UniversityIndustry Relationships:

1

• University-Industry Relationships
• Experiences from Austin Texas, the University of
  Texas, and
• IC2 Institute
• PRESENTED TO
• Colombian Industry Networks
• July 4, 2009

Dr. Elsie Echeverri-Carroll Research Professor
and Director Economic Development IC2 Institute
e.carroll_at_mail.utexas.edu
2
Objetivos de la Clase

• Revisión de la literatura internacional sobre la
  relación u-e
• Revisión de la literatura sobre la relación u-e
  en Colombia
• Presentar el caso exitoso de la relación u-e en
  la U de Texas en Austin
• Memorándum al presidente de sus organizaciones en
  el que ustedes van a identificar y priorizar
  tres estrategias para superar las limitaciones
  en la relación U-E en sus respectivas
  organizaciones

3
Estrategias para Promover la Relación
Universidad-Empresa en la Institución que
Represento M E M O R A N D U M
PÁRRAFO 1 Resumen compacto de la literatura más
importante de la relación Universidad-Empresa a
nivel internacional.
PÁRRAFO 2 Diagnóstico compacto de la relación
Universidad-Empresa en Colombia. Considerar las 3
fortalezas y 3 limitaciones más importantes.
PÁRRAFO 3 Diagnóstico compacto de la relación
Universidad-Empresa en la Institución que
represento. Considerar las 3 fortalezas y 3
limitaciones más importantes.
PÁRRAFO 4 Tres estrategias para superar las
limitaciones en la relación Universidad-Empresa
en la Institución que represento en orden de
prioridad e indicar las razones por la que estas
estrategias son prioritarias.
4
Class Schedule

• 800 AM-1000 AM class
• 1000 AM-1015 AM break
• 1015 AM-1215 AM class

5
University-Industry LinksLiterature Review

• Reamer A, Icerman L, Youtie J (2003) Technology
  Transfer and CommercializationTheir Role in
  Economic Development. Economic Development
  Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
  http//www.eda.gov/ImageCache/EDAPublic/documents/
  pdfdocs/eda_5fttc_2epdf/v1/eda_5fttc.pdf
• Ankrah, SN (2007) University-Industry
  Inter-organizational Relationships for Technology
  /Knowledge Transfer A Systematic Literature
  Review, ISSN nr 1743-6796, Leeds University
  Business School. http//lubswww.leeds.ac.uk/resear
  chProgs/fileadmin/user_upload/ANKRAH1.pdf
• Agrawal, Ajay (2001) University-to-Industry
  Knowledge Transfer Literature Review and
  Unanswered Questions International Journal of
  Management Review, Vol 3, Issue 4, pp. 285-302.
• Feldman MP and Breznitz SM (2009) The American
  Experience in University Technology Transfer In
  McKelvery M and Homen M (Eds) Learning to Compete
  in European Universities. Edward Elgar
  Publishing.

6
Who Benefit from Stronger U-I Links?
The University of Texas

The Austin Technopolis
7
Firms

• Which firms develop stronger links with
  universities?
• What benefits do firms gain from stronger links
  with universities?
• What kind of links do they develop and how?

8
Which firms have stronger links with universities
in the U.S.?

• absorptive capacity Firms in-house RDt-n
  (Cohen and Levinthal 1990)
• absorptive capacity Firms connectedness to
  the open science community of which its
  investment in RD is just one of the several
  components (e.g. publishing papers with
  scientists outside the firm and engaging in
  research collaboration) (Lim 2000)

IBM Research in Austin
University of Texas
11.1 million in funding from the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency to Collaborate
super chip (2003)
1 million gift to computer engineering 2007
AMD Austin
9
Which firms develop stronger links with
universities?

• There are differences in the degree to which
  firms are capable of effectively utilizing
  university research to their benefit and these
  differences vary systematically with the degree
  to which firms are connected to the university
  (Cockburn and Henderson 1998)

10
Connectedness and Tacit Knowledge

• Connectedness is only important because the
  knowledge associated with an invention is not
  completely transferred in the codified form of
  patents and publications but rather requires some
  form of interaction between the inventor and the
  recipient firm. (Agrawal 2001, p.291)
• Thus, one of the most important benefits that
  firms get from stronger links with the community
  of science (including the universities) is access
  to tacit knowledge.

