AFRICA UNIVERSTIY
(A United Methodist- Related Institution)
UTILIZATION OF PATENT SYSTEM IN ETHIOPIAN
UNIVERSITIES
BY
ABBO P. DAWIT
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT FOR THE
REQUIREMENT OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER IN INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY IN THE COLLEGE OF BUSINESS, PEACE, LEADERSHIP AND
GOVERNANCE
2020
Abstract
Universities are critical actors in the development of knowledge and innovation spaces.
Currently, Ethiopia has 44 public universities. The purpose of this research was to assess
the utilization of the patent system in Ethiopian universities to find out the reasons behind
the low number of patent and utility model applications received by the Ethiopian
Intellectual Property Office (EIPO) from the Ethiopian Universities. There was an interest
in assessing the factors that contributed to the low number of applications filed by the
Ethiopian universities at the EIPO. The researcher utilized the research methods and
instruments to gather information from the sample of the population through in-depth
interview, questionnaires and document analysis to enhance the quality of the study. The
researcher used descriptive and narrative format to analyze collected data. The researcher
chose the narrative method because it is a very important way to set out the information
gathered by in-depth interview from Ethiopian universities inventors and students. The
researcher used the descriptive method to elaborate the data which sets out the information
gathered through the questionnaires. The research findings indicate that the reason behind
the low number of the patent and utility model applications received by the EIPO from
sample selected Ethiopian universities is due to the unclear patent and utility model
application filing procedure, lack of awareness of the patent and utility model application
filing and high-cost patent and utility model application fee. The researcher concluded
that the Ethiopian universities inventors and students lack of awareness on how to utilize
Intellectual Property especially patents. In light of the above, the researcher recommended
that EIPO should create awareness among Ethiopian universities inventors and students
on the importance of the patent system, how to draft patent specification and apply for
patent and utility model registration. Finally, the researcher recommended that the
Ethiopian government should apply the triple helix model to expand the intellectual
property awareness to universities and other relevant industries.
Key word: Patent, Intellectual Property and University
ii
Declaration Page
I declare that this dissertation is my original work except where sources have been cited
and acknowledged. The work has never been submitted, nor will it ever be submitted to
another university for the award of a degree.
Abbo Paulos Dawit
Student Full Name
Student’s Signature (Date)
Ahmed Ibrahim
Main Supervisor’s Full Name
Main Supervisor's Signature (Date)
iii
Copyright Page
No part of this dissertation may be reproduced, stored in any retrieval system, or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording
or otherwise for scholarly purpose, without the prior written permission of the author or
Africa University on behalf of the author.
iv
Acknowledgments
I wish to express my sincere gratitude to the following people and organizations who
contributed immensely to put this project together. My supervisors Mr. Ahmed Ibrahim
and Mr. Emmanual Sackey who were patient and tirelessly guided me throughout all the
difficult times and encouraged me during the course of the entire research project;
Ethiopia Intellectual Property Office (EIPO) Director General Mr. Ermias Yemanebirhan;
EIPO Deputy Director General, Mr. Endalu Mosissa; Technology Transfer Team Leader
Mr. Sintayehu Tadesse; Patent Protection and Technology Transfer Director Mr. Fikire
Tesfaye; Copyright and Community Knowledge Study, Registration and Information
Team Leader Mr. Yasin Omer; Trade Mark Directorate Director, Ms. Tigist Bogale,
Patent Protection and application reception team leader, Mr. Friwe Tegegn, and patent
examination team leader Getachew Taffa. I also want to express my gratitude to staff at
Africa University, particularly Mr. George Mandewo and Professor Peter Mageto for their
determination and patience in assisting and pushing me to meet deadlines. Last but not
least, my sincere gratitude goes to all my family especially my lovely wife Ms.
Amelework Fur she proved to be patient and supportive.
v
Dedication
This research is dedicated to my Father Mr. Dawit Abbo, Mother Ms. Bekelech Munea
and my son coming soon St. Paulos.
vi
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
ARIPO Africa Regional Intellectual Property Office
EIPO
Ethiopia Intellectual Property Office
GDP
Growth and Development Plan
IP
Intellectual Property
IPR
Intellectual Property Right
OAPI
Africa Intellectual Property Office
OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
PCT
Patent Cooperation Treaties
R&D
Research and Development
TRIPs
Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
WIPO
Word Intellectual Property Organization
WTO
World Trade Organization
vii
Definition of Key Terms
Patent - is a form of intellectual property that gives its owner the legal right to exclude
others from making, using, selling and importing an invention for a limited period of
years, in exchange for publishing an enabling public disclosure of the invention.
Patent System - is a legal way for protecting the rights of inventors.
IP Policy - provides the structure, predictability, and a beneficial environment for the
enterprise and researchers.
viii
Table of Content
Abstract ............................................................................................................................. ii
Declaration Page .............................................................................................................. iii
Copyright Page ..................................................................................................................iv
Acknowledgments .............................................................................................................. v
Dedication .........................................................................................................................vi
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations .............................................................................. vii
Definition of Key Terms ................................................................................................ viii
Table of Content ................................................................................................................ix
List of Tables................................................................................................................... xii
List of Figures ................................................................................................................ xiii
List of Appendices ..........................................................................................................xiv
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1
1.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Background of the Study ......................................................................................... 1
1.3. Statement of the Problem ........................................................................................ 5
1.4. Purpose of the Study................................................................................................ 6
1.5. Specific Objectives of the Study ............................................................................. 6
1.6.
Research Questions ............................................................................................. 7
1.7.
Significance of Study .......................................................................................... 7
1.8.
Delimitation of the Study .................................................................................... 8
1.9.
Limitation of the Study........................................................................................ 8
CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ................................................... 9
2.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 9
2.2. Theoretical Framework: Triple Helix Model .......................................................... 9
2.3.
Relevant Theoretical Frame to the Study ........................................................... 11
2.3.1. The Role of Utilizing Patent System by Universities, Organization and
Industries ................................................................................................................... 16
ix
2.3.2. The Importance of Intellectual Property Policies to University .................... 19
2.3.3. International and Regional Patent System .................................................... 23
2.3.4.
Patent System in Africa ............................................................................. 26
2.3.4.1. African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO) ............... 27
2.3.4.2. African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI) ................................. 28
2.3.5.
Ethiopia Intellectual Property Office (EIPO) ............................................ 30
2.3.6.
Growth of patent applications by Chinese universities ............................. 32
2.3.7. Growth of Patent Application by the Korean Universities, Industries and
Government .............................................................................................................. 35
2.4.
Summary ........................................................................................................... 40
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 40
3.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 41
3.2. Research Design .................................................................................................... 41
3.3. The Target Group Population ................................................................................ 42
3.4. Sampling Technique .............................................................................................. 42
3.5. Data Collection Methods and Instrument .............................................................. 43
3.5.1. In-Depth Interview ......................................................................................... 43
3.5.2. Questionnaires ................................................................................................ 44
3.5.3. Document Analysis ......................................................................................... 44
3.6. Methods of Data Analysis and Presentation .......................................................... 44
3.7. Ethical Consideration ............................................................................................ 45
3.8. Summary ............................................................................................................... 45
CHAPTER 4 DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION .................. 46
4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 46
4.2. Data Presentation and Analysis ............................................................................. 46
4.3. Background Information of the Respondent ......................................................... 48
4.4. Level of Invention Filed by the EIPO from for Sample Selected Ethiopian
Universities ................................................................................................................... 50
4.5. Availability and the Use of Intellectual Property Policies by The Ethiopian
Universities ................................................................................................................... 52
4.6. Challenges Affecting the Use of Patent System .................................................... 54
4.7. Solution to the Existing Challenges in the Use of Patent System ......................... 56
4.8. Budgets for Supporting Innovation Center to Initiate Innovators, Researchers, and
Students in the Ethiopian Universities ......................................................................... 57
4.9. Interpretation of Data ............................................................................................ 58
4.10. Summary ............................................................................................................. 58
CHAPTER 5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION .................. 60
5.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 60
5.2. Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 60
5.3. Discussion ............................................................................................................. 61
5.4. Recommendations ................................................................................................. 63
REFERENCES................................................................................................................. 65
List of Tables
Table 4.1: Content and Number of Questionnaire in Each Section ................................. 47
Table 4.2: Demographic Information of the Respondent................................................ 48
Table 4.3 Level of Invention Filed by the EIPO from for Sample Selected Ethiopian
Universities .............................................................................................................. 51
Table 4.4 The Reason why Patent and Utility Model Filing Applications are few ......... 52
Table 4.5 Availability and the Use of Intellectual Property Policies by the Ethiopian
Universities .............................................................................................................. 53
Table 4.6 Challenges Affecting the Use of Patent System .............................................. 54
Table 4.7 Solution to the Existing Challenges in the Use of Patent System .................... 56
Table 4.8 Budgets for Supporting to Innovation .............................................................. 57
xii
List of Figures
Figure 2.1 The Relationship between University-Government-Industry......................... 11
Figure 2.2 Structure of the EIPO Organization ................................................................ 31
Figure 2.3 EIPO Patent and Utility Model Application Filing Workflow ....................... 32
Figure 2.4 Patent Application Filings by the Chinese Universities ................................. 33
Figure 2.5 Patent Application Filings by The Korean Universities ................................. 38
Figure 4.1: Questionnaire Distributions ........................................................................... 47
Figure 4.2 Level of Invention Filed by the EIPO from for Sample Selected Ethiopian
Universities .............................................................................................................. 51
Figure 4.3 Availability and the Use of Intellectual Property Policies.............................. 53
Figure 4.4 Challenges Affecting the Use of Patent System ............................................. 55
Figure 4.5 Solutions to the Existing Challenges in the Use of Patent System ................. 57
Figure 4.6 Budgets for Supporting to Innovation ............................................................ 58
xiii
List of Appendices
Appendix 1 Questionnaires Survey Instrument ............................................................... 73
Appendix 2 In-Depth Interview Guideline ...................................................................... 78
Appendix 3 Summary of Sample Selected University..................................................... 80
Appendix 4 AUREC Approval Letter .............................................................................. 81
Appendix 5 Approval Letters from Organization ............................................................ 82
Appendix 6 Informed Consent Form ............................................................................... 83
Appendix 7 Plagiarism Report ......................................................................................... 87
xiv
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1. Introduction
This chapter focused more on the general background of the utilization of the patent
system in Ethiopian Universities, and gives detailed analysis on the history of universities
using the patent system at international, regional and national levels. It also outlines
statement of the problem; aim of the study; specific objective; research questions;
significance of the study; justification of the study and delimitation and limitation of the
study.
The following four chapters focused on the central aim of this research study which mainly
focused on discussing the reason why the number of patent and utility model applications
filed, by the Ethiopian Universities’, in the EIPO was very limited.
1.2. Background of the Study
Since time immemorial, human beings have been consistently engaged in inventing and
innovating many things to perform different activities in a better and safe way.
Nevertheless, a large number of inventions and innovations were susceptible to
embezzlement and liable to right ownership infringement and unfair competition. For this
reason, the idea of Intellectual Property Protection was established in the world.
According to the World Intellectual Property Office (WIPO, 2003), Intellectual Property
is the creation of the human mind; which are classified into two most important parts
industrial property and copyright & related rights.
1
It further illustrates, Intellectual Property Rights are like any other property right which
allows creators or owners of patents, trademarks or copyrighted works to benefit from
their own work.
The researcher agrees with the definition given to Intellectual Property and its significance
to protect the new invention from infringement. Simbarashe (2014) said that, Patent
System is one which used to implement patent law and strongly defends the right of
inventors. On the other hand, Yankey (1987) stated that Patent System is used to promote
innovation and inspire inventors through profitable extraordinary rights and it makes a
true environmental condition for inventors and academic researchers. Thus, to get patent
protection the inventor shall fulfill the requirement of patent system.
WIPO (2004) defined that patent is a document issued upon application via a government
office (or a regional office acting for quite a few countries), which describes an invention
and creates a legal situation in which the patented invention can normally be exploited
(manufactured, used, sold and imported) with the authorization of the proprietor of the
patent. The patent shall be exploited provided that it fulfilled the requirement of
patentability; such as, novelty, inventive step and industrial applicability.
