"Compared to other countries, there are still too few spin-offs from universities in Germany. The potential is far from being exploited. This is not due to a lack of excellence in research, but rather to the lack of recognition of spin-offs in the science system. Excellent research counts for reputation. Teaching and transfer play hardly any role. Medical universities, but also faculties, sometimes even try to prevent spin-offs because they fear that they will lose excellent researchers and that a start-up or spin-off could be sold abroad and they will lose top researchers. There is a huge gap between the reality of universities and the Sunday speeches on transfer and innovation.
Anyone who wants to start a company as a university professor will inevitably run into conflicts of interest. In negotiations with their own university, they will be put in the position of negotiating against them and determining their working hours and their share of company profits. The uncertainty of financing, contract design and the uncertainty of success have already robbed many founders of their sleep.
Although the rapid transfer of technology into application, especially in the field of life sciences, could directly benefit patients and the health system, the negotiations between the actors often drag on for months, if not years. "A key reason for this is unclear and differing ideas about appropriate consideration of the participation of publicly funded scientific institutions in potential economic success" and different expectations, according to a position paper from the Transfer Alliance with standardized key points for spin-offs in the "Medical Life Sciences", a future industry. In it, the Transfer Alliance defines the framework conditions for license agreements for patents and other intellectual property for research institutions and their spin-offs. It specifies specific license rates and participation levels, criteria for contract design and possible contract components.
The key points were developed in particular by Thomas Gazlig, who heads the Charité BIH Innovation division with all technology transfer, and the managing director of Ascenion GmbH, Christian Stein. Gazlig, who is also a board member of the Transfer Alliance, reports that the Charité and BIH spin-offs have raised over 200 million euros in venture capital in recent years. Gazlig does not believe in special German approaches to investment management, but relies on international experience, taking into account the peculiarities of German public budget law. "It is by no means harmful to think about application and excellence at the same time," Gazlig told the F.A.Z. Being a researcher and an entrepreneur in the same field involves role conflicts and compliance problems, but these can be solved. It is about dealing with the results differently and not about changing research; rather, this carries the risk of reducing the quality of innovation. Only a truly outstanding science system can produce outstanding results. "We are just not managing to fully exploit these results, for the benefit of our society and economy, in the sense of appropriate monetization in Germany with an increase in jobs," Gazlig points out.
Scientific institutions are often risk-averse and overly anxious
In his view, the main obstacles to spin-offs are not bureaucratic hurdles, but rather the obstacles to supporting innovations. He sees a double problem: in Germany, there are an incredible number of regulations in the area of third-party funding that need to be taken into account, and a mentality in scientific institutions "that is particularly risk-averse and interprets the regulations in an overly cautious manner." Gazlig cited the General Data Protection Regulation as an example, which is interpreted extremely strictly in Germany. It is a matter of exploiting the scope for interpretation of the respective regulations and also making decisions at all levels, including in the specialist departments of the universities. Many clerks do not use their discretion, but delegate the decisions to the next higher level.
Christian Stein reports that Ascenion GmbH is currently involved in almost 40 spin-offs, in which a total of several hundred million euros of venture capital is invested. Based on international benchmarks, "we were able to agree on market conditions together with the founders and investors." The Transfer Alliance's recommendations could make the processes even more efficient and transparent. Ascension has experience with over 100 developed start-ups and is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Life Science Foundation. Every six weeks, Ascenion founds and supports a start-up. Stein, who has lived and researched in the United Kingdom, believes that the matter-of-factness with which scientists there justify what they do with public money to society is worth emulating. "Research institutions and universities must be and remain motivated to apply for patents broadly and internationally, to support founders and start-ups, and to live with the risks and disadvantages of know-how and brains being acquired by start-ups," he says. He therefore believes it is crucial that they participate fairly in the income generated by the inventions and research results of universities in spin-offs financed by taxpayers.
Around 20 percent of all European patent applications come directly or indirectly from academic institutions.
These are substantial economic values that academic institutions and the state would miss out on if research institutions and universities did not participate in the value creation from their spin-offs. "The Transfer Alliance's recommendation encourages academic institutions to think and act economically and entrepreneurially, instead of giving up their intellectual property rights without receiving market-standard compensation," says Stein.
Standards for license agreements must always be industry-specific
Companies do not want off-the-shelf contracts, says Stein. International experience has shown that standards must always be industry-specific. Therefore, the key points for the biomedical sector should be seen as a prelude, which should be followed by further position papers.
The starting point is almost always a license agreement for the use of the required intellectual property, which is usually exclusive.
In the international sector, license agreements and open minority participation are combined. The participation is implemented by the scientific institution either directly or indirectly (via a third party). If direct or indirect participation is not possible for legal or structural reasons, virtual shares could also be considered as an alternative. Indirect shareholdings are co-ownerships with far-reaching rights (rights to participate, speak and obtain information) with clear legal regulations. Virtual shares (phantom shares, exit fee) are a contractual claim that must be individually designed in separate contracts. For such structures, spin-offs usually need professional shareholding management. Concrete examples of this are given in the key points of the Transfer Alliance.
Anyone who wants to have a start-up landscape needs reasonable financing, says Stein. In Germany, there is no lack of start-up financing, but there is a lack in the middle and at the end. In the later phase, most of the capital usually comes from the United States or other overseas places. Just setting up an account for a GmbH takes at least six weeks in this country. The reasons for this lie in the Money Laundering Act. There are many regulations that are well-intentioned and justified, but represent hurdles for small companies. "That is not founder- and start-up-friendly." It is a thicket of regulations that you have to find your way around. But you don't have to put a founder under a magnifying glass, says Stein. He just has to prove himself.
The United States is at the top of the list of newly founded start-ups, followed by China, Great Britain and India. Germany is in fifth place. In order to minimize the financing gap for start-ups in Germany, the federal government has launched the WIN initiative to make it easier for young, innovative companies to access capital. In the WIN initiative, the companies and associations involved have committed themselves to working with politicians to strengthen the German and European start-up landscape through ten key steps. It aims to invest around 12 billion euros in young, innovative companies by 2030. This also aims to overcome barriers to investing in start-ups. In 2022, 9.4 billion euros were invested in start-ups in this country, which corresponds to 0.25 percent of Germany's gross domestic product (GDP). In the same year, 0.78 percent of the United States' GDP was invested as venture capital." [1]
1. Die Scheu vor dem Risiko einer Ausgründung: Eckpunkte für Start-ups in den Lebenswissenschaften. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung; Frankfurt. 07 Nov 2024: 8. Von Heike Schmoll
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą