Road Map for Agricultural Technology Transfer

and Commercialisation
Manoj P Samuel (manojpsamuel@gmail.com) is with the ICAR-Central
Institute of Fisheries Technology, Kochi, Kerala. Karim Maredia is with the
Michigan State University, East Lansing, United States. R Kalpana Sastry is
with the ICAR-National Academy of Agricultural Research Management,
Hyderabad, India.

The management and transfer of agricultural technologies for commercialisation

purposes is considered to be a new concept in India. However, there is an
upward surge in the technology protection, incubation and other
commercialisation activities in recent times. This can be attributed to the recent
transformation of the agribusiness ecosystem in the country due to policy
initiatives and more focused research in applied and frontier areas.

The authors acknowledge the reviewer for their comments and suggestions to
improve the article.

Technologies developed in research or academic institutions are typically

transferred through an agreement in which the university or the research
institution grants to a third party a licence to use its intellectual property in the
defined technology, sometimes for a particular field of use and/or region of the
world. The technology transfer process promotes commercialisation, reach of
better products to the market and job generation. The expenses incurred
towards intellectual property protection and its maintenance can be justified in
view of introduction of better products, increased completion in the market,
enhanced customer satisfaction, and more revenue and tax generation.
India became a signatory to the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) in 1998. As a
result, patent filings have increased exponentially. Considerable changes have
been made in the patenting procedure through the introduction of Patents
Rules, 2003, which were further amended in 2005 and 2006, resulting in new
practices and procedure (OCGPDT 2011). In recent years, the Indian
government introduced many schemes, began to provide soft loans and
promote venture capital funds to foster its national innovation system through
project-based programmes. The current trends in respect of filing of intellectual
property applications are depicted in Figure 1 (OCGPDT 2014).
Current Status
Agricultural extension system: Public extension played a major role in
ushering in the green revolution in Indian agriculture. Though agriculture
development in India is basically a state subject and the agricultural sector
plays a crucial role from the perspective of ensuring food and livelihood security
of its large population, the central government plays a major role in formulating
policies that has direct bearing on the growth of the agricultural sector. The
programmes conceived at the national level are mainly implemented by the
states through its development departments. Besides, state governments also
formulate regional-level agricultural extension programmes. Similarly, the Indian
Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) is an apex body at the national level
that supports research and extension activities to evolve effective transfer of
technology (ToT) models. The state agricultural universities (SAUs) also
contemplate to develop extension models suitable to take up ToT besides
implementing the models evolved by the ICAR system. Training and visit (T&V)
system, broad-based extension system (BBES), district-level agricultural
technology management agency model (ATMA), decentralised extension
network—Raitha Samparka Kendra (RSK), Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK) also
known as the Farm Science Centre—are some of the innovative agricultural
extension programmes that were implemented over the years.
ITMU, ZTMU and business planning and development units: During the
Eleventh Five Year Plan of Government of India, the ICAR has mooted a three-
tier intellectual property and technology management system towards
developing an institutional set-up for agricultural technology transfer and
commercialisation (ICAR 2006). Accordingly, ICAR established in all its
institutes a single-window mechanism, namely Institute Technology
Management Units (ITMUs) to showcase the intellectual assets of the institute
and pursue matters related to intellectual property management and
transfer/commercialisation. Along with this, mid-tier mechanisms called zonal
technology management and business planning and development (ZTM&BPD)
units were established, in synergy with the ITMUs, in various zones of the
country. The Twelfth Five Year Plan brought in more innovations in the existing
system with the introduction of the National Agricultural Innovation Fund (NAIF)
and establishment of agribusiness incubation (abi) units in many agricultural
research institutes for promotion of grassroots innovations at micro level.
The ZTMC and ABI units function as business facilitation centres and provide
the physical infrastructure necessary for technology incubation and new
business/ start-ups, including offices and lab space. They will also offer hand-
holding services and ensure availability of shared resources such as specialised
equipment and technical support services (OCGPDT 2014).