In addition to these, Mark, Stephen & Richard (2004) said that invention must meet the
requirement of patentability such as novelty, inventive step and industrial applicability to
get patent protection. And Maskus (2000) also stated that “Novelty and non-obviousness
(inventive step)” are two quintessential patentability requirements, inherent in really all
jurisdictions that place patents are examined earlier than being granted. The protection
conferred by the patent is limited to generally 20 years (Bart, 2006). The researcher also
2
agrees with these three patentability requirements stated above because they are accepted
and applied in Ethiopia as well.
Universities are key actors to boost or increase the information and make bigger the
innovation areas. Thus, the use of the patent system and implementation of Intellectual
Property protection mechanism in the universities inspire creativity, prepares basis of the
legal enforcement and reassures the IP right owner on the protection of its IP right
(Chunyan & Henry, 2018). In addition to these, “the positive use of patent structures
stimulates the development of new knowledge, as an end result of the recognition that
know-how is a foremost supply of accelerated welfare and economic growth” (Christian,
Markus, & Sabrina, 2018, p.27).
In addition, Justia (2018) said that lack of utilization of the patent system and IP policy in
universities make conflict in the institutions and industries at a time of profit. Adhikari,
Bliese, Davis & Halawi (2014), stated that the university academic researchers were
historically shaped the foundation for many of the most significant technological and
industrial development. “It is recognized as a source of knowledge creation, innovation
and technological advance” (Estifanos & Melaku, 2018, p.11).
The researcher argues that although many imaginative ideas and discoveries are arising
from university researchers, students and innovators most of them are not fully developed.
This is clearly depicted by the fact that, “Universities typically focus on traditional
objectives such as teaching, research and knowledge transfer and the efficiency of
universities differs across these objectives, as some universities place higher value on one
or more other mission-related objectives” (Kim, 1999, p.112). In addition, the researcher
3
agrees with this idea because the university aims will depend of on the interest of the
universities.
The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE, 2009) report indicated that Higher
Education Proclamation has recognized individual IP rights and confidentiality
agreements when university-generated knowledge is used for public benefit. In addition,
Jeremy, Chris, Chidi, and Tobias (2014) stated that Research Policies in universities
require all potentially patentable inventions conceived by academic researchers in the
course of their employment and in sponsored projects, to be disclosed regularly to the
office of Innovation & Incubation Center. This office’s mandate is under the Vice
President of a university and this gives the University the right to patent inventions
developed as a result of public funds or other public financing being channeled through
the University.
These kinds of financial support granted to researchers, inventors and students from the
universities are vital for the increase in the number of patent and utility model application
at the national level. For example, patent application of the United Kingdom (UK)
universities are growing on a yearly basis because patenting is regarded as a regular
endeavor of the academia, and an inherent part of the teaching process (Stuart, 2010).
According to the research conducted by Guo (2007), the number of patent and utility
model applications registered from Chinese universities by the Chinese National IP Office
has increased rapidly.
The research conducted by Stefan (2018) indicated that during the past 15 years there has
been a significant higher education expansion in Ethiopia and the number of government
universities also increased from 32 to 44 universities.
4
However, recent Ethiopia
Intellectual Property Office (EIPO, 2019) reports indicated that the number of patent and
utility model applications received by EIPO from Ethiopian universities is low.
EIPO received the first patent application on 25 May 1997. Taking this into account,
EIPO (2019) report indicated the total number of patent and utility model applications the
office received from 2014 up to 2019 is only 273 and 1885 respectively. Out of these the
universities filed only two (2) patent and fifteen (15) utility model applications.
Further, out of the fifteen (15) utility models application filed to EIPO, only one
application was granted whereas both patent applications were rejected.
These statistics indicated that very limited number of patent and utility model applications
was received from different Ethiopian universities within five years’ duration. The central
aim of this research, initiated by the researcher, is to critically assess and identify the
factors contributing to low number of patent and utility model applications received by
EIPO from Ethiopian universities.
1.3. Statement of Problem
According to the EIPO (2019) report, the total number of patent and utility model
applications the office received between 2014 and 2019 is only 273 and 1885 respectively.
Out of these the universities filed only two (2) patent and fifteen (15) utility model
applications.
Further, out of the fifteen (15) utility models application filed at the EIPO, only one
application was granted, meanwhile both patent applications were not granted.
5
These statistics indicated that very limited number of patent and utility model applications
were received from different Ethiopian universities within the five years’ duration. The
central aim of this research, initiated by the researcher, is to critically assess and identify
the factors contributing to very few number of patent and utility model applications
received by EIPO from Ethiopian universities.
This on its part raises the question as to why the number of patent and utility model
applications from Ethiopian universities were very few, and calls for the need to scrutinize
the overall patent system utilization trend.
1.4. Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the study is to assess the factors contributing to a few number of patent
and utility model applications received by the EIPO from Ethiopian universities.
1.5. Specific Objectives of the Study
The specific objectives were to:
1.5.1. Determine the current level of patent and utility model applications received by
EIPO from the selected Ethiopian universities;
1.5.2. Investigate the availability and the use of IP policies in selected Ethiopian
universities;
1.5.3. Examine the challenges affecting the use of the patent system in selected
Ethiopian universities; and
1.5.4 Suggest a solution to the existing challenges in the use of the patent system in
selected Ethiopian universities.
6
1.6. Research Questions
1.6.1. What is the current level of patent and utility model applications received by the
EIPO from the selected Ethiopian universities?
1.6.2. Are there IP policies in selected Ethiopian universities?
1.6.3 What are the challenges affecting the use of the patent system in selected
Ethiopian universities?
1.6.4 How can the existing challenges in the use of the patent system in selected
Ethiopian universities be overcome?
1.7. Significance of the Study
The Significance of this study is to contribute to universities and academic researchers
towards the effective utilization of the patent system; create awareness of the importance
of patent and utility model application filing in the EIPO and inspire the know-how to
generate income from patents and utility models. This study will also encourage local
inventors to file patent and utility model applications in the national IP office.
In addition, this research assists inventors and academic researchers to increase their
ability in utilizing IP rights, and how they can enjoy benefits from their mind creation and
generate income by using licenses, assignments, and collaborations that are driven by
confidential agreement contracts with third parties. This study also contributes to build
strong relationships between Universities, industries and governments, and it is very
important to promote innovation and productivity of the country’s economic development.
7
Finally, this research pushes universities to utilize the patent system, and IP policies in
their institution effectively, and in manner that encourages inventors to file their own
inventions or innovations in the EIPO.
1.8. Delimitation of the Study
Due to shortage of time and financial constraint, this study was limited to the territory of
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
1.9.Limitation of the Study
Due to shortage of time and financial constraint, this research is limited to the territory of
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia only. Another challenge faced by the researcher was the slow
response of the key respondents to fill and return the questionnaire on time. To make
matters worse, in some instances participants asked to be paid in return for their
respondent participation.
8
CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1. Introduction
Review of Related literature is believed to being the most important and crucial part for
thoroughly understanding the research questions to be addressed. To answer the research
questions, the researcher reviewed different sources that are related to the research title.
2.2. Theoretical Framework: Triple Helix Model
The researcher has resolved to review the relationship between university, government
and industry based on the triple helix model. The background history of Triple Helix
model explained by Campbell and Carayannis (2010) stated that the concept of Triple
Helix comes from geometry and suggests the structure of a spiral that torsions around an
axis with a constant course in space. This concept is used and converted into the
innovation research under the thinking of Triple Helix model. It is an analytic model that
describes institutional preparations and dynamics of innovation that are produced between
university-industry-government.
Also, Henry and Loet (2000) explained that the Triple Helix has worked as a model for
the study of innovation with consequences for the design of research and innovation
policies. However, these Triple Helix models were not adequately integrated between all
institutions in the Ethiopian context.
The researcher focused on the Triple Helix model because the triple helix model
recommends a greater interaction and robust relationship between innovation actors.
9
Thus, industry, university and government have always been primary institutions in the
invention or innovation system. The interrelations or interaction, initiative and exchanges
that arise from mutual connections become the generating force for policies, knowledge
and products at regional and national level. According to Henry and Loet (2000), “new
organizational mechanism such as incubators, consortiums, clusters, and science parks
become a source of knowledge exchange” (p. 296).
In addition, Chunyan and Henry’s (2018) said that standard innovation models can help
students, researchers, managers, entrepreneurs, and policymakers to understand the roles
of university, industry, and authorities, as well as informing and creating a modern region,
which has self-renewal and sustainable progressive capability. They also explained that
these models placed more focus on innovation in innovation and the dynamic to foster an
innovation ecosystem, through various hybrid organizations, such as technology transfer
offices, venture capital firms, incubators, accelerators, and science parks.
The researcher is more interested to review this model because Triple Helix is used to
“examine strengths and weaknesses and fill gaps in innovation systems whether publicly
recognized as highly successful, declining or emergent and it provides a clear guidelines
and focuses on attention and effort” (Chunyan and Henry, 2018, p. 10).
As indicated in figure 2.1 below, the researcher is interested to indicate the body of the
research area which is the main focus area of the dissertation to be explained in the part
to follow.
10
Figure 2.1 the Relationship between University-Government-Industry (Henry and
Loet, 2000, p.119)
2.3.
Relevant Theoretical Frame to the Study
Knowledge is the holistic directional result of human mind. According to Hossain and
Lasker (2012) Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) are the legal protection over scientific
and technological knowledge through the patents, copy right and trade mark. Also, IPRs
are regarded to encourage innovation, promote funding in science and technological
know-how (S&T) and make the applied sciences work for public benefit.
In addition to this, Henry and Loet (2000) suggested that, the importance of the classical
theory on Science & Technology and IPRs is depicted in their mutually beneficial
correlation with each other. They argued that, Science and Technology is the machine of
innovation and IPRs are the fuel for innovation. And also they said that from the time of
industrial revolution in Europe and during twentieth century in the North America and
Japan, IPRs contributed to science, innovation, technology and research which served as
catalyst in accelerating the economic growth (Henry & Loet, 2000, p.119).
11
Further, Maskus (2000) stated that IPRs especially patents, have two central objectives.
The first one is for the application of IPRS to the promotion of investments in knowledge
creation and business innovation, which is achieved by establishing exclusive rights to use
and sell newly developed technologies, goods, and services. The second objective of IPRs
is to promote extensive dissemination of new know-how by way of encouraging the proper
holders to display their innovations and thoughts on the market.
Similarly, Mandeville (1996) concluded that all IPRs are positioned by way of the right
holder in a juridical relation with others. He has separately defined the key difference
between rights of real property and IPRs in that in the latter case, the object of the right is
non-physical. One can think of it as an abstract object rather than a physical object. It is
possible that one can own the abstract object without owning a particular physical
manifestation of the abstract object. Finally, Mandeville (1996) suggested that intellectual
property rights are rights of exploiting the data and information by turning it into the high
resource in the present day economic existence.
According to Nordhaus (1969), unpatented improved inventions are easily imitated, and
hence center of attention on the non-exclusive nature of technological expertise due to the
fact the patent statistics are now not captured by means of information base and no longer
granted with the aid of country wide or international intellectual property office.
12
In this perspective, the researcher also agrees that in the absence of a patent system, there
would be too little investment in Research & Development (R&D) and inventors would
not be interested in further research.
Fully endorsing this view, Adhikari et al. (2014) stated that University researches
historically formed the foundation for many of the most significant technological and
industrial advancement and they recognized by “the source of knowledge creation,
innovation and technological advance, and knowledge-based on prototype development
and technology incubation” (Estifanos and Melaku, 2018, p.109).
However, according to Leta (1980) many thoughts and discoveries springing up from
researchers, student and inventors and they are never completely developed. The
universities are trying to use the patent system arising from academic research for
exclusive developing and least developed countries through the usage of the patent
system.
Gideon, Phillip, David & Peter (2005) said that University technology transfer and
commercialization schemes are complicated approaches. So, universities engage with
licensing innovations or start- up firms primarily based on their personal research and
college
research
and
development
(R&D)
resources,
infrastructure,
capital,
entrepreneurial incentives, university-industry enablers, middle man facilitators and good
leadership are simply some of the inputs concerned in shaping tremendous methods of
patent system in the university and increase the number of patent and utility model
application.
13
Moreover, the researcher also argues that this thought which proves to being successful
practice in one system might not be a successful exercise in another system given the
resources, cultures, environments and priorities from university to university,
neighborhood to community, and state to state differ.
On the other hand, Simbarashe (2014) stated that patenting is not simply an administrative
load or a peripheral subject but a necessary source of competitive advantage in the
information financial system the place price is generated from ideas, knowledge, skills,
and methods. The researcher linked evaluated literature on granted or registered patent
and utility models, with economic development and the increasing numbers of patents and
utility model awarded a point to the developing strategic importance.
In addition to these the researcher argues that the role of the patent system in the institution
or university is the most important approach to the fruitful commercialization of invention
output. For example, “the patent holders may capitalize on inventions by suppressing their
development, even though these inventions would benefit the public” (Pierre, 2000, para.
2). Furthermore, the researcher also agrees with this idea which the patent system provides
incentives to focus on what is patentable and on developing certain innovations simply to
avoid what is covered by a patent.
Some public and private research universities have explained that the capital used for
creating knowledge that fosters scientific and technology based economic improvement
(Milken institute, 2017) and they also argue that capital is the cornerstone or foundation
to promoting success in knowledge-based financial development. On the other hand, Joe,
14
Ross and Minoli (2017) said that public and private research universities are increasingly
investing in patent and highly-trained human capital to raise their technological innovation
capabilities and as a consequence, they increase their funding and fulfill healthy
educational and innovative environment.
The researcher also argues that creating human capital and conducting research are very
essential processes to leverage the technology within universities and research centers.
Therefore, enhancing the level of education and their outputs are a better way to develop
technology. The researcher also agrees with this idea of Joe et al. (2017) which stipulates
that innovation ecosystems highlight the key role played by universities and according to
their suggestion, innovations has two characteristics. The first being, concentration of
innovation activity in urban areas with a large share of national research activity; and the
second being the need for a highly educated and skilled labor supply in university.
They argue that research universities are the most solid institutions countries can use to
compete in the age of innovation. Federal and other sources of public funding for
university research should be viewed as an investment with a high rate of return and
research funding should be a top priority for enhancing country economic growth. The
researcher also agrees with this suggestion because most federal and other public funded
universities create more innovation, which also adds the value in the economic growth of
country. That means, if one country’s innovation capability increased and more
technology is transferred from one institution to another institution, that is one indicator
of the country’s economic growth.
15
According to Joe et al. (2017), University research funding can aid the creation of each
middle and high-skill enterprise jobs through innovation, commercialization and science
transfer. They argue that products and services are created and licensed, there are a myriad
of multiplier influences felt throughout the economy.
Finally, they concluded that Universities are a source of aggressive advantage; universities
create a skilled group of workers via research & development and excessive technological
know-how transfer. It also helps to create new applied sciences, new industries, and extend
the variety patent and utility model application with the aid of the national mental property
office.
Similarly, the researcher also agrees that the Triple Helix model is very important to
increase the innovation space in countries, and fill the gap between the government,
universities and industry.
2.3.1. The Role of Utilizing Patent System by Universities, Organization and
Industries
The researcher is interested to review the role of utilizing patent system by the universities,
industries and organizations. According to Getachew (2010), patent system plays positive
role in stimulating local inventive and innovative activities, facilitating technology
transfer process thereby contributing to scientific and technological progress.
In addition to this, Shanthi and Michael (2004) said that the universities aim to use the
patent system in the national, regional and global stage to encourage the local inventors
to create greater inventions and it helps to enlarge the range of patent and utility model
application.
16
Simbarashe (2014), agrees with this idea as utilization of the patent system is
advantageous given it restricts wasteful innovation efforts in the universities, industry and
organization and patent system as a safety mechanism that provides incentives to
inventors. It is true, the researcher also believes that above (Simbarashe, 2014) justified.
Jemey (1907), who underscores this view stated that effective utilization of the patent
system can reduce wasteful innovation efforts in the universities, enterprise and
corporations. The researcher also agrees with this as it is very important to extend patent
and utility model application in the growing countries like, Ethiopia.
On the other hand, Chunyan and Henry (2018) said that the purpose of utilization of the
patent system and IP coverage in the universities is to inspire and enables the fantastic
creation and IP protection as the whole.
Also, Justia (2018) said that lack of utilization of the patent system and IP policy in
universities make conflict in the institutions and industries at a time of profit. On the other
hand, “it stimulates the development of new knowledge, as a result of the recognition that
knowledge is a primary source of increased welfare and economic growth” (Christian et
al, 2018, p. 434).
According to OECD (2003), Universities and other publicly research funded businesses
are frequently defending their inventions from genetic innovations application assisting
raise extra funding for research and encouraging the new startups inventors. It is upward
push the university patenting has passed off in opposition to a broader policy framework
aimed at fostering increased interaction between public research and enterprise. In order
to enlarge the social and personal returns from public aid to Research & Development and
17
in the end increase the quantity of the patent and utility model applications in country wide
level.
According to Tidd (2006), some nations amended this act e.g. Austria, Denmark, Germany
and Japan. The main effect of these modifications has been the abolishment of the socalled professor’s privilege that granted teachers the right to own their patents and Fink
(2001) said that right to ownership has now been transferred to the universities whilst
educational inventors are given a share of royalty income in exchange. There has also
been a debate in Sweden on whether to follow a comparable path and switch possession
to institutions. For now, at least, the status quo stays and policy efforts are focusing on
creating the potential of universities to provide professors with support for patenting. In
Canada, the rules on IP ownership by used universities vary across Provinces. Efforts
have, however, been made to harmonize policies at least with admire to R&D funded by
means of federal government Crown Contracts.
In Ireland and France, the establishments generally but now not continually keep title, the
authorities have chosen an alternate path: issuing guidelines for IP management at
institutions in order to foster greater constant practices. Such reforms are not only confined
to OECD countries. “The republic of China has freshly made legislative reforms to allow
universities to protect and claim IP, but implementation of such reforms remains a
challenge. One lesson from all this is that despite the importance of patent legislation in
fostering technology transfer, different national systems may require different solutions”
(OECD, 2003, p. 15).
The researcher argues that making universities and different public research groups more
active in protecting and exploiting their IP ability no longer exclusively active
18
merchandising college, students and researches. However, additionally finding out how
exceptional to pursue any relationship with enterprise consumers whilst defending the
public interest.
It ought to be recalled that intellectual property is however one of several channels for
transferring information and technology from publicly funded research which encompass
publication, the movement of graduates, conferences as well as casual channels. “While
research establishments and companies are working to find solutions to issues as they
arise, governments and research funding corporations have a role to play in offering
suggestions on tutorial patenting and licensing and in fostering debate” (OECD, 2003, p.
8).
In general, the researcher concluded that the three chained relationship helped in the
expansion of patent system in the national, regional as well as international level. This has
also helped to increase patent and utility model applications in national intellectual
property offices.
2.3.2. The Importance of Intellectual Property Policies to University
The researcher underscores the vitality of reviewing the importance of IP Policies to
University, industry and organization. According to WIPO (2018), Universities and public
research institutions looking to partner with industry or other corporations want a policy
for tremendous mental property (IP) administration and information switch and
Intellectual Property coverage presents structure, predictability, and really helpful
surroundings in which business enterprise and researchers can get admission to and share
knowledge, technology and Intellectual Property.
19
In addition, Reddy (2012) on his part argued that universities or other institutions provide
teaching activities to generate IP, such as teaching materials, software or designs, which
create a good working environmental condition to inventors. It increases the innovation
space, Universities and research institutions need suitable IP policies to deal with the
ownership right with third party.
The United Kingdom patent office (2004) report indicated that internal University
Intellectual Property policies may set out certain obligations for the researchers as well as
for the institution itself. These may sometimes also be covered in university employment
contracts with researchers. They also argue that the obligations of an inventor may
include, for example, (1) the need to disclose to the appropriate body determined in the
policy any research results that could be protectable by IP rights; (2) not to disclose the
invention to third parties in a way that may compromise its patentability: (3) to abide by
any agreements signed with external parties; (4) to assist in the protection and
management of IP; and (5) to disclose any conflicts of interest. Obligations of the
university (or of its relevant bodies) may include, for example, (1) to evaluate every
disclosure; (2) to minimize delays: (3) to maintain confidentiality over inventions; (4) to
facilitate transfer so as to benefit the public; and (5) to assign possession to the inventor,
research funding organization or government if it decides not to patent or license.
As indicated in WIPO (2018), traditionally universities have served the public activity by
way of supplying graduates to meet the need of industry and business in its neighborhood.
With this, universities have published the effects of their research activities, making them
freely available.
20
The researcher also supports this idea given that nowadays, this is often viewed as being
incompatible with the industry’s need to keep information confidential and protected by
IPRs, such as patents and utility model.
According to Idris (2002), quickly progressing globalization needs universities and PRIs
to be open to business and international collaboration. This, in turn, requires ensuring that
research results are effectively protected and managed, by making effective use of the IP
system. According to Jeremy et al. (2014), identifying and growing IP and bringing
research effects to the next stage of development have come to be institutional goals in
many universities and PRIs. In this context, an institutional IP policy is a precondition for
profitable collaboration between academia and commercialization partners.
According to WIPO (2018), an institutional IP coverage is a formally-adopted document,
which clarifies the ownership of and right to use the IP ensuing from the institution’s own
or collaborative R&D activities. It also sets out the guidelines of the organization on how
to accurately identify, evaluate, defend and control its IP for its addition development,
usually through some form of commercialization; provides an obvious framework for
cooperation with third parties, and affords recommendations on the sharing of economic
benefits springing up from the commercialization of IP.
“Without a formal document regulating the possession and use of IP rights, the different
stakeholders in a university/PRI (professors, researchers, students, traveling researchers,
etc.) and commercialization companions (industrial sponsors, consultants, non-profit
organizations, SMEs, or governments) would have no instruction on how to make
decisions concerning Intellectual Property” (WIPO, 2018, p.24)
21
In addition, Jeremy et al. (2014), suggested that the goals of an IP policy promote scientific
research and technological development with the aid of encouraging researchers to reflect
on consideration on the possible opportunities for exploiting an invention so as to make
bigger the plausible advantages to society. “It Provides an environment that helps and
encourages innovation and development, balances the number of conflicting pastimes of
universities, industry and society, and it ensures compliance with relevant national laws
and Intellectual Property guidelines” (WIPO, 2018, p. 11).
In addition to the above statement, OECD (2003) said that IP Policies generally determine
which body of the university will be responsible for the protection and management of the
university's IP rights. In many cases, such responsibility is assigned to the technology
transfer office. Responsibility for evaluating invention disclosures and making decisions
on whether or not to patent is generally also spelt out in the IP policy.
Hossain and Lasker (2012) argued that developing countries participate in world
intellectual property structures as second comers in a global arena that has been formed
by using the first comers. That they are now being entreated to undertake a complicated
set of regulations more ideal to advanced economies, is a predominant moral concern.
They argued that the development of the international innovation are the late comers in
the world economy who are also deprived bearing misappropriate share of fee with admire
to the advantage is any other concern. Strong IPRs may facilitate science switch below
licensing it might also not promote investment and boom of indigenous S&T; as an
alternative, it chokes the domestic R&D in growing counties. The deficiency of the human
22
and technical potential to innovate is also inappropriate for robust IPRs, and in stimulating
R&D in many creating countries.
Ronald, William and Ram (1993) argued that IPRs in developing nations are
counterproductive to financial development. The first and strongest argument in this is
based on the observation that more purposes come from inventors in high‐income
countries, a developing countries patent system is most possibly to trouble patent rights to
foreigners.
Therefore, “a stronger patent system serves primarily to transfer wealth from home
consumers to inventors in high‐income countries” (Maskus, 2000, p. 496).
2.3.3. International and Regional Patent System
The wealth of any nation rests on three pillars: Labor, Capital and Natural Resources
(Smith, 1997). On the other hand, Lester (1997) said that our generation has added a fourth
pillar. It is Intellectual Property in all. So intellectual property includes Patents which
protects new technology; Copyrights which protect literary and artistic works as well as
computer software, and Trademarks which protect commercial development and
consumer protection.
The most serious task-and in many ways the most challenging, will be to establish a truly
global or world patent system, one that will serve the needs of multinational researchbased industries as well as minor and autonomous inventors at a cost that promotes instead
of hindering the development of inventions.
23
In addition, Simbarashe (2014) stated that the International and regional patent system
was mounted to fulfill the public interest and harmonize patent systems. The international
patent administrative organization is administered via multilateral patent agreements and
according to Samuel (1996), international patent institutional or administrative framework
primarily includes businesses set up to administer the multilateral patent agreements. The
frame work mainly includes the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO); the
World Trade Organization (WTO); and Regional Patent Organizations such as the
European Patent Office (EPO); the Eurasian Patent Office (EAPO); the African
Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI) and the African Regional Intellectual Property
Organization (ARIPO).
The researcher supports this view because the international patent system is capable to
harmonizing the patent and utility model application system and easily fulfilling the
customer interest.
Getachew (2010) stated that:
The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) was concluded in 1970, amended in 1979
and further modified in 1984. The PCT was adopted mainly to deal with the
problem of filing several applications in several countries within the period of
time prescribed by the Paris Industrial Property Convention and overcome the
duplication of effort by national patent offices. This is made possible by
streamlining pre-patent granting procedures and requirements such as filing,
search and examination. It provides for filing a single application, performing
international prior art search and international publication of patent applications.
The Treaty also provides for international preliminary examination that is made
24
optional to member countries. The PCT does not grant patents, but facilitates
obtaining national patents in several countries. The patent granting procedure
under the PCT system consists of two phases: an international phase and a
national phase. The international phase deals with a centralized filing and
searching procedure and optional international preliminary examination. The
national and where appropriate the regional phase is concerned with the final
patent granting procedure by the national and regional patent or industrial
property offices. The filing of only one international application has the same
effect as if separate national or regional applications have been filed in all the
countries which the applicant designates in his international application (p.20).
In addition, James (2002) said that PCT is a global treaty that has been signed by most
industrialized countries, where a PCT application can be filed for an application fee inside
one year of submitting an application for a patent in the U.S. dollar. They additionally
elaborate, the PCT application to filing date extends to each and every member PCT treaty,
and the patent search process were being simplified.
Eventually, James (2002) explained that the importance of PCT system is it provides the
possibility of filing a separate application in each country or region where the applicant
seeks protection, with a single international patent search which greatly reduces the cost
and time. The applicant can file a foreign patent application six months after filing the
national office. “a patent application, or sooner if you get a PCT license to file the foreign
application, then, you can get permission for a delay of 20 or 30 months before filing a
separate application in each PCT country where you want protection” (Getachew, 2010,
25
p.20). This international patent system is also known as PCT, and is administered by the
WIPO.
2.3.4.
Patent System in Africa
The reviews the standard of the Africa patent system. Patent systems play a fantastic
function in stimulating nearby imaginative and innovative activities, facilitating transfer
of technology, contributing to scientific and technological development and socioeconomic improvement (Getachew, 2010). They argue that the majority of African
countries have national patent systems or belong to a regional patent system. In some
African countries, the patent system is more than a century old. Unlike the developed and
emerging industrialized countries, the patent system in Africa has contributed little to
stimulating local inventive and innovative activities, encouraging transfer of technology
and enhancing S&T capacity. The reason behind this problem can be attributed to a
number of factors including inherent features of the patent system itself.
“The patent system in most African countries did not evolve from developments within
the countries, but were transplanted and installed during the colonial period” (Getachew
2010, p.1). They said that the modifications that had been made by way of the African
countries later were accomplished merely for the sake of having an independent system
and/or to comply with the necessities of international patent agreements. Africa Patent
system is well established into two main Africa regional systems.
Getachew (2010) said that two Africa regional patent systems are separated at the period
of colonization. During colonization era, the majority of African people spoke a second
language English or French. Due to this reason, the Africa IP system is divided into two
26
parts: Africa Regional Intellectual Property Office (ARIPO) and Africa Intellectual
Property Office (OAPI). In addition to this, Uchenna (2017) said that two organizations
were established after the independence of most African countries; however, it is
unfortunate to notice that only a few African countries are member states of the ARIPO
and the OAPI.
2.3.4.1. African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO)
African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO, 2019) states, ARIPO is
mandated to grant patents on behalf of the Harare Protocol Contracting States in
accordance with the provisions of the Harare Protocol on Patents, Designs and Utility
Model, this Harare Protocol was adopted on December 10, 1982 at Harare, Zimbabwe.
The protocol entered into force in 1984. Under the protocol, an applicant for the grant of
a patent for an invention can, by filing only one application, designate any one of the
Harare Protocol Contracting States in which that applicant wishes the invention to be
accorded protection. The protocol requires the filing of the application to be made with
any one of the contracting States or directly with the ARIPO.
On the other hand, Mario (2018) said that the cause for the ARIPO fixed to pool the
resources of its member nations in industrial property things together in order to avoid
duplication of economic and human resources. Thus, the preamble to the Lusaka
Agreement clearly states that member states are aware of the advantage to be derived by
them from the effective and continuous exchange of information and harmonization and
coordination of their laws and activities in industrial property matters.
27
The member states additionally recognized the creation of an African regional industrial
property organization which enabled them to pave the way for valuable co-operation in
industrial property matters. It also would serve that purpose and according to Harare
Protocol, patent and utility model applications can also be filed by the applicant (who can
be an inventor or his/her assignee) or via a licensed representative of the applicant
(attorney, agent, or legal practitioner) who has the right to represent the applicant before
an industrial property office of any of the Harare Protocol contracting states. In order to
file, the Applicant has to publish the following: description of the invention, one or extra
claims, one or extra drawings (if any), an abstract, prescribed utility expenses or a written
challenge to resort the charges and designation of at least one state (ARIPO, 2019).
2.3.4.2. African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI)
According to Getachew (2010), Africa Patent system is nicely set up into two essential
Africa regional systems. These two regional systems are separated at the duration of
colonization. According to Mario (2018), the beginning of the OAPI should be traced as
some distance back as 1962, when there used to be a strong urge for a regional intellectual
property organization which suit the aspirations of the newly independent African states.
He stated that on September 13, 1962, the Agreement Establishing the African and
Malagasy Office of Industrial Property (OAMPI) was concluded in Libreville, Gabon, by
twelve (12) Heads of State and Government.
They said that Libreville Agreement was revised in Bangui (Central African Republic) on
2 March 1977 to provide for the creation of the African Intellectual Property Organization
(OAPI). However, the Bangui Agreement was equally revised in 1999, in order to: adapt
the provisions of the settlement to meet the standards required by using some binding
28
worldwide intellectual property treaties; simplify approaches for issuing securities; extend
the missions of the OAPI to consist of the advertising of financial development in member
states by skill of advantageous protection of intellectual property safety and related rights,
as well as imparting education on intellectual property; and to lengthen protection of to
new aspects, such as plant varieties and layout designs of integrated circuits (Mario 2018).
And also, Simbarashe (2014) said that OAPI regional system came into being as a result
of the Libreville Accord of September 13, 1962 effective 1st January 1964 as revised by
the Bangui Accord of 15 2nd March 1977 and the Regulations made in terms of the
revision which were effective the 8th February 1982.
According to Mario (2018), OAPI unitary patent system is the organization’s outstanding
feature that distinguishes it from some other regional patent organizations. The unique
feature of OAPI is a single patent which applies automatically to each member country,
with a single Patent Law which is applicable in each member state.
The researcher also argued that the ARIPO patent system is preferable to OAPI patent
system because of every Patent applicant could easily apply for patent protection in the
national office of the ARIPO member states, which saves money and time for patent
applicant. On the other hand, OAPI doesn’t have national patent office.
Further, according to Mario (2018) Art 2 of the Bangui Agreement (1977) clearly provides
that for each of the member States, the Organization shall serve both as the national
industrial property service within the meaning of Article 12 of the aforementioned Paris
Convention and as the central patent documentation and information body and each of
29
the member States also party to the Patent Cooperation Treaty, the Organization shall
serve as the national Office, the designated Office, the elected Office or the receiving
Office within the meaning of Article 2(xii), (xiii), (xiv) and (xv) of the aforementioned
Treaty. They said that OAPI member states do not have separate national patent offices,
but however, there exists a real cooperation between the ministerial departments in charge
of industrial property matters in individual member states and the OAPI. They also say
that the OAPI member states have no national patent legislations; neither do they grant
national patents.
Getachew (2010) also stated that patent once granted an OAPI patent has impact in the
entire 17 member states except prior approval of any country wide authority, and
revocation via a countrywide courtroom in one-member state would automatically lead to
the loss of such protection in all the different seventeen (17) OAPI member states. if such
revocation was made on the grounds of public interest or morality.
This exception is in line with WIPO (2019), TRIPS Agreement (1994) Art. 27 (2).
Member states may also eliminate patentability inventions, the prevention within their
territory of the industrial exploitation of which is crucial to guard order public (public
policy) or morality, together with to defend human, animal or plant life or health or to
keep away from serious prejudice to the environment, provided that such exclusion is not
made in simple terms due to the fact the exploitation is prohibited through their law.
2.3.5.
Ethiopia Intellectual Property Office (EIPO)
Ethiopia Intellectual Property Office (EIPO) was established by Proclamation
no.320/2003. Before this proclamation “IP was not an organized sector, it was fragmented,
30
and accountable to the Science and Technology Commission, Trademark to Ministry of
Trade, and Copyright to Ministry of Culture (Bogale, 2014).
The researcher reviewed the Ethiopian Patent proclamation no.123/1995 which stipulated
that, Inventions, Minor Inventions, Industrial Designs and implementing Regulations
established to achieve the main objective. According to Federal Democratic Republic of
Ethiopia (FDRE, 1997) report, Patent proclamation no.123/1995 the objective of EIPO
was necessary to create favorable conditions to the owner of invention to encourage the
local inventers and related activities. These activities including building up national
technological capability, encouraging the technology transfer, patent information
accumulation and dissemination, and adoption of foreign technology by creating
conducive environment to assist the national development efforts of the country and
finally, they fulfilling the nation's multidimensional demand for a harmonious scientific
and technological progress, and to use for the public benefits, shall be most effectively
served when there exists an appropriate legal framework.
Figure 2.2 describe that the structure of Ethiopian intellectual property office.
Figure 2.2 Structure of the EIPO Organization (Source: EIPO, 2019)
31
The researcher reviewed that the Ethiopian patent system implementation was based on
the patent proclamation number 123/1995. This proclamation confines invention, minor
invention and industrial design.
Unfortunately, according to Girma (2017), Ethiopia did not ratify different treaties and
protocols such as Paris convention, TRIPs agreement and Berne convention and is not a
member to ARIPO or OAPI. The researcher argues that Ethiopia’s not signing different
treaties and protocols is highly affecting the expansion of intellectual property awareness
and patent economic growth.
Figure 2.3 below is describing the EIPO’s patent and utility model application filing
workflow: -
Figure 2.3 EIPO Patent and Utility Model Application Filing Workflow (Source:
EIPO, 2019)
2.3.6.
Growth of Patent Applications by Chinese Universities
The researcher reviewed that the boom of patent and utility model filing practice by
Tsinghua and Beijing two Chinese universities. Accordance to Guo (2007), the wide
32
variety of patent applications filed through Republic of China, intellectual property office
structure special Chinese universities have increased rapidly. They stated that after
ministerial and commission guidelines were issued and Intellectual property rights
enforcement are used to be strengthened, the range of patent applications filed by means
of universities improved rapidly.
Figure 2.4 below suggests that the records of patent applications within Chinese
universities.
Figure 2.4 Patent Application Filings by the Chinese Universities (Source: Guo, 2007,
P.1674)
This patent applications increment according to Guo (2007), Republic of Chinese
universities is due to the developing recognition of the value of IP in Chinese society. In
addition, they also argue that in some universities, students are required to put up a
publication or patent application to graduate. The researcher also agrees with this concept
because of, university policy put in force student to put up the invention to patent
33
application. It helps to expand the number of patent and utility mannequin applications
national, regional, as well as international level.
On the other hand, they argued that most universities lack institutional IP policies and
independent workplaces accountable for IP management and rates of technological knowhow transfer and commercialization is very low. According to Guo (2007) explanation,
some world-class universities, such as Tsinghua University and Beijing University, have
become adept at IP management.
And according to Yusuf and Kaoru (2007), China and their Economies confirms that
Beijing University and Tsingbua University created more than sixty improvements in
every high science area. The report elaborates that this is largely dependent on the strong
incentives such as allowing researchers to hold at least 50% of the income from
commercialized technologies.
There are differing views on this different feature of the Chinese innovation system. Some
argue that this is vital for pushing the know-how financial system in China. Others argue
that universities are now not set up for making income and they need to first fulfill their
roles as generators of expertise for the frequent good.
In addition, Yusuf and Kaoru (2007) said that Chinese Ministry of Education has recently
begun to seem into the current state of University Industry (UI) collaboration in order to
make certain proper balance certain. They argue that University spin-offs or universityspawned ventures are one widely recognized way of commercializing the consequences
of university-conducted research. This is especially common in such fields as facts
34
technology and existence sciences. Such spin-offs include companies founded by way of
public sector researchers, which includes staff, professors and post-doctorate students,
start-ups with licensed public area technologies, and companies in which a public group
has a fairness investment. Spin-offs are an entrepreneurial and risk-taking approach of
exploiting knowledge developed by public laboratories for industrial benefit.
Similarly, Fink (2001) argued that the effectiveness of this method is particularly
noticeable in such sectors as biotechnology where a new discovery is often directly usable
without having to go through the many stages from basic research to commercial
application. There is much debate as to whether spin-off companies, with all the risks
involved in setting up a new company and the high mortality rate for startups, are the most
efficient way of getting university technologies to market if compared to licensing to
existing firms.
According to Albert (2010), Preliminary evidence would suggest that particularly in the
case of disruptive or very innovative technologies spin-offs may be the best way of
ensuring that a given technology is commercialized. In addition, spin-offs are sometimes
used as a mechanism to ensure that university technology is commercialized by domestic
companies that can benefit the local economy.
2.3.7. Growth of Patent Application by the Korean Universities,
Industries and Government
The researcher reviewed that the published scholarly papers, it the Ethiopia government
endeavor to share first-hand experience from Korea about major undertakings
accomplished to expand IP within the universities.
35
According to Dong-won and Martin (2007), Korean universities are managed by way of
Ministry of education Science and Technology and obtain economic help from
government mainly. There is excessive degree of similarity in terms of common
administrative procedures and lookup policies due to the fact of, authorities decide
admission policies centrally and research output indicate that Universities traditionally
choose to hire their own graduates and this establishes boundaries to facts float in between
universities, industry and government. They additionally argue that, Korea University
lookup is very much concentrated in a few lookup universities and University lookup &
improvement activities are extra directed towards fundamental research than others
sectors.
The researcher also shares this idea because of in Ethiopian Universities, research is
concentrated in a very few research universities. The researcher opposes this idea because
of if, anyone needs increment on innovation which serve as vital cornerstone to economic
growth, and they should put Triple Helix model in place. These model creates chain
between university, industry and government. These chains help to easily transfer
technology from one institution to the other.
According to Joseph (1942) recommendation, technological capabilities are a key to
economic development and Synthesizing Korean experience until the 1990s and the
perspectives of technological capabilities in economic development and Kim (1997) also
emphasized that the roles of assimilation and accumulation of technological knowledge
in economic development. They also claimed in 1999 technological capabilities building,
Korea followed reverse innovation process in its economic development.
36
The researcher also supports this idea of Kim (1997) which is the level and degree of
technological capabilities becomes essential in understanding economic development to
the countries. So, it makes proper measurement of them. According to Dong-Won and
Martin (2007), Patents are one of the most popular measures for technological capabilities
and naturally, understanding on this line of research became deepened by analyzing a
variety of patent-based indicators.
They said that Korean universities today have highly qualified faculty trained in globalstandard innovation and research and in terms of publications there has been very
substantial improvement. They also argue that the growth of any economic activity is
furthered by creating proper incentives. In general, Dong-Won and Martin (2007),
University-industry relations are possible to encourage institutional interaction through
administrative structures or through individual professorial linkages.
The research also agrees with this idea and it make corporation with in innovators and
researchers in most universities, institutions and governments.
In contrary, Dong-Won and Martin (2007) also argue that most Korean universities
inventions were until recently owned by the inventors. They said that, exception is if the
invention was made with government research funds.
The researcher also believes by these idea, the right to file for a patent belongs to the
government. According to Dong-Won and Martin (2007), ownership of the patent by
individual professors would assist in commercialization, the situation in Korea makes this
difficult.
37
In addition, they said that “in Korea 2000 new incentives to encourage University and
industry linkage activities were introduced; these incentives appear to have increased the
number of startups by inventers and researchers from 337 in 2000 to 1,078 at the end of
2004 and the number of professorial patent applications also increased even more rapidly
than the total number of Korean patent applications” (Dong-Won and Martin, 2007, p.
997).
The figure below indicate that the number of patent application received by Korean
Intellectual Property office from different Korean universities.
Figure 2.5 Patent Application Filings by the Korean Universities Source: (DongWon & Martin, 2007, p. 998).
The figure above indicated that the Korean university increased the number of patent and
utility model applications. According to Erhan (2012), Korean universities to shift towards
more research-oriented institutions and to increase research output, the government has
taken various measures. They said that, Korean government has taken different measures
such as “Brain Korea 21 programs”, which is designed to support selected universities in
their transformation into research-oriented and graduate education oriented institutions,
38
“BK21” provided fellowship funding to graduate students, postdoctoral researchers and
contract-based research professors who belong to research groups at top universities.
These are the major measures which Korean government takes to increase intellectual
property output from the different institutions, industries and universities. For these reason
according to Jay (2010), Korean Government allocated US$ 290 million per year since
1999 and the number of publications in academic researchers and inventors increased
rapidly. As result Industries also invested more money for the joint work with universities
participating in this Project. They also assume that another important patent and utility
model application that can ease knowledge flow from universities to industry by related
to venture enterprises.
The researcher also agrees with these, because of academicians and inventors establish a
venture within universities and institutions invest by venture. The graduate students
involve the case of when the businesses use incubator in universities and industries receive
the invention from universities in developing their current product.
According to Boo-Young & Lee (2009), the number of university-related venture
business reached 1,473 at the end of April 2005 and Most of university-related venture
industry were established out of the joint research projects with universities.
Another initiative taken by Korea government is to increase the number of patent and
utility model application. According to Boo-Young & Lee (2009), Korean government
established industry and university linkage. They said that, in the Korean universities, in
the year 2003, 133 cases of innovation were reported from 19 Korean private universities
39
as compared with 102 in 2002 and 58 in 2001. And parallel to this, the income for these
universities from innovation center more than tripled, from 0.473 billion won in 2001 to
1.913 billion Won in 2003.
The researcher agrees to this because of government motivation important to inventors
applies Patent and utility model applications by national universities seem to have
increased drastically as well. And Boo-Young & Lee (2009), said that establishment of
the Industry and University Cooperation Foundation (IUCF) is responsible for the
management of Intellectual Property Rights at each universities and increase the number
of patent and utility model application in national and international level.
Finally, the researcher also agrees with the view of Chunyan and Henry (2018) suggested
that the universal innovation models or Triple Helix model can assist students, researchers,
managers, entrepreneurs, and policymakers to understand the roles of university, industry,
and government informing and developing an innovative region. It helps to increase the
number of patent and utility model application in the national, regional as well as
international level.
2.4.
Summary
Universities are critical actors in the development of knowledge and innovation spaces.
Developed and developing countries are utilizing a patent system by the
commercialization of the innovation output. The Triple Helix model can assist students,
researchers, entrepreneurs, and policymakers to understand the roles of university,
industry and government informing and developing good innovation regions. It can also
examine the strengths and weaknesses of the institution to fill the gaps. The utilization of
the patent system is a very important way to intellectual property prosperity.
40
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY
3.1. Introduction
In this chapter, the researcher discussed the research methodology of the study, the
research design, data collection method, selection of a target group of the population, data
analysis and presentation of the data.
3.2. Research Design
The research design helped the researcher to collect data from the sample selected
Ethiopian universities. According to Buckingham and Saunders (2004), research design
is a plan or guide for data collection and interpretation, with sets of rules that enable the
researcher to conceptualize and observe the problem under study.
The researcher also agrees with this idea because a well-designed investigation helps the
researcher to find accurate information from the key respondents. The research design
guided the researcher to implement the study and achieve the goal on time.
The researcher has collected data from the sample selected Ethiopian universities
academic researchers, inventors, and students concerning the level of the utilization of the
patent system. Adhikari et al. (2014) said that University academic research has
historically formed the foundation for many of the most significant technological and
industrial advancement and they are recognized by the source of knowledge creation,
innovation, and technological.
However, according to Estifanos and Melaku’s (2018), many ideas and discoveries that
arise from university academic researchers and inventors are never fully developed. These
41
helped to assess whether the researcher wanted to find a satisfactory answer for a specific
problem under investigation. The researcher collected data from the sample of the
population by using mixed methods such as qualitative and quantitative.
3.3. The Target Group Population
The researcher focused on selecting target group population from the Ethiopia
Universities based on reason according to Stefan (2018). The research report indicates that
the currently, Ethiopia has forty-four (44) public universities. From these forty-four (44)
public universities; four (4) public universities are located in the territory of the Addis
Ababa Ethiopia and near Addis Ababa Ethiopia. The researcher thus resolved to select a
target group of the population for research on the use of the patent system from the
following Ethiopian Universities: Addis Ababa University; Addis Ababa Science and
Technology University; Kotebe Metropolitan University and Adama Science and
Technology University.
3.4. Sampling Technique
The researcher chose the population according to Burn and Grove’s (1993), a population
is all elements individuals, objects and events that meet the sampled criteria for inclusion
in a study. The study of the sample population of this research comprises students,
researchers, inventors and technical staff in the selected Ethiopian universities. The
sample for this study includes (4) Four universities. The sample size consists of
respondents from selected universities.
The researcher collected data by using non-probability sampling method known as
purposive sampling to select the respondents for the study. According to Jorge and
Sulaiman (2019), a purposive sampling is a kind of sampling that uses the judgment of an
42
expert in selected cases or selected cases with a specific purpose in mind. The researcher
selected 40 respondents from Ethiopian universities using purposive sampling. The
sample comprises ten (10) academic researchers, ten (10) inventors, and ten (10) technical
staff from four selected Ethiopian Universities. These ten (10) technical staff members are
working in the Ethiopian universities innovation and technology supporting center and
university to industrial linkage. The selection method used ensured that respondents were
selected based on their key role in the universities and, and their ability to make a
meaningful contribution to the data collection.
3.5. Data Collection Methods and Instrument
The researcher used primary and secondary data sources to gather information from the
sample population. Primary data was a direct collection of data through in-depth
interviews and questionnaires, from four Ethiopian universities. The researcher also used
secondary data sources to collect information from the EIPO patent and utility model
application registrar. The researcher used three main methodologies to collect data from
a population which are interviews, questionnaires, and document analysis.
3.5.1. In-Depth Interview
The researcher conducted discussions with the selected Ethiopian Universities inventors
and students to obtain enough information with regard to the challenges affecting the
effective utilization of the patent system. This method offered golden opportunity for the
researcher to capture enough information from the respondents. The researcher carried out
informal interviews with two (2) senior academic researchers, two (2) inventors and two
(2) technology transfer staff managers in the selected Ethiopian universities.
43
3.5.2. Questionnaires
The researcher also used standard questionnaires distributed to the selected respondents.
The questionnaires consisted of both open-ended questionnaires and closed-ended
questionnaires. According to Burns & Grove (1993), open-ended questionnaires are
related to qualitative and closed-ended questionnaires are related to quantitative.
3.5.3. Document Analysis
During the investigation, the researcher used document analysis to give voice and meaning
to the title; how much Ethiopian Universities utilize the patent system and file patent and
utility model application at the EIPO. This document analysis was done by the patent and
utility model registrar at the Ethiopian intellectual property office. The researcher
collected data from EIPO (2014-2019), which is statistics of the patent and utility model
applications received by the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office from the selected
Ethiopian universities for the past five years.
3.6. Methods of Data Analysis and Presentation
The researcher analyzed collected data by two forms; which are descriptive and narrative
form. These two methods are selected by the researcher depending on the key reasons.
The narrative method was selected because it enabled the researcher to give thorough
description concerning the information gathered by the in-depth interviews from
Ethiopian university academic researchers, inventors and students. Also, the researcher
chose descriptive form to analyze the information gathered through questionnaires from
the Ethiopian university academic researchers, inventors and students, and presented this
data by using pie charts and bar charts to. This two-way method is believed to base the
research on accurate information and make it plausible and meaningful.
44
3.7. Ethical Consideration
The respondents participated on the basis of informed consent. Prior to obtaining consent,
the researcher provided sufficient information and assurances on participation in the
research, thus enabling the respondents understand the implications of participation and
freely consent. Also, confidentiality was maintained throughout the study process.
Further, the questionnaires sent to the respondents was used solely for research purposes,
and was not passed or disclosed to third parties without participant consent.
Finally, the researcher followed some points to fulfill the dissertation ethics during the
study time. The researcher respected the dignity of research participants; the research
participants were not subjected to any harm; full consent was obtained from the
participants prior to the study; the protection of the privacy of research participants has
been ensured; adequate level of confidentiality of the research data is also ensured and
anonymity of individuals and organizations participating in the research has also been
ensured.
3.8. Summary
This section provided detailed discussion concerning the overall framework of the
research methods including data collection and analysis mechanism which is compatible
with the research questions. The researcher used three appropriate data collection methods
and instruments which helped to analyze, interpret and present data.
45
CHAPTER 4 DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Introduction
This chapter presents a review of all collected data presentation, analysis and discussion.
The researcher collected data through questionnaires, in-depth interviews and document
analysis from the academic researchers at Ethiopian universities, inventors and students.
They give out an overview of the current level of utilization of the patent system and why
the number of patent and utility model applications received by the EIPO from Ethiopian
universities is very low. The result of the study discussed in more detail the respondent’s
personal information, the current level of the patent applications, availability and the use
of intellectual property policies, challenges affecting the use of the patent system, and
solutions to existing challenges in Ethiopian universities.
4.2. Data Presentation and Analysis
To answer the research questions and the research objectives, questionnaires were
prepared and distributed to 40 sample respondents. Out of the total number of sample
respondents, thirty-eight (38) out of forty questionnaire papers (95%) have been returned
to, and analyzed by the researcher.
The researcher collected information from the sample of the population through in-depth
interview and analyzed by narrative form. Due to shortage of time, the study was limited
to the territory of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. The researcher selected four (4) Ethiopian
universities namely Addis Ababa Science and Technology University, Adama Science
and Technology University, Addis Ababa University and Kotebe Metropolitan University
within that territory.
46
Figure 4.1: Questionnaire Distributions
Table 4.1: Content and Number of Questionnaire in Each Section
Section Number of question
Content
1
5
Background of respondent information
2
4
Intellectual
Property
Awareness
and
patent
application
3
5
Intellectual property policy, solution and challenges
affects existed use of patent system in the selected
university
4
4
Research and innovation incubator center and
intellectual property strategies
Total
18
47
Each questionnaire included four parts and each part contained the number of questions
are described in above table 4.1. The following section discusses the questions which are
very important to answer research questions and research objectives.
4.3. Background Information of the Respondent
The table 4.2: below has given the general demographic information of respondents that
were used in study.
Table 4.2: Demographic Information of Respondent
Variable
Categories
Frequency
% Percent
Gender
Male
32
84%
Female
6
16%
25-35 year
12
32%
36-46 year
17
45%
47-57 year
7
18%
Age
Educational Level
57 and above year 2
5%
Degree
11
29%
Master
13
34%
48
Occupation
Work experience
PhD.
14
37%
Researcher
16
43%
Student
4
10%
Innovator/ inventor 18
47%
0-2 year
21
55.27%
3-5 year
9
23.68%
6-8 year
6
15.79%
9 and above
2
5.26%
Table 4.2: gives the general information and profile of the respondents’ who were
involved in the study. It includes gender, age range, educational qualification, occupation
and work experience in sample selected respondent. A total of 32 men and 6 females
participated in the survey with a percentage of 84% of male and 16% of female. This
percentage indicates that the number of male innovators, academic researchers, and
students who participated are more than the female.
49
4.4. Level of Invention Filed in EIPO from Four Sample Selected Ethiopian
Universities
The number of patent and utility model applications received by the EIPO is on a yearly
steady increase. However, according to the EIPO registrar document report (2019) the
number of the patent and utility model applications received by EIPO from the sample
selected Ethiopian universities is low.
Table 4.3 and figure 4.2 below indicate that the sample selected Ethiopian universities
created 278 inventions within five years. However, out of the 278 inventions, only 6 utility
model applications were registered by EIPO. The research findings indicate that Ethiopian
universities researchers, inventors and students have created a lot of inventions within five
years but, they do not follow up by filing patent or utility model applications at the
Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office. This is usually as a result of lack of awareness on
filing patent and utility model application, unclear application filing procedure, and highcost application fee to file patents and utility models.
On the other hand, the Ethiopian universities researchers and inventors using the invention
for promotion purposes only, whereas students also use it for graduation purposes. Due to
these reasons, the number of the patent and utility model applications received by the
EIPO from the Ethiopian universities is low.
50
Table 4.3 Level of Invention Filed in EIPO from Four Sample Selected Ethiopian
Universities
Level of innovation
Frequency Percent
The number of inventions created by the selected Ethiopian 278
98%
universities but, not filed in EIPO.
The number of utility model applications registered by EIPO 6
2%
from the sample selected Ethiopian universities
Number of patent application registered
by EIPO from 0
0%
the sample selected Ethiopian universities
Figure 4.2 Level of Invention Filed in the EIPO from Four Sample Selected
Ethiopian Universities
51
Table 4.4 The Reason for Low Patent and Utility Model Applications
The Reason for low Patent and Utility Model Applications Frequency Percent
Lack of awareness to file patent/ utility model application
22
58%
Unclear filing procedure
11
29%
High-cost of application fee to file patent/ utility model
5
13%
4.5. Availability and Use of IP Policies in the Selected Sample Ethiopian
Universities
Table (4.5) and figure (4.3) below describe the availability and use of IP policies in the
Ethiopian universities. The respondents’ feedback indicates that 82% of the universities
have IP policies at the draft level, which are however not implemented; thus meaning the
universities have no effective IP policy as the draft is not yet implemented.
On the other hand, according to the respondents, only 18% have Intellectual Property
Policy as a symbol but, implementation was less. Technology transfer and universityindustry linkage directorate and university management said that they are strongly
planning to implement IP policy shortly. Thus, these interviews also served as motivation
to utilize the patent system in the university level. From this feedback, the researcher
52
concluded that Ethiopian Universities lack awareness, as well as manpower skilled in
intellectual property to utilize the patent system.
Table 4.5 Availability and the Use of IP Policies by the Ethiopian Universities
Availability and the Use of IP policies
Frequency Percent
Yes we have
7
18 %
Yes we have at draft level but not yet at implementation
31
82 %
No IP policy
0
0%
Figure 4.3 Availability and Use of IP Policies
53
4.6. Challenges Affecting the Use of Patent System
Table 4.6 and figure 4.4 discuss the challenges affecting the use of the patent system in
the sample selected Ethiopian universities. The academic researchers at the Ethiopian
Universities, inventors and students said that they have faced a lot of challenges in filing
patent and utility model applications at the EIPO. Consequently, 45% of the respondents
in the research stated universities faced serious challenges due to the absence of IP policy
at implementation level. This gap can be cited as one of the major problems which
hindered the patent filing and utility model application process to be carried out within
EIPO.
As indicated by the respondents, apart from absence of institutional IP policy and as
observed by the researcher, university managers, lecturers and academic researchers,
working within the four selected universities, have lack of awareness to synergize their
effort, finalize and implement their respective draft IP policies.
As indicated by 13 % of the respondents, lack of skilled manpower to be consulted by
university management members, lecturers and academic researchers about intellectual
property right and intellectual property management creates serious challenges in the
utilization of the patent system and proper exploitation of intellectual property right. All
in all, the statistical analysis of the responses clearly indicates that the awareness gap has
a significant contribution to the limited number of patent and utility model filings.
Further, 18% of the respondents indicated that they failed to file patent or utility model
application at the EIPO due to the high cost required for the process. They stated that they
could not afford to cover the application fee for filing, which did not take into account
their meager income. University students also indicated this as a major issue. They stated
54
that, they lost their interest about patent and utility filing issues because of the financial
constraints they are facing as a student.
In a nut-shell, the above stated challenges are the major aspects that affect the utilization
of the patent system in the selected Ethiopian universities, as well as the filing rate of
patent and utility model applications within the EIPO.
Table 4.6 Challenges Affecting the Use of Patent System
Challenges Affecting the Use of Patent System
Frequency Percent
Lack of skilled manpower
5
13%
No IP policy implementation in sampled universities
17
45%
Poor awareness on the utilization of the patent system 16
42%
Figure 4.4 Challenges Affecting the Use of Patent System
55
4.7. Solution to the Existing Challenges in the Use of Patent System
Table 4.7 and figure 4.5 below indicate how Ethiopian universities take action for existing
challenges on the use of the patent system. As indicated by 71% of the respondents’
feedback, the researcher underscores the vital importance of devising various mechanisms
and platforms to create awareness to university management members, lecturers,
academic researchers, inventors and students regarding the basics of IP. Moreover, their
feedback highlights the most valuable importance of implementing successive trainings
and seminars to raise awareness which in turn enables them to alleviate the major
challenges and create strong working relationship with IP related cross sectorial
stakeholders.
As indicated from feedback obtained from 29 % of the respondents, all the government
entities that are concerned with the protection of intellectual property should give due
consideration in finalizing and implementing university IP policy which will be
compatible with their institutional set up, duties and responsibilities.
Table 4.7 Solution to the Existing Challenges in the Use of Patent System
Solutions to the Existing Challenges in the Use of Patent Frequency Percent
System
Creating awareness in the society
27
71%
Encouraging the government to implement IP policy
11
29%
56
Figure 4.5 Solutions to the existing challenges in the use of patent system
4.8. Budgets for Supporting Innovation Center to Initiate Innovators, Researchers,
and Students in the Ethiopian Universities
Table 4.8 and figure 4.6 below indicate two divergent prevailing situations concerning the
amount of budget allocated to the four Ethiopian universities selected for the research
purpose. From the study, 55% of the respondents stated that the university they are
working in allocated a sufficient budget to support innovation. They further stated that,
the presence of this fertile atmosphere encouraged most of the academic researchers,
innovators and students to create many innovations every year. Apart from the budget
allocated for the research purpose, the universities organize award winning contests
amongst the innovators and grant award for best/selected inventions. Motivated by the
awards, both the winners and other innovators are driven to create other new inventions.
However, 45% of the respondents stated that the university they are working in has not
allocated any budget to support innovation. They also stated that, in the future, they are
determined to synergize their effort and put every possible pressure on the government to
57
give due emphasis for innovation and allocate enough budget to its initiation and fruitful
implementation.
Table 4.8 Budgets for Supporting Innovation
Adequate Budget Frequency Percent
Yes
21
55%
No
17
45%
Figure 4.6 Budgets for Supporting Innovation
4.9. Interpretation of Data
Based on the analysis of the collected data; the researcher found out that most of the
Ethiopian universities are facing lack of awareness to use the patent system. Even if most
of the Ethiopian Universities have their own draft IP policy, they are not yet at the point
of finalizing and implementing it. Furthermore, they lacked IP policy implementation
strategies.
58
These are some of the major problems Ethiopian Universities faced in the registration of
patent and utility model applications at the EIPO. Apart from lack of awareness about IP
basics, other aspects such as vague application filing procedure and high-cost of filing
contributed to limit the number of patent and utility model applications received by the
EIPO from the Ethiopian Universities.
4.10. Summary
The researcher concluded that, the reason why a very little number of the patent and utility
model applications are filed at the EIPO is because of lack of the intellectual property
awareness in the Ethiopian universities, lack of implementation of IP policies, unclear
filing procedure and high-cost fee of filing. These are the challenges that contributed to
low filings of patent and utility model applications at the EIPO.
59
CHAPTER 5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1. Introduction
This chapter summarizes all parts of the study comprising the research findings, statement
of the problem, research objectives and research questions. The Researcher discussed in
detail by focusing on the results of the study, which in turn helped to conclude and
recommend the research on how much the researchers at Ethiopian universities, inventors
and students are utilizing a patent system, and why the numbers of patents and utility
model applications received by EIPO from Ethiopian universities are low.
5.2. Conclusion
Universities are key players in the development of knowledge and innovation spaces. The
utilization of the patent system and implementation of IP policy encourages and facilitates
the effective new invention.
From the research findings, the researcher concludes that majority of the researchers,
inventors and students in the selected Ethiopian universities have a lot of inventions, with
98% of these inventions in the innovation incubation center, and 2% of these inventions
registered in EIPO. The researcher concluded that the EIPO has received a very small
number of utility model application because the selected Ethiopian universities have a
lack of intellectual property awareness, lack of IP policy implementation mechanism,
unclear application filing procedure and high-cost to apply for patent and utility model
protection. In addition, the Ethiopian universities researchers use inventions only for
promotion purposes and the students also use them for the sake of graduation.
60
The research findings indicate that the low level of implementation of the IP policy by the
Ethiopian Universities has hindered the researchers, inventors and students to utilize the
patent system., Further, the researchers in Ethiopian universities, inventors and students
are faced with a lot of challenges in the utilization of patent systems which includes lack
of intellectual property awareness, lack of skilled manpower and no attention by the
government to Intellectual property.
5.3. Discussion
The patent system promotes innovation, encourages inventors by rewarding exclusive
rights, and makes good environmental condition to students, inventors and researchers.
From an economic point of view, the patent system offers strong integration and
acceptance in the market.
For instance, the Korean national patent policy and activities of the Korean Intellectual
Property Office (KIPO) have been integral components in Korea's successful economic
growth strategy and continue to be important factors in ensuring Korea's economic
wellbeing. This clearly indicated that Korea has long been a proponent of strong patent
protection and Korea synergizes its effort to maintain a robust, well-functioning patent
office that supports the development of local technology.
This view is consistent with the notion, to which Korea subscribes, that the patent system
can help promote and sustain healthy economic development, particularly in emerging-or
newly industrializing-countries (Jay, 2010).
61
Both developed and developing countries, like Korea, UK (United Kingdom) and the
Republic of China are properly utilizing the Patent system. This clearly means that putting
in place a platform for the effective utilization of the patent system contributes to the
creation of a powerful position in the market for patents and utility models.
On the contrary, absence of IP policy and strategy, lack of intellectual property awareness
and shortage of research and innovation budget adversely affected both developing and
least-developed countries alike. This is true in the case of Ethiopia as well because
intellectual property happens to be an infant discipline.
From the patent and utility model applications point of view, IP protection is strongly
enforced in the Republic of China, by the China national government, which has led to
the rapid increase in the number of patent applications filed by the Chinese universities to
Chinese Intellectual Property Office. The reason for this is, Chinese universities are well
aware of the importance of protecting their IP, and the society also recognizes the value
of IP.
Taking the overall literature review concerning the presence of institutional IP policy
within universities of both developing and least developed countries into account, this
research depicted the following prevailing statuesque. Hence, universities within The
Republic of China begun to pay significant attention to the patent system because they
closely correlated efficient IP protection and law enforcement mechanisms, which serve
as a take-off ground for successive invention and innovation, with institutional reputation.
Unlike universities within The Republic of China, Ethiopian universities have very few
patent and utility y model applications. From the various possible reasons to be mentioned,
62
absence of university IP policy, lack of intellectual property awareness; lack of intellectual
property policy implementation mechanisms and shortage of skilled manpower are the
major reasons to mention.
Similarly, unlike countries like The Republic of China and South Korea, Ethiopian
Government has not signed international and regional IP related conventions and treaties.
This is a clear indication that the government is not giving due emphasis and importance
to Intellectual Property.
Consequently, the academic researcher strongly advises and recommends that the
Ethiopian government should follow the footsteps of China and Korea and adapt best
practices and align them with the prevailing Ethiopian situation. In so doing, it should also
devise an efficient strategy to implement a patent system which in turn will promote
Ethiopia’s technological capacity to the maximum, hasten its development endeavors, and
increase its GDP.
5.4. Recommendations

EIPO should create awareness among researchers in Ethiopian universities,
inventors and students on the importance of patent system and how to draft and
apply for patent and utility model protection.

Universities and EIPO relationship should be improved through establishing
technology and innovation supporting centers (TISC).

Universities should sign memorandum of understanding with the EIPO.

The government should encourage the universities to develop and implement an
institutional IP Policy.
63

Universities that have IP policies in place should set up modalities and a platform
for its implementation.

In order to make the best out of IP and use it as a major tool for development,
initially EIPO should devise and implement strategically designed and diversified
awareness creation mechanisms, including different Social Medias, at societal
level.

In order to tap the untapped potential of the patent system to generate large amount
of wealth, Ethiopian science and technology universities should focus on
designing intellectual property curriculum and produce skilled man power which
will fill the gap. Consequently, Ethiopian government should establish IP StartUp Academies aimed at filling the gap created by the absence of skilled manpower.

In order to critically assess and identify the existing IP status-quo, the Ethiopian
government should organize for IP audits at the end of every budget and/or
academic year.

To promote the value of IP protected by efficient patent protection mechanisms,
the EIPO should motivate and reward academic researchers, innovators and
students who file their patent and utility models

Ethiopian universities should put in place platforms that fully appreciate, support,
and reward the utilization of the patent system.

The Ethiopian government should put pressure on universities to make them
prepare and implement their own institutional IP policy.

Ethiopia government should apply the Triple Helix model to expand the IP
awareness in the universities as well as the relevant industries.
64
REFERENCES
Adhikari, B., Bliese, A., Davis, E., & Halawi, L. (2014). Promoting Innovation and
High- Tech Entrepreneurship: An
Exploratory Research.
Retrieved
from
https://commons.erau.edu/publication/305
Africa Regional Intellectual Property Office. (2020). Harare Protocol on Patents and
Industrial Designs. Retrieved from https://www.aripo.org/ip-services/patents/
Albert, G., & Hu, A. (2013). Patent Rights and Economic Growth: Evidence from
Cross- Country
Panels
of
Manufacturing
Industries.
doi:10.1093/oep/gpt011
Bart, V. (2006). University research, intellectual property rights and European
innovation systems. Journal of Economic Surveys, 20(4), 607-632. Retrieved
from https://econpapers.repec.org/article/blajecsur/v_3a20_3ay_3a2006_3ai_3a4
_3ap
_3a607-632.htm
Bogale, T. (2014). Assessment of Utilization of Patent Information in Ethiopia. Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia: Person Education Ethiopia
Boo-Young, E., & Lee, K. (2009). Determinants of industry–academy linkages and
their
impact on
firm
performance.
Retrieved
from
https://smartech.gatech.edu/bitstream/handle/1853/35012/KeunLee.pdf 39, 625–
639.
Buckingham, A., & Saunders, P. (2004). Part one research design: Discovering fact and
theories.
Retrieved
from
http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/content/bpl_images/content_store/sample_
65
chapter/0745622445/Buckingham_sample%20chapter_the%20survey%2
0method.pdf
Burns, N., & Grove, S. (Eds.). (1993). Practice of nursing research: Conduct, critique
and utilization (2nded.). St. Louis, Mo: Elsevier/Saunders.
Burns, N., & Grove, S. (Eds.). (2001). Practice of nursing research: conduct, critique
and utilization (4thed.). Louis, Mo: Elsevier/Saunders.
Campbell, D., & Carayannis, E. (2010). Triple helix model. International Journal of
Social Ecology and Sustainable Development 1(1), 41-49.
Christian, S., Sabrina, B., & Markus, G. (2019). Stimulating academic patenting in a
university ecosystem: an agent-based simulation approach. Journal of
Technology
Transfer, 40(1), 434-435. doi:10.1007/s10961-018- 9697-x
Chunyan, Z., & Henry, E. (Eds.). (2019). The Triple helix: A Universal Innovation
model (2nded.). doi:10.4324/9781315620183
Dong-Won, S., & Martin, K. (2007). Universities, cluster and innovation system: the
case of Seoul Korea. Journal of World Development, 35(6), 991-1004.
doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2006.05.008
Erhan, A. (2012). Innovation Actors in South Korea: An analysis of University, Industry
and Government Research Centers. Retrieved from
http://beykon.org/dergi/2012/FALL/E.Atay.pdf
Estifanos, Y., & Melaku, A. (2018). Determinants of University-Industry Linkage.
Journal
of business and management, 10(13), 11-12. Dire Dawa, Ethiopia:
Dire Dawa
University.
66
Ethiopia Intellectual Property Office. (2019). patent and utility model application
database. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Author
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. (1997). Patent Proclamation No. 4/1995 and
Article 53(1). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Author
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. (2009, November 15). Higher Education
Proclamation. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Author
Fink, C. (2001). Patent Protection, Transnational Corporations, and Market
Structure: A Simulation Study of the Indian Pharmaceutical Industry.
Journal: Industry, Competition and Trade, 1(1), 101-112.
doi:10.1023/A:1011533029416
Getachew,
M.
(2010).
Patent
System
in
Africa.
Retrieved
from
https://repository.uneca.org/bitstream/handle/10855/15981/Bib64552.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y
Gideon, D., Phillip, H., David, B. & Peter, T. (2005). Entrepreneurship and universitybased technology transfer. Journal of Business Venturing 20 (2005) 241–263
Grima, B. (2017). Workshop on access to the scientific and technological information
for
technological capacity building presentation. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia:
Ethiopia
Intellectual Property Office.
Guo, H. (2007). IP Management at Chinese Universities. Intellectual Property
Management
in
Health
and
Agricultural
Innovation.
Retrieved
http://www.iphandbook.org/handbook/chPDFs/ch17/ipHandbookCh%2017%2009%20Gui%20Universities%20in%20China.pdf
67
from
Henry, E. & Loet, L. (2000). The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and
Mode 2 to a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations.
Research
Policy, 29(2), 109-123.
Hossain, A., & Lasker, S. (2012). Intellectual Property Rights and Developing
Countries. Journal of Bioethics, 1(3), 43-44. doi:10.3329/bioethics. v1i3.9633.
Idris, K. (2002). Intellectual Property: A power Tool for Economic Growth. Retrieved
from https://www.peacepalacelibrary.nl/ebooks/files/wipo_pub_888_1.pdf
James, R. (2002). The Responsibility of the Rule Maker: Comparative Approaches to
Patent Administration Reform.
Retrieved
from
https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1318&conte
xt=facpub
Jay, E. (2010). Korea's Patent Policy and Its Impact on Economic Development.
Retrieved
from http://open.mitchellhamline.edu/facsch/138
Jemey, B. (1907). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals. Oxford: Clarendon Press
Jeremy, D., Chris, A., Chidi, O. & Tobias, S. (Eds.). (2014). Innovation & Intellectual
Property: Collaborative Dynamics in Africa.
Claremont, South Africa: UCT
Press
Joe, L., Ross, D. & Minoli, R. (2017). Concept to Commercialization. Retrieved from
https://milkeninstitute.org/sites/default/files/reportspdf/Concept2Commercialization-MR19-WEB.pdf
Jorge, M., & Sulaiman, M., (Ed). (2019). Modernizing the Academic Teaching and
Research Environment. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-74173-4
68
Joseph,
A.
(1942).
Capitalism,
Socialism
and
Democracy.
Retrieved
from
https://eet.pixelonline.org/files/etranslation/original/Schumpeter,%20Capitalism,
%20Socialism%20and%20Democracy.pdf.
Justia. (2018). Intellectual Property. Retrieved from https://www.justia.com/intellectualproperty/patents/
Kim, L. (1999). Building technological capability for industrialization. Analytical
frameworks and Korea's experience Journal: Industrial and Corporate Change,
8(1), 111-113. doi:10.1093/icc/8.1.111
Lester, C. (1997). Needed: A new system of Intellectual property right. Retrieved from
https://hbr.org/1997/09/needed-a-new-system-of-intellectual-property-rights.
Leta, N. (1980). The Role of University Technology Transfer Operations in Assuring
Access to Medicines and Vaccines in Developing Countries. Yale Journal of
Health Policy, 1(2003), 24-26.
Mandeville, T. (1996). Understanding Novelty. Information, Technological Change, and
the Patent System Journal: Prometheus Critical Studies in Innovation, 17(1), 3.
doi:10.1080/08109029908629399
Mario, E. (2018). Regional Intellectual Property Integration in Developed and
Developing Countries: The case of the European Patent Office (EPO) and the
African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI) Patent Systems [Master’s
thesis,
University
of
Yaounde
II].
Retrieved
from
https://www.grin.com/document/446150
Mark, B., Stephen, A., & Richard, C. (Ed). (2004). A patent system for the 21st Century.
Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in the Knowledge-Based Economy.
doi:10.17226/10976
69
Maskus, K. (2000). Intellectual Property Rights and Economic Development. Case
Western Reserve journal: international law, 32(3), 473.
Retrieved
from
https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol32/iss3/4.
Milken
Institute.
(2017).
Concept
to
Commercialization.
Retrieved
from
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/the-milken-institute-ranks-the-bestus-universities-for-technology-transfer-300442457.html
Nordhaus, W. (1969). Invention growth, and welfare: A theoretical treatment of
technological change. Cambridge, Mass: M.I.T. Press.
OECD. (2003). Turning Science into Business: Patenting and Licensing at Public
Research Organizations. doi:10.1787/9789264100244-en.
Pierre, D. (2000). The Case against the Patent System. Montréal.
Retrieved from
http://www.quebecoislibre.org/000902-3.htm
Reddy, G. (2012). Intellectual property rights and the law (9thed.). Hyderabad: Gogia
Law
Agency.
Ronald, E., William, P. & Ram, N. (1993). Technological Innovation Process: Patent
Documentation as a Source of Technological Information, 9(1), 357.
Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/chtlj/vol9/iss1/9
Samuel, A. (1996). The International Patent System and Third World Development.
Retrieved
from
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3003&context=dlj
Shanthi, G. & Michael, D. (2004). Distinguishing between knowledge transfer and
technology transfer
activities Journal: IEEE Transactions and Engineering
Management, 51(1), 57- 58. doi:10.1109/TEM.2003.822461
70
Simbarashe, P. (2014). Utilization of the Patent System in Zimbabwe manufacturing
industry. Harari, Zimbabwe: Person Education Zimbabwe.
Smith, A. (1997). Theory of development in economics: wealth of any nation rested on
three pillars. Retrieved from https://iep.utm.edu/smith/
Stefan, T. (2018, November 15). Higher education in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia:
World education news reviewer.
Stuart, M. (2010). Seducing the Goose: Patenting by UK Universities. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228822377.
Tidd, J. (2006). A review of innovation models. Imperial College, London: Tanaka
Business School
Uchenna, F. (2017). The Necessity of Adopting One Uniform System for All Africa.
Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320041905
United Kingdom patent office. (2004). United Kingdom Intellectual property policy.
North Western Europe, UK. Author
World
Intellectual
Property
Office.
(2003).
What
is
intellectual
property.
https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/intproperty/450/wipo_pub_450.pdf
World
Intellectual
Property
Office.
(2004).
Intellectual
Property
handbook.
Switzerland, Geneva: Author
World Intellectual Property Office. (2018). IP Policies: Intellectual Property Policies
for
Universities. Switzerland, Geneva: Author
World Intellectual Property Office. (2019). Academic Patenting: How universities and
public research organizations are using their intellectual property to boost
research and spur innovative start-up. Switzerland, Geneva: Author
71
World Intellectual Property Office. (2019). Agreement on Trade- Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights (1994). Art. 27 patentable subject matter.
Switzerland, Geneva: Author
Yankey, G. (1987). International Patents and Transfer of Technology to Less Developed
Countries, 2 (1), 45. Western Africa: the case of Ghana and Nigeria.
Yusuf, S. & Kaoru, N. (Eds.). (2007). How university promote economic growth:
Technology Transfer, Intellectual
Property
and
Effective
University to Industry. doi:10.1596/978-0-8213-6751-3
72
Collaboration
Appendix 1 Questionnaires Survey Instrument
Requirement of the Degree of Master in Intellectual Property in the College of Business,
Peace, Leadership and Governance.
Dear respondent: - The major objective of this questionnaire is collecting relevant
information from the respondents that the researcher aims to capture the Utilization of
Patent System in Ethiopian Universities whose sole purpose is to qualify the requirement
for awarding the Master’s Degree of Intellectual property by Africa University, College
of Business, Peace, Leadership and Government.
Therefore, the information you deliver being sought for Academic purpose and shall be
strictly protect your privacy and confidentiality of the information you provided so, I
kindly ask your honest and truthful response for the success of the study because the
quality of your response affects the outcome of the study. I would like to say thank you
very much for your cooperation.
Questionnaires to be filled by respondents



No need of writing you name
Each questions has its own instruction to follow
Write the truthful and honest answer on the space provided that needs your
personal response.
Note: Tick the answer that meets your choice and elaborate the reason why you ticked.
73
Part 1: Personal Detail Information
A.
Respondents Background Information
University______________________________________
Occupation_________________________________________
B.
Educational background Diploma
C.
Sex: Male
D.
Age range
E.
Degree
Master
Ph.D.
Female
25-35year
Work experience 0-2 year
36-46 year
3-5 year
47-56yera
6 -8 year
57 and above year
9 and above year
Part 2: Intellectual Property Awareness and patent application
1. Are you aware of the importance of intellectual property protection especially in
patents?
Yes, aware
Yes, but not able to use
Not aware
If Yes but not able to use elaborate the reason why?
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
74
2. Is there any patent or utility model application registered in Ethiopia Intellectual
Property office?
Yes
No
If yes, how many patent or utility model applications registered in Ethiopia Intellectual
Property office?
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_________
3. Why patent or utility model applications not filing in Ethiopia Intellectual Property
office?
High cost
Filing procedure not clear
Lack of awareness for filing
4. Are you aware of the right of patent and utility model inventor and applicant of
invention?
Yes
NO
Part 3. Intellectual property policy and challenges affects to use patent system in
the university
5. What are the challenges affecting the utilization of the patent system in university?
Lack of skilled staff
No IP policy implementation in university
awareness to utilize patent system
75
Poor
6. What are the solutions in your opinion to solve this challenges which are
faced utilization of patent system?
Creating awareness to society
Enforce government to implement IP policy
7. Do you have a guideline of intellectual property policy?
Yes, we have
v yes, at draft level but no implementation
No IP policy
If yes, how you assist the student and academic
researchers, innovators?___________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________
If NO, what do you think for the future to assist students, innovators and academic
researchers?
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_____________________
8. Do you know patent and utility model application filing is an effective method for
protecting your innovation from third parties?
Yes
NO
76
9. Do you have enough awareness to generate income from patents through license?
Yes, we are aware
Yes, but not able to use
NO
Part 4. Research and innovation incubator and intellectual property strategies
10. Do you have a technology and innovation supporting center in your university?
YES
NO
11. How many innovations are done in this university within five years?
___________________________
12. Do you have enough budgets to support innovation?
Yes
No
13. Write if you might have additional comment on patent and utility model application
filing challenge in your universities or Ethiopian intellectual property office
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
77
Appendix 2 In-Depth Interview Guideline
Requirement of the Degree of Master in Intellectual Property in the College of
Business, Peace, Leadership and Governance.
Questions for semi structured open ended interviews with technology transfer and
university to industrial linkage directorate.
Dear respondent: - The major objective of this questionnaire is collecting relevant
information from the respondents that the researcher aims to capture the Utilization of
Patent System in Ethiopian Universities, whose sole purpose is to qualify the requirement
for awarding the Master’s Degree of Intellectual property by Africa University, College
of Business, Peace, Leadership and Government.
Therefore, the information you deliver being sought for Academic purpose and shall be
strictly protect your privacy and confidentiality of the information you provided so, I
kindly ask your honest and truth full Answer for the success of the study because the
quality of your response affects the outcome of the study I would like to say thank you
very much for any cooperation.
1. Do you have an intellectual property policy at this university?
2. Do you have innovation incubator centers at this university?
3. How many innovation projects are there in this university and how many patent and
utility models application filing in the Ethiopia Intellectual Property Office?
4. In your opinion what are the challenges affecting the use patent system?
78
5. If sometimes innovations are created in the university budget; who is the owner of the
innovation?
79
Appendix 3 Summary of Sample Selected University
Addis Ababa University
Addis Ababa Science and Technology University
Adama Science and Technology University
Kotebe Metropolitan University
80
Appendix 4 AUREC Approval Letter
81
Appendix 5 Approval Letters from Organization
82
Appendix 6 Informed Consent Form
My name is PAULOS DAWIT ABBO a final year (MIP) student from AU. I am carrying
out a study on a Research proposal. I am kindly asking you to participate in this study by
answering the use of the patent system in selected universities.
What you should know about the study:
Purpose of the study:
The purpose of the study is to assess the factors contributing to less number of patent and
utility model applications in selected universities. These selected universities are involved
in the Addis Ababa and they are more concerned by innovation and on the other hand it
helps to collect important information from these universities. For this reason, I select four
universities which are Addis Ababa Universities, Addis Ababa Science and Technology
University, Kotebe Metropolitan University and Adama Science and Technology
University. From this selected University Top of Form40 informed consent are selected
for collecting information which consist of ten (10) innovators, ten (10) researchers, ten
(10) students and ten (10) technical staff from selected universities. They are selected for
a reason because they know the problem why patent or utility model application less filing
in the nation's intellectual property office. Finally, at the end of this research the
government filled the problem of why patent and utility model application less filing in
the Ethiopia intellectual property office and for further solving the problem in Ethiopian
universities.
83
Procedures and duration
I am going to selected universities to collect data from informed consent which are
working in the university and the job title interrelated to intellectual property. For this all
process Ethiopia intellectual property office helped me by writing recommendation letters
for selected universities. To collect data from selected universities takes three weeks
(Jan25-Feb 10).
Risks and discomforts
No risk.
Benefits and/or compensation
End of this research universities are benefit by government give attention to innovation
center and
fill the gap which is why Ethiopian universities are less filing the patent and
utility model application in the national intellectual property office.
Finally, the benefit of this research is not only for university it is on the other hand for
Ethiopia intellectual property office by increasing patent and utility model filing
application but overall it is increasing the national GDP.
Confidentiality
Confidentiality will be maintained throughout the study process. Although this
questionnaire request of selected Universities this is only for the research purpose. It will
not be passed on to third parties.
84
Voluntary participation
Participation in this study is voluntary. If participants decide not to participate in this
study, their decision will not affect their future relationship with organization or selected
universities (participant’s organization or other authority) If they chose to participate, they
are free to withdraw their consent and to discontinue participation without penalty.
Offer to answer questions
Before you sign this form, please ask any questions on any aspect of this study that is
unclear to you. You may take as much time as necessary to think it over.
Authorization
If you have decided to participate in this study, please sign this form in the space provide
below as an indication that you have read and understood the information provided
above and have agreed to participate.
-------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------
Name of Research Participant (please print)
Date
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Signature of Research Participant or legally authorized representative
85
If you have any questions concerning this study or consent form beyond those answered
by the researcher including questions about the research, your rights as a research
participant, or if you feel that you have been treated unfairly and would like to talk to
someone other than the researcher, please feel free to contact the Africa University
Research Ethics Committee on telephone (020) 60075 or 60026 extension 1156 email
aurec@africau.edu
Name of Researcher ABBO PAULOS DAWIT
86
Appendix 7 Plagiarism Report
87