EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 215 (2018) MATEC Web Conf., 215 (2018) 02001 References
Open Access
Issue
MATEC Web Conf.
Volume 215, 2018
The 2nd International Conference on Technology, Innovation, Society and Science-to-Business (ICTIS 2018)
Article Number 02001
Number of page(s) 4
Section Science to Business
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201821502001
Published online 16 October 2018
  1. Antikainen, M., Mäkipää, M., & Ahonen, M. Motivating and supporting collaboration in open innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 13(1), 100–119. (2010) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Belderbos, R., Cassiman, B., Faems, D., Leten, B., & Van Looy, B. Co-ownership of intellectual property: Exploring the value-appropriation and value-creation implications of co-patenting with different partners. Research Policy, 43(5), 841–852. (2014). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Chesbrough, H., & Ghafele, R.. Open innovation and intellectual property. New Frontiers in Open Innovation, 191. (2014). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Colangelo, G. Avoiding the tragedy of the anticommons: collective rights organizations, patent pools and the role of antitrust. (2004). [Google Scholar]
  5. David, F., & van der Sijde, P.. University–Business Co-operation in Indonesian Higher Education for Innovation. In New Technology-Based Firms in the New Millennium (pp. 187–200). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. (2015) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Deselnicu, O. C., Costanigro, M., Souza-Monteiro, D. M., & McFadden, D. T. A meta-analysis of geographical indication food valuation studies: what drives the premium for origin-based labels?. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 204–219. (2013). [Google Scholar]
  7. Direktorat Jenderal Kekayaan Intelektual Indonesia. http://www.dgip.go.id/ [Google Scholar]
  8. Drucker, P. F. Knowledge-worker productivity: The biggest challenge. California management review, 41(2), 79–94. (1999). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/chafea/agri/ [Google Scholar]
  10. European Patent Office. https://www.epo.org/index.html [Google Scholar]
  11. Fichter, K. Innovation communities: the role of networks of promotors in Open Innovation. R&d Management, 39(4), 357–371. (2009). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. Garriga, H., Von Krogh, G., & Spaeth, S. How constraints and knowledge impact open innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 34(9), 1134–1144. (2013). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. Hadjimanolis, A. Barriers to innovation for SMEs in a small less developed country (Cyprus). Technovation, 19(9), 561–570. (1999). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. Irawan, C. Pendaftaran Indikasi Geografis sebagai Instrumen Perlindungan Hukum dan Peningkatan Daya Saing Produk Daerah di Indonesia. Proceeding SENDI_U. (2017). [Google Scholar]
  15. Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. the Quarterly journal of Economics, 108(3), 577–598. (1993). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. Laursen, K., Reichstein, T., & Salter, A. Exploring the effect of geographical proximity and university quality on university–industry collaboration in the United Kingdom. Regional studies, 45(4), 507–523. (2011). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. Lundvall, B. Å. National innovation systems—analytical concept and development tool. Industry and innovation, 14(1), 95–119. (2007). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. Motohashi, K., & Muramatsu, S. Examining the university industry collaboration policy in Japan: Patent analysis. Technology in Society, 34(2), 149–162. (2012). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. Mowery, D. C., & Sampat, B. N. The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and university–industry technology transfer: a model for other OECD governments?. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(1-2), 115–127. (2004). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. Osterloh, M., & Rota, S. (2007). Open source software development—Just another case of collective invention?. Research Policy, 36(2), 157–171. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. Powell, W. W., & Snellman, K. The knowledge economy. Annu. Rev. Sociol., 30, 199–220. (2004). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Schrape, J. F. Open Source Communities: The Sociotechnical Institutionalization of Collective Invention. In Collectivity and Power on the Internet (pp. 57–83). Springer, Cham. (2018). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. Sukartiko, A. C. Geographical Origin Characterization and Evaluation of Selected Quality Parameters of Potato Tubers. Cuvillier. (2012). [Google Scholar]
  24. Tallman, S., Jenkins, M., Henry, N., & Pinch, S. Knowledge, clusters, and competitive advantage. Academy of management review, 29(2), 258–271. (2004). [Google Scholar]
  25. West, J., & Gallagher, S. Challenges of open innovation: the paradox of firm investment in open‐source software. R&d Management, 36(3), 319–331. (2006). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.