Agrinnovate India and technology business incubators: In addition to the
existing mechanisms, a new initiative, namely Agrinnovate India was
established as a registered company under the Department of Agricultural
Research and Education (DARE) (ICAR 2006). It aims to work on the strengths
of ICAR and promote the development and spread of research and
development outcomes through intellectual property rights (IPRs) protection,
commercialisation and forging partnerships both in the country and outside for
public benefit. Apart from this, technology business incubators (tbis) targeting
big scale incubation and commercialisation process with funding from the
Department of Science and Technology, Government of India have been
established in a few ICAR institutes and SAUs.
Potential Institutional Innovations
In view of ever-increasing competition in the technology landscape, it is
inevitable for the ICAR to conceive and strategise mechanisms to strengthen its
intellectual property portfolio management. The researchers and academicians
should be encouraged to develop, protect and commercialise their innovations
for the benefit of the farming community focusing on end-to-end income
generation. A few suggestions for strengthening the transfer of technology and
commercialisation capacity of the National Agricultural Research System
(NARS) in India are listed below.
Sensitising SAUs and ICAR institutes on intellectual property
management and technology commercialisation: Sensitising the institutions
under NARS network and educating its scientists/faculty about the ever
dynamic and complex environment of IPR and technology management is vital.
They should be made aware about the various tools, techniques, protection
measures, issues and challenges in relation to IPR and technology
management and also about the changing boundaries of industry landscape.
The provisions of rewards for technology commercialisation, both financial and
professional, may attract the research fraternity towards better intellectual
property management and subsequent commercialisation for the benefit of the
larger farming community.
Establishing institutional mechanism for technology transfer and
commercialisation: As the market forces emerge and the intellectual property
regime gets strengthened, more transparency, accountability, and overall
performance are warranted especially from the public-funded research
organisations and state universities. An institutional mechanism, in tandem with
the existing ZTMU–ITMU–ABI trio has to be developed for better and speedy
process of intellectual property protection, technology transfer and
commercialisation. Bigger firms and investors across the globe can be
approached and facilitated through the recently launched business innovation–
incubation systems like Agrinnovate India and TBI under the NARS itself. A
model for the same is depicted in Figure 2. Provision should also be made to
protect the interest of the farming community to a larger extent. The established
mechanism should also address questions from the society on the moral and
ethical issues of commercialising outputs from the public-funded research
projects, which otherwise would be available free of cost on public domain.
Establishment of technology managers’ networking platform: A networking
platform of researchers and managers working on technology management and
commercialisation in SAUs and ICAR institutes under the common umbrella of a
registered society will be helpful in networking relations and exchange of
information related to intellectual property management and technology
commercialisation in agriculture. Such a platform can be connected to similar
organisations in other countries like the Association of University Technology
Managers (AUTM) in the United States (US), which functions to
promote technology transfer between universities, industry and/or the
government (AUTM 2013). The avenues of international technology transfer
and commercialisation could be explored by such a global network. The
platform can also be used to engage with the industry for effective
commercialisation and to foster public–private partnerships (PPPs).
Bringing an act in Parliament like Bayh-Dole Act in the US: The US Bayh-
Dole Act of 1980 allows universities and other non-profit institutions to have
ownership rights to discoveries resulting from federally-funded research,
provided certain obligations are met. Crafting Indian legislation analogous to the
Bayh-Dole Act in the us will ensure more legal clarity and support, lower
transaction costs, and facilitate more efficient channels for technology transfer.
The main focus of this act should be on changing the institutional governance
and culture which grant ownership of intellectual property to public research
organisations and further promote the transfer and commercialisation of
developed technologies. The act should be drafted in such a way that it enables
public research institutions and universities to compete with the private sector
and also pave the way for more transparent and dynamic PPPs and a vibrant
Indian innovation system. India today is thus much closer to a functioning
technology transfer system that was the us in 1980 as a matter of statute, but
away as far as matters of institutional governance and institutional culture are
concerned (Abramson 2007).
Concerted approach for promoting business incubation and start-ups: By
default, agricultural technologies are low-cost technologies, and entrepreneurs
consider them less enterprising because of the lower purchasing power of the
target market. Therefore, ICAR and SAUs should initiate facilities for incubation
of new business ideas based on innovative agricultural technologies by
providing cheap space, facilities and required information and research inputs.
The ABI programme is envisaged to support the entrepreneurs and start-ups by
offering business consulting services to agriculture-related businesses and also
helps to develop a strategic business plan. Apart from guidance and
consultancy services, the new mechanism should also assist in making venture
capital funds and funds from angel investors available to the start-ups.
Support mechanisms: In spite of the many agencies, schemes and
government departments in the country that act as support mechanisms for
intellectual property protection and subsequent commercialisation, the benefits
have not been reaching to needy entrepreneurs, especially in the case of micro,
small and medium scale agribusinesses. An umbrella-like, consortia-based
structure should be conceived and established for convergence of all schemes
and financial aid programmes offered by both governmental and non-
governmental agencies, and directing them to appropriate agri-enterprises and
start-ups.
Strengthening agricultural extension system: In Indian agriculture research
and education system, for decades, the role of technology transfer manager is
played by the extension personnel. However, the present extension systems
appear to be inadequate to address the challenges faced by the farmers in the
context of the changing agricultural scenario. More training and education
needs to be given to the grass-roots level extension workers through capacity-
building programmes on IPR and technology management. The visibility of
viable decentralised, democratic, farmer-centric, demand-driven, vibrant and
participatory institutional mechanisms has to be ensured at the lowest cutting-
edge administrative level (panchayat-level institutions) to cater to the needs of
the farming community and rural youth and sensitise them on technology
management.
Creating university licensing corporations/licensing companies: University
licensing corporations, which inject private sector thinking into public and non-
profit institutions, can play an important role in helping those institutions
negotiate deals that serve both public and private interests. They could aid in
translating technology into business ventures, creating incubation opportunities
from scientific innovation and attract funds from venture capitalists, investors
and other providers. The ICAR’s initiative on creation of the company,
Agrinnovate India, is the right step towards that direction. They can forge
strategic alliances with global business houses and their counterparts in foreign
universities.
Encourage public–public and public–private partnerships for intellectual
property management: To increase industrial competitiveness in India,
possibilities of new partnerships should be explored among the research
producers, technology providers, users (including start-ups), and funders. With
the introduction of many new bio-parks and bioinformatic centres, the scope of
ppps in agriculture, biotechnology and food technology has attained a peak in
recent years. With 65% of the population in India still looking at agriculture for
their livelihoods, there is enormous potential for PPP in agriculture-related
technology development, protection, transfer and commercialisation. The
partnership opportunities are particularly huge in areas of seed sector, farm
machinery, food and fertiliser industries. At the same time, innovations are
required in the existing research ecosystem under NARS that allow public
institutions and private firms to develop and own patentable innovations jointly.
Though a number of governmental and semi-governmental organisations are
working on technology development and management, the integrated effort of
all these agencies is hardly taking place. Hence, a national-level umbrella
consortium can be mooted for coordinating and converging the individual
initiatives to an integrated and focused effort. Governmental and non-
governmental departments and agencies like the Department of Science and
Technology (DST), Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR),
Department of Biotechnology (DBT), ICAR, Ministry of Micro, Small and
Medium Enterprises and various innovation and incubation hubs, etc, should be
brought under the said consortia for making sure of constant flow of information,
effective technological interventions, timely consultancy services and speedy
delivery mechanisms for the benefit of the grass-roots level agripreneurs.
Changes in existing research ecosystem: ICAR’s and SAUs’s policies have
to be modified in such a way that will encourage public institutions to share
patent revenues with individual inventors or researchers. It should also
encourage universities and research institutes to patent all patentable
discoveries and make it mandatory for all public research institutions to set
aside a portion of royalty revenues to maintain internal systems for updating
innovation, filing new patent applications, litigating, licensing, and building
intellectual property awareness and competence. A national innovation fund can
be created with seed money from the government, and a portion of royalties
that a public institution receives from patents derived through public research
grants should flow back to a national public innovation fund to fund future
research. The ICAR institutions/SAUs should also facilitate the resources
necessary to file patents, establish intellectual property offices, train personnel
in patenting, draft licensing programmes, and negotiate partnerships with
corporate collaborators.
