| Summary: | abstract: Extant evaluation studies of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 have focused primarily on its effects on the pace of innovation and on the norms and practices of academic research but neglected other public values. Seeking to redress this shortcoming, I begin by examining Bayh-Dole with respect to other relevant public values following the Public Value Failure approach. From that analysis, equity emerges as a pressing issue. I define equity issues, in a loosely Rawlsian sense, as situations of unfair distribution of political power and economic resources. My analysis identifies a business model of offices of technology transfer--that I call "nurturing start-ups"--that is likely to become a standard of practice. This model can foster either firm competition or concentration in emerging industries and will therefore have an impact on the distribution of economic benefits from innovation. In addition, political influence to reform Bayh-Dole is allocated disproportionately in favor of those who stand to gain from this policy. For instance, elite universities hold a larger share of the resources and voice of the university system. Consequently, adjusting the nurturing start-ups model to foster competition and increasing cooperation among universities should lead to a more equitable distribution of economic benefits and political voice in technology transfer. Conventional policy evaluation is also responsible for the neglect of equity considerations in Bayh-Dole studies. Currently, "what is the policy impact?" can be answered far more systematically than "why the impact matters?" or "is this policy designed and implemented legitimately?" The problem lies with the consequentialist theory of value that undergirds evaluation. Hence, I propose a deontological theory of evaluation to reaffirm the discipline's commitment to democratic policy making. === Dissertation/Thesis === Ph.D. Public Administration 2011
|
|---|
