Technology Transfer and Commercialization Models and Policies in India, USA, China and Malaysia: A Conceptual Review

Main Article Content

Ajay Kumar Singh


Technology transfer (TT) and technology commercialization (TC) have a significant contribution to increase the use of existing technologies and innovation of research institutions and universities in manufacturing sector and business activities. Accordingly, TT and TC bring several positive implications for government, businessmen, research universities, researchers and scientists, and common people in a nation. India has adopted several science & Technology (S&T) and intellectual property rights (IPRs) policies to increase TT and TC after independence. Despite that, India does not have better position in technology transfer and technology commercialization as compared to other Asian countries. Therefore, this study provides a discussion on technology commercialization (TC) and technology transfer (TT) related policies for India, USA, China and Malaysia based on existing literature. Subsequently, it also includes the various models on TT and TC adopted by aforementioned countries based on previous studies. It is helpful to select a consistent model for TC and TT for Indian research institutions and universities. However, it is an apparent that most research organizations have an involvement in TC and TT as per the prescribed rule by respective funding agencies in India. Therefore, there is no uniform policy to increase TC and TT at large scale in Indian research institutions. It is also seemed that there is an incompatible policy framework for TC and TT in India as compared to USA and China. Thus, it is advised that India needs to adopt vertical and horizontal models to increase TT and TC in research institutions. Furthermore, it includes significant aspects of TC and TT to increase the attentions of Indian policy makers, development thinker, industries, research institutions, researchers and scientists to implement a uniform policy in India. Finally, it also provides several policy proposals for India to increase its position in S&T, IPRs, TT and TC among the globally competitive countries.

Technology transfer and commercialization, models for technology commercialization, intellectual property rights, India, USA, China, Malaysia

Article Details

How to Cite
Singh, A. K. (2021). Technology Transfer and Commercialization Models and Policies in India, USA, China and Malaysia: A Conceptual Review. Asian Journal of Sociological Research, 3(1), 19-45. Retrieved from
Review Article


Jyoti B, Singh AK. Characteristics and determinants of new start-ups in Gujarat (India). Entrepreneurship Review. 2020; 1(2):1-25.

Singh AK, Jyoti B. Factors affecting firm’s annual turnover in selected manufacturing industries of India: An empirical study. Business Perspective Review. 2020;2(3): 33-59.

Falvey R, Foster N. The role of intellectual property rights in technology transfer and economic growth: Theory and evidence. United Nations Industrial Development Organization, Vienna; 2006.

Singh AK, Ashraf SN. Association of entrepreneurship ecosystem with economic growth in selected countries: An empirical exploration. Journal of Entre-preneurship, Business and Economics. 2020;8(2):36-92.

Singh AK, Acharya SR, Chavda P. Implications of IPRs and socio-economic factors on growth of manufacturing sector in selected cross economies: An empirical assessment. Proceedings of the 12th Biennial Conference on Entrepreneurship Organized by EDII Ahmedabad [Feb 22-24, 2017]. New Delhi: Bookwell Publishing House. 2017;262-279.

Singh AK, Ashraf SN. Viability of Bayh-Dole Act of USA in context of India: critical evidence from review of literature. JNNCE Journal of Engineering & Management. 2019;3(1):7-22.

Ashraf SN, Singh AK. Does entre-preneurship ecosystem have a long-term relationship with economic Growth in selected economies? A statistical investigation’, in Misra S., Shukla S. and Batthini G. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 13th Biennial Conference on Entrepreneurship Organized by EDII Ahmedabad [Feb 20-22, 2019]. Bookwell Publishing House, New Delhi. 2019;1:176-187.

Singh AK, Negi V, Singh BJ. Does sustainable development have causal relationship with environmental development? An evidence from country-wise panel data analysis. International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development. 2020;19(2):147-171.

Singh AK, Singh BJ, Ashraf SN. Implications of intellectual property protection, and science & technological development on manufacturing sector in selected economies. Journal of Advocacy, Research and Education. 2020;7(1):16-35.

Van Norman GA, Eisenkot R. Technology transfer: From the research bench to commercialization: Part 1: Intellectual property rights-basics of patents and copyrights. JACC: Basic to Translational Science. 2017;2(1):85-97.

Ciborowski RW, Skrodzka I. International technology transfer and innovative changes adjustment in EU. Empirical Economics. 2019;59(1):1351-1317.

Paiva T, Ribeiro M, Coutinho P. R&D collaboration, competitiveness development and open innovation in R&D. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2020;6(116):1-18.

Purushotham H, Sridhar V, Sunder S. Ch. Management of TT from Indian publicly funded R&D institutions to industry-modeling of factors impacting successful TT. International Journal of Innovation and Technology. 2013;4(4):422-428.

Alina I, Diana D. TC: Experience of the U.S. and possibilities for oil and gas industry in Russia. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research. 2016; 11(7):4990-4994.

Hamano Y. Commercialization procedures: Licensing, spin-offs and start-ups. World Intellectual Property Organization; 2011.


Sajid A, Vinay P, Chander S. TT in pharmaceuticals. International Research Journal of Pharmacy. 2012;3(6):43-48.

Mysore S. TC through licensing: Experiences and lessons-A case study from Indian horticulture sector. Journal of IPRs. 2015;20:363-374.

Singh AK, Arya A, Jyoti B. A conceptual review on economic, business, IPRs and science & technology related activities in Asian economies. JNNCE Journal of Engineering & Management. 2019;3(2):1-22.

Hyndman KG, Gruskin SM, Iyer C. TT: What India can learn from the United States. Journal of IPRs. 2005;10(5):399-405.

Vivekanandan VC. Transplanting bayh-dole act-issues at stake. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights. 2008;13(1): 480-285.

Zuniga P. The state of patenting at research institutions in developing countries: Policy approaches and practices. WIPO Economic Research Working Paper, No. 4; 2011.

Brown C. Ayresian technology, Schumeterian innovation, and the Bayh-Dole Act. Journal of Economic Issues. 2009;43(2):477-485.

Ray AS, Saha S. Patenting public- funded research for TT: A conceptual –Empirical synthesis of U.S. evidence and lesson for India. Indian Council for Research on International Relations, Working Paper 244, New Delhi; 2010.

Berman EP. Why did universities start patenting? Institution-building and the road to the Bayh-Dole act. Social Studies of Science. 2008;38(6):835-871.

Sampat BN. The Bayh-Dole model in developing countries: Reflection on the Indian Bill on Public Funded IP. Policy Brief Number 05, Department of Health Policy and Management Columbia University; 2009.

Thursby J, Thursby M. University licensing: Harnessing or tarnishing faculty research? Innovation Policy and the Economy. 2010; 10(1):159-189.

Mowery DC, Shane S. Introduction to the special issue on university entrepreneur-ship and TT. Management Science. 2002; 48(1):5-9.

Reczek PR. Research and the Bayh-Dole Act. American Association for the Advancement of Science. 2004;303(5654): 40.

Paraskevopoulou E. The adoption of Bayh-Dole type policies in developing countries. Policy Brief, The Innovation Policy Platform, World Bank Group and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD); 2013.

BayhDole25. The Bayh-Dole Act at 25. A Publication of BayhDole25, Inc., New York; 2006.

Satyanarayana K. The Indian public funded IP Bill: Are we ready? Indian J Med Res. 2008;128(6):682-685.

Chen A, Patton D, Kenney. University TT in China: A literature review and taxonomy. Brief Working Paper, 2016-5, Berkeley University of California; 2016.

Graff GD. Echoes of Bayh-Dole? A survey of IP and TT policies in emerging and developing economies. In IP Management in Health and Agricultural Innovation: A Handbook of Best Practices (Eds. A Krattiger, RT Mahoney, L Nelsen, et al.). MIHR: Oxford, U.K., and PIPRA: Davis, USA; 2007.