Catalyse change in legal system and industrial culture: Apart from
strengthening the institutional innovations and delivery mechanism, the NARS
can also play a vital role in strengthening intellectual property laws and
regulations in India with respect to agriculture, plant variety, geographical
indicators, biodiversity and traditional knowledge. It can also moot new
guidelines for IPR policies within and outside NARS for issues related to
agriculture, food and water. A stronger intellectual property enforcement and
providing more timely resolution of infringement complaints can help combat
intellectual property theft, which is not uncommon in India.
Innovative ideas in technology transfer/commercialisation: A few
innovative and novel ideas for technology management and entrepreneurship
promotion from the US system like hatching (for early development of
entrepreneurship culture among students), CEO mentors (facilitating well-
experienced CEOs as mentors of student start-ups) (MSU 2015),
Derisking(MSU 2015) (real time systems to reduce the gap between an early-
stage invention and its commercial viability), Innovation club (which provides a
new forum for professionals to share andexplore ideas in a positive and
supportive environment), economic gardening (Masahiro 2012) (economic
development model that focuses on strengthening existing local companies)
(Zucker and Darby 2009; MSu 2015), kitchen incubator (MSU 2015)
(providing production servicesand marketing support of food products), spin-off
companies (Bacchiocchi and Montobbio 2009) (creation of an independent
company through the sale or distribution of new shares of an existing
business/division of a parent company), gap funding (MSU 2015) (funding to
bridge the difference between the money required to begin or continue
operations, and the money currently accessible), etc, may be adopted with
required modifications for Indian conditions.
Conclusions
Early implementation of a strong agriculture/veterinary patent regime would
strengthen India’s agricultural research and development sector, attract more
foreign investment, and provide a better working environment for Indian firms.
More concerted approaches of state and private players through effective ppps
are required to revitalise the Indian agricultural scenario to a more profit-
oriented, technology savvy and productive one. Innovative institutional
mechanisms should be designed for promoting intellectual property protection
and technology commercialisation among researchers and academia. Legal
and other supportive framework should also be strengthened to support the
ever-changing intellectual property regime. The role of a strong intellectual
property education among agricultural, business and law schools is also
important in the present-day scenario. More open and pragmatic approaches
would aid in developing a strong intellectual property platform for Indian
agricultural research system.
Forming protocols and guidelines for operating patents derived through public
research funds coupled with appropriate innovations in institutional governance
will enhance the prospects for technology transfer from laboratories to
commercial markets. Appropriate policies should combine the concern with
international norms with the specifics of India’s economic and social needs.
References
Abramson Bruce (2007): “India’s Journey toward an Effective Patent System,”
Policy Research Working Paper 4301, World Bank, South Asia Region, Finance
and Private Sector
Development Unit.
AUTM (2013): Licensing Activity Survey, FY 2012, Association of University
Technology Managers, US.
Bacchiocchi, E and F Montobbio (2009): “Knowledge Diffusion from University
and Public Research, A Comparison between US Japan and Europe Using
Patent Citations,” Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol 34 (2), pp 169–81.
ICAR (2006): ICAR Guidelines for Intellectual Property Management and
Technology Transfer and Commercialization, Indian Council of Agricultural
Research, New Delhi, p 68.
MSU (2015): MSU Innovation Centre Annual Report, Michigan State University.
Masahiro Samejima (2012): “Making Intellectual Property A National
Priority: Helping SMEs Make the Most of Their Inventions—Looking Ahead,”
International report—IP management helps SMEs maintain a competitive
edge, Uchida & Samejima Law Firm,
Japan, http://www.iammagazine.com/reports/Detail.aspx?g=2d
de700a-6f5c-45e4-912a 7054906315c1.
OCGPDT (2011): Manual of Patent Office Practice and Procedures, Office of
Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks, Mumbai.
— (2014): Annual Report 2013–14, Office of Controller General of Patents,
Designs and Trademarks, Mumbai.
Zucker, L G and M R Darby (2009): “Capturing Technological Opportunity via
Japan’s Star Scientists: Evidence from Japanese Firms’ Biotech Patents and
Products,” Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol 26, Nos 1 & 2, pp 37–58.