applied research and devel- opment than do universities. As a group, UIRCs receive 46 percent of their funding from public sources 34 percent from federal government and 12 percent from state governments , Many of the centers had more than one disciplin- ary focus. The vast majority of public and private support for research at UIRCs comes in the form of grants.
Most industrial support of UIRCs appears to be directed at more basic and long-term applied research. In addition to direct funding, industry contributions to individual centers also include equipment, in- strumentation, and internship opportunities for students. The goals and missions of individual centers vary considerably, as do their disciplines Table 2. Collectively, these centers engage a broad range of traditional and high-technology industries in their research Table 2.