11
U.S. firms linked with the community of science
including star scientists have higher patent
productivity

• Firms links with community of science (Lim 2000)
• Firms links with star university scientists
  (Zucker et. al. 2000)

Firms patents productivity of important
patents Patents that have been registered in
at least two regions (US, EU, and Japan)

• Universities
• Other Firms
• RD Labs
• 2.Star university scientists

1. Community of Science

• Sponsoring research
• Participating in Research consortia
• Partnering with other companies

Firm A
Firm B
12
Channels of Knowledge Transfer

• We have only begun to investigate the various
  channels by which knowledge is transferred to
  firms from the universities
• Feldman and Breznitz (2009)
• Formal channels that fall under the umbrella of
  the TTO sponsored research agreements with
  industry invention disclosures, patents
  licenses of university intellectual property to
  firms and the formation of spinoffs companies
• Informal channels that do not fall under the
  umbrella of TTO industry hiring of students,
  faculty consulting, and knowledge trading among
  friendship networks
• Are there cultural differences across countries?
• There is a lack of longitudinal studies to test
  whether short term links lead to long-term links

13
U-I Degrees of Tech Transfer Flows
Technology park Industrial incubators
High
Expected Technology flow to firms
Patent licensing Sponsor research Faculty
consulting Personal exchange
Training Publications Grants Fellowships Scholars
hips donations
Low
Few Weeks (Phase 1)
1-3 years (Phase 2)
Many years (Phase 3)
Duration of the Relationship
Source Graph by Ankrah (2007) based on
information from Chen (1994)
14
Set de Preguntas 1

• Cuáles son las 10 compañías que en Colombia
  invierten mas en ID?
• Cuáles son las 10 compañías colombianas que están
  más ligadas a la comunidad científica colombiana
  (o cuáles son las 10 compañías colombianas que
  colaboran más con universidades, firmas, o
  centros de ID)?
• Cuáles son los canales que mas se usan en
  Colombia para transferir conocimiento de la
  universidad a la industria (publicaciones
  conjuntas, investigación conjunta)?

15
Universities

• What benefits do universities gain from stronger
  links with industry?

16
U.S. University Characteristics

• Rapid growth in U.S. universities patenting and
  licensing activity after the Bayh-Dole Act of
  1980, which granted universities the right to
  license inventions that resulted from federally
  funded research? Has it shifted the average type
  of research from basic to more applied research?
  (Henderson et al 1998 Thursby and Thursby 2000)
• Which technologies are more easily licensed?
  technologies in very early embryonic stages (50
  proof of concept and 50 lab-scale prototype)
  (Jensen and Thursby 1998)
• What factors favor university spinoffs? (Di
  Gregorio and Shane 2000)
• Licensing Activity ? Equity versus cash from
  royalties (Feldman et. al. 2000)

17
Has the Bayh-Dole Act shifted the average type of
research that is conducted at universities from
basic to more applied research?

• Henderson et al (1998)
• Patent quality measured by two variables (a)
  its importance? how many times is it cited in
  other patents. (b) its generality? in how many
  patent classes is it cited.
• Comparing university patents with a 1 random
  sample of all patents in the U.S. during the
  1965-92 period, they find that the trends in the
  quality of university patents are similar to the
  trends in the 1 random sample of all patents.
• Their data illustrates that while the Bayh-Dole
  Act has increased the propensity to patent, it
  has not resulted in a shift in the overall
  quality of patents generated at universities.

Quality of university patents 1965-92
Quality of a 1 sample of U.S. patents 1965-92
18
Has the Bayh-Dole Act shifted the average type of
research that is conducted at universities from
basic to more applied research?

• Thursby and Thursby (2000)
• Survey data from 65 U.S. universities
• Their results suggest that the growth in
  licensing patented university inventions is
  driven primarily by an increase in professors
  propensity to patent and firms propensity to
  outsource RD by licensing, rather than a shift
  in the average type of research from more basic
  to applied.
• Licensing growth universities function of
  propensity professors to patent, firms to
  outsource RD

19
Which factors have a positive effect on
university startups?

• Di Gregorio and Shane (2000)
• Intellectual eminence of professors
• The possibility that the startup can offer equity
  rather than cash to university professors

20
Do universities that are more experienced and
successful at licensing are more likely to employ
equity than cash (royalties) in their licensing
agreements?

• Feldman et al (2000)
• Their results show that experienced university
  TTO are more likely to use equity, because
  although its use is more complex than cash, it
  may increase the option value of some
  technologies and also improve the alignment
  between universitys interests and those of the
  firm.

21
Set de Preguntas 2

• Qué restricciones imponen las universidades
  colombianas a los investigadores que quieren
  licenciar su tecnología?
• Qué apoyo brindan las universidades colombianas a
  los investigadores que quieren licenciar su
  tecnología?
• Existe la posibilidad de que los investigadores o
  las universidades reciban acciones de las
  compañías en lugar de regalías en los acuerdos de
  licencias?
• Cuáles universidades colombianas han tenido éxito
  en la creación de nuevas compañías?

22
U.S. Research and Development

• By 1979, industry RD expenditures passed
  government spending growing more than three-folds
  after controlling for inflation between 1975 and
  2000 (Litan et al. 2007)

23
US Academic RD Funding from the Federal G and
Industry
24
Industry Funding of University Research, 1973-2005
2.6 billion (2006)
Outsource of RD?
25
Share of Academic RD Funding from the Federal
Government and Industry, 1994
Sources National Science Foundation, 2009
Arocena and Sutz (2001) Changing knowledge
production and Latin American Universities,
Research Policy, 30 1221-1234.
26
Set de Preguntas 3

• Quién financia la mayor parte de la investigación
  en las universidades colombianas (el gobierno o
  la industria)?
• Ha tenido la industria una participación
  creciente en la financiación de investigación en
  las universidades en los últimos 20 años?
• Ha habido una caída en los recursos que las
  empresas dedican a financiar investigación en
  Colombia a partir del 2000?

27
Most Respected Literature on U-I Relationships in
the U.S.

• Econometric models and estimation techniques
• Limitation of this literature? Data provided by
  Association of University Technology Managers
  (AUTM) patents, licensing agreements,
  university startups.
• policies that affect the vibrant trade in
  scientific knowledge for commercial applications
  that is not patented and does not flow through
  the university TTO have been largely overlooked.
  (Agrawal 2001, p. 294).
• Non-patent channels of knowledge transfer have
  been overlooked.

28
Benefit to Firms and Universities

• Funding from Licenses?
• The median net royalty
• per university respondent to
• the AUTM surveys overall
• climbed from 440,000 in 1996
• to 950,000 in 2005.
• Most royalties from licensing agreements
• accrue to relatively few patents and relatively
• few universities that hold them.
• Research is starting to indicate that firms
• will benefit significantly by investing in
• the types of relationships that
• are not necessarily in the presence
• of efficient market such as those different from
• patents and licensing agreements (e.g.,
  conferences, joint publications)

29
Different industries value different channels
differently
Technology park Industrial incubators
High
Expected Technology flow to firms
Patent licensing Sponsor research Faculty
consulting Personal exchange
Industry Set 1
Training Recruiting of students
Publications Conferences Informal
conversations Grants Fellowships Scholarships dona
tions
Industry set 2
Low
Overall these channels are more important
Source Cohen et al (1998, 2000)
30
Firms use different channels to access university
knowledge
Firm 1
Technology park Industrial incubators
High
Expected Technology flow to firms
Firm 2
Patent licensing
Publications
Low
Firms
Source Agrawal and Henderson (2000)
31
Set de Preguntas 4

• Cuál es el ingreso por licencias de patentes en
  las universidades colombianas y en su propia
  universidad?
• Qué tipo de relaciones informales (p.ej.,
  publicaciones, conferencias, consultoría) tiene
  su universidad con la industria?
• Constituyen estas relaciones informales un
  trampolín para desarrollar relaciones mas
  formales (p.ej., acuerdos sobre licencias)?

32
International Literature Review
33
The Colombian Case Existing Literature

• Tognato, Carlo (2005) Comercializar la
  Tecnología Generada desde las Universidades Un
  Reto Institucional Revista de Ingeniería,
  Universidad de los Andes.
• Abello Llanos, Raimundo (2007) Factores Claves en
  las Alianzas Universidad-Industria como Soporte
  de la Productividad en la Industria local Hacia
  un modelo de desarrollo económico y social
  sostenible. Investigación y Desarrollo, 15
  [phone].
• Vesga, Rafael (2008) Emprendimiento e innovación
  en Colombia Qué nos está haciendo falta?
  Available at the WEB.
• Colciencias (2008) Colombia construye y siembra
  futuro

34
The Colombian Case Existing Literature

• Tognato, Carlo (2005)? reto institucional
  (universidades). Propone
• Fijar metas medibles ? de licencias, de
  spinoffs
• Crear incentivos y políticas laborales que
  faciliten el intercambio de investigadores entre
  u-e
• Crear instituciones ? OTT, Capital semilla,
  incubadoras de empresas, clusters tecnológicos
• Creación de una serie de comités que produzcan un
  documento base y lo consulten con los
  stakeholders.
• Limitaciones de este artículo ? No presenta un
  diagnóstico o análisis cuantitativo que
  justifique sus recomendaciones de política.

35
The Colombian Case Existing Literature

• Abello Llanos, Raimundo (2007) Usa el Modelo de
  Gestión de Bruno y Vasconcellos (2003) para
  analizar 8 casos de innovación desarrollada por
  grupos de investigación en la U del Norte para
  empresas.
• El Modelo identifica 4 factores claves
• Institucional
• Organizacional
• Realización de valor
• Creación de valor
• Limitaciones del Estudio Tiene la U del Norte
  una Oficina de Gestión? No hay un análisis
  cualitativo de la relación u-e en la U del Norte
  o en Colombia.

36
The Colombian Case Existing Literature

• Vesga, Rafael (2005)? Emprendimiento e innovación
  en Colombia Qué nos está haciendo falta?

Nivel Macro (País)
Nivel de Empresa
Nivel del Individuo
Universidad

• Análisis de estos 3 componentes a dos niveles
• El nivel teórico
• El emprendimiento innovador en Colombia

37
The Colombian Case Existing Literature

• Vesga, Rafael (2005)?Qué nos hace falta?
• Capital de riesgo ? escasa cultura de evaluación
  de proyectos y valoración de empresas que tienen
  altos niveles de riesgo. Los capitalistas
  colombianos prefieren invertir en el sector de la
  construcción.
• Redes de emprendedores
• Infraestructura física
• Sabemos muy poco sobre la innovación a nivel del
  individuo y de la empresa
• Actores? organizar los esfuerzos de actores que
  están trabajando en algunos aspectos pero han
  dejado otros de lado (no se discute?)

38
(No Transcript)
39
Disconnect between scientific effort and
technological development in Latin America (2001)
Country share in the total of patents granted
to foreigners in the U.S. Country share in the
total of scientific publications
worldwide Source World Intellectual Property
Organization
40
Regiones

• Cuáles son los beneficios para las regiones o
  ciudades de una mayor interacción entre las
  firmas y la universidades locales?

41
Regions

• Jaffe (1989)? Industrial Patents in states
  FUNIVs RD in states
• Both theoretical and empirical literature has
  shown that university research positively
  influences the capacity for innovation of the
  surrounding firms (Jaffe 1989 Mansfield 1991,
  1998 Nelson and Rosenberg 1993 Zucker, Darby,
  and Armstrong 2001 Cohen, Nelson, and Wash
  2002).

42
Technopolies
Why is it that Silicon Valley flourished while
Route 128 (Boston) declined in the 90s? SV
developed a decentralized but cooperative
industrial system while Route 128 came to
be dominated by independent, self-sufficient
corporations.
The technopolis wheel model, widely accepted as
a blueprint for Austins tech-driven future,
identified business, government, academia,
and business support groups, as the major players
in economic development.
43
The Technopolis Framework
Education
LargeCompanies
SupportGroups
EmergentCompanies
networks
LocalGovernment
FederalGovernment
StateGovernment
Gibson D, Kozmetsky G, and Smilor R (1988)
44
Support/Networking Groups are very important

• Chamber of Commerce
• Business and community groups
• Professional associations
• Entrepreneurial/Industry
• Associations
• The Austin Technology Council

• Austin has at least one networking event every
  day with cultural/sport/recreation events on
  every weekend. People get networked!

45
Triángulo de Sábato o triple hélice?

• Sábato, Jorge A y Botana, Natalio (1968). La
  Ciencia y la Tecnología en el Desarrollo Futuro
  de América Latina. Revista de la Integración No
  3, Buenos Aires, Noviembre 1968.

Source Luis Enrique Gamboa, April 2008.
Innovar para Producir Un Reto para el Gobierno,
la Universidad y la Empresa, Available at the
WEB.
46
1990 - 2000 Austin Enjoyed Spectacular
Economic Growth Why and How?
The Austin Model
47
Dells Spectacular Growth
U.S. Employees
Sales, in billions
20,200 employees
Sales
48
In the early 1980s Austin was the state capital
and a university town with a cowboy/ranching
culture the city was NOT known for high tech.
Jobs were mostly in government and education
the area could not retain its educated talent.

In the late 1980s Austin was most known for see
through buildings and a depressed economy NOT
entrepreneurship, venture capital, and
technology-based growth.

49
10 Years Later The Best U.S. Cities for
Business Top Five Wealth Creators

• 1. Austin
• 2. Las Vegas
• 3. Salt Lake City
• 4. Phoenix
• 5. San Jose

Fortune, November 23, 1998
50
Top 15 U.S. Cities for Entrepreneurship

• 1. Austin 9. West Palm Beach
• 2. Atlanta 10. Colorado Springs
• 3. Santa Rosa 11. Fort Collins
• 4. Boulder 12. Oakland
• 5. Boise City 12. Seattle
• 6. San Diego 14. Charlotte
• 7. Orange County 15. Fort Worth
• 8. San Antonio tied

Forbes magazine, Vol 165, 13, May 29, 2000, p.
137
51
The University of Texas at Austin

• Flagship of the University of Texas System 15
  academic and health institutions
• 52,000 Students, including 13,000 graduate and
  professional school students
• Nationally ranked in Engineering, Computer
  Science, Business, and Law
• Global programs and large numbers of
  international students
• Located in Austin, TX

52
IC2 INSTITUTEThe Innovation, Creativity, and
Capital InstituteThe University of Texas at
Austin
A think and do tank

• http//www.ic2.utexas.edu/

53
What Makes IC2 Institute Different?

• Dr. George Kozmetsky (1917-2003)
• Co-founder Teledyne in 1960?a leading provider
  of sophisticated electronic components and
  communication products. Taking the company from
  startup to a Fortune 500 company.
• Dean - UT Austin Business School (1966-1982)
• Founded IC2 in 1977
• Winner of National Medal
• of Technology (1993)
• Educator, Entrepreneur,
• Mentor, and Visionary

54
WHO WE ARE

• Research Publications
• Incubators Action Programs
• Regional Development
• Masters Program (MSTC)
• Visiting Scholars
• Non-degree Education Training Programs

• 32 years old
• 3.5 million
• 45 staff
• Over 240
• IC² Fellows

55
Research Publications

• Broad-based transdisciplinary library of
  theoretical and applied research (books,
  monographs, journal articles, and working
  papers).
• Developed by resident IC² researchers, IC²
  fellows, visiting scholars, and UT faculty
  students.

56
Global Endowed Fellