UNC lags behind in monetizing its research

While remaining among the top in capturing research funding, UNC lags behind its peer universities in converting research to patents and other commercial applications.

UNC Board of Trustees member Phillip Clay said UNC ranks high among public research universities with respect to volume of research.

But there is a much lower number of patents, which Clay said is an indicator of the research’s impact.

Clay is the chairman of the Innovation and Impact Committee, which was created this year by the trustees to examine ways research can benefit the University financially.

“The University has a large volume of research,” Clay said in an interview. “The charge to the committee is to look at ways to get greater impact, to generate patents and copyrights, which bring funds to the University and create opportunities.”

At the Sept. 25 board meeting, Joseph DeSimone, director of the Kenan Institute of Private Enterprise, pointed out that UNC’s license income is only $1.5 million, compared to an average among top universities of $35 million.

“We’re ninth in federal funding, but lowest in ratio of converting federal dollars to patents,” he said, adding that the issue has been ongoing in the last few years.

Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost Jim Dean said despite the success UNC has had in bringing in research dollars, improvement remains to be made in terms of commercialization.

“I do believe that our commercialization efforts — commercialization means taking research and turning it into a business, effectively, and patents are one part of that — we can do better in that area,” he said, adding that committees created by former Chancellor Holden Thorp are studying the issue and will report their findings soon.

Dean emphasized that the value of research cannot be determined solely by patents.

“Let’s say you’re in the School of Pharmacy and you develop some new compound that is going to be successful in a drug — you might get a patent for that,” he said.

“But let’s say you’re in the School of Public Health and you’re discovering some new program that’s going to help mothers feed their children better. It’s much less likely that a patent is going to come out of that, but that does not mean in any way it’s less valuable.”

Dean pointed out that the frequency with which University research dollars are converted into patents depends on the areas of research.

“If you take a place like (the Massachusetts Institute of Technology) which … is at the top of the list in terms of patents for research dollar, I don’t believe that they have, for example, a school of public health,” Dean said. “So they’re not going to have a huge amount of research dollars that are less likely to lead to patents.”

At Chancellor Carol Folt’s installation ceremony earlier this month, Gov. Pat McCrory said in a speech that UNC must strive to produce job-ready graduates.

“Ultimately, research, regardless of its classification, serves us best when it improves the lives of people and solves real-world problems,” he said.

“Disseminating this knowledge and creating more patents, which we’ve talked about … will create more jobs and entrepreneurs in this state. Entrepreneurs survive on their ability to connect concepts to the real world.”

Biomedical engineering professor Edward Chaney, who is the co-founder of the imaging software company Morphomics Inc., said it is necessary to seek a balance between the citizens whose tax money pays for research grants and the return those citizens must eventually see.

“There’s no question (financial profitability of research is important),” Chaney said. “The research the company was founded on we did at UNC with grants primarily from the (National Cancer Institute). It’s hard to measure profit just in dollars … there’s an intangible profitability, but also a financial gain. The University was part-owner of the company and received royalties, and that’s important too.”

Music and women’s and gender studies professor Annegret Fauser said it is important to consider long-term effects when looking at the value of research.

“Of course there are the applicable outcomes of research, which can be something like a book, but there is also a far less tangible side, about the development of knowledge and creativity without an immediate quantifiable outcome,” she said.

Fauser praised the creative thought that happens at universities rather than corporations — which can’t be judged by an economic metric.

“Eventually, of course, I’ll write a book or hold a conference or teach a seminar relating to my research, but besides all of that, something is gained when we think about who we are,” she said. “It’s a way of thinking, of problem-solving, and how can you sell that? You can’t.”

Dean said in his interviews with the provost selection committee, he discussed opportunities for improvement in commercialization — but said it is not his only focus.

“This is important, but it’s one of a number of things that are important,” he said. “The University has some businesslike elements, but the University is not strictly speaking a business. And my goal is not to turn it into one, even though I was the business school dean.”

Fauser is originally from Germany, where, she said, an emphasis on creative thought and research in the humanities and arts is considered vital for maintaining high industrial output.

“I would love for people on this side of the Atlantic to realize that things can’t all be outcome-driven,” she said. “When we don’t value humanities, arts, knowledge for the sake of knowledge, we are losing something that, ironically, is important for economic competitiveness.”

university@dailytarheel.com