Dhewanto W, Uman KK. TC mapping in a developing economies: Indonesian case study; 2009.

World Development Indicators; 2015.

Stephen TK. Asian Initiatives on Bayh-Dole, with special reference to India: How do we make it more "Asian?" Chicago-Kent Journal of IP. 2010;10(10):44-64.

Govindaraju CVGR. R&D commercializa-tion challenges for developing countries -The case of Malaysia. V.G.R. Tech Monitor. 2010;12:25-30.

Lin M. Foley, Lardner LLP. China Bayh-Dole Act: A framework fundamental to achieving the economic potential of China’s National Patent Development Strategy (2011-2020). China Quarterly Newsletter, Eye on China; 2011.

Sheikh FA. Science, technology and innovation policy 2013 of India and informal sector innovations. Current Science. 2014;106(1):21-23.

Mukhopadhyay D. Science, technology and innovation policy 2013: Outline of coherent strategy for translating in it into action. Current Science. 2015;109(5):863-868.

Salman A, Al-Hemoud A, Fakhraldeen SA, Al-Nashmi M, Alfadhli SM, Chun S. Research and development as a moderating variable for sustainable economic performance: The Asian, European, and Kuwaiti models. Sustainability. 2020;12(7525):1-17.

Wignaraja G. Trade policy in PRC and India in the new era of slower world growth: Challenges and policy options; 2013. Available:

Wei Y, Balasubramanyam VN. A comparative analysis of China and India's manufacturing sectors. Economic Working Paper Series, 003. Lancaster University Management School, UK; 2015.


Das GG. Who leads and who lags? Technology diffusion, e-commerce and trade facilitation in a model of northern hub vis-à-vis southern spokes. Journal of Economic Integration. 2007;22(4):929- 972.

Surugiu MR, Surugiu C. International trade, globalization and economic interdependence between European countries: Implications for business and marketing framework. Procedia Economics and Finance. 2015;32(1):131-138.

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO); 2015.

Saha CN, Bhattacharya S. Intellectual property rights: An overview and implications in pharmaceutical industry. Journal of Advanced Pharmaceutical Technology & Research. 2011;2(2):88-93.

Bauer EJ. Agricultural TT at the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation. (Chapter: 16th Edited by Maredia K., Mysore S., Kumar S. and Rakhmatov C. ‘TT and commercialization: Experience of India and USA). World Technology Access Program, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA; 2012.

Zhengping L. The practice of TT promotion organization in China. Asia and the Pacific Incubator Conference, Hanoi, Vietnam; 2007.

Mysore S, Kumar NKK, Ganeshan S, Krishnamoorthy A, Sidhu AS. Enabling public private partnership through technology licensing in horticulture crops (Chapter: 5th Edited by Maredia K., Mysore S., Kumar S. and Rakhmatov C. ‘TT and commercialization: Experience of India and USA). World Technology Access Program, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA; 2012.

Rath S, Nathani A, Patel D, Kulkarni P, Gota V. Status of TT in India-the mucg needed Magic Remedy. Current Science. 2014;106(8):1058-1060.

Lin A, Sorscher S, Gupta N, Guillen E, Cox K. The Bayh-Dole Act and promoting the transfer of technology of publicly funded research. UAEM White Paper on the Proposed Indian Bayh-Dole Act Analogue; 2010.

Yueh LY. Global IPRs and economic growth. Northwestern Journal of Technology and IP. 2007;5(3):434-448.

Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation (GoI). India Habitat III National Report 2016. Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Government of India, New Delhi; 2016.

Singh AK, Ashraf SN, Arya A. Estimating factors affecting technical efficiency in Indian manufacturing Sector. Eurasian Journal of Business and Economics. 2019;12(24):65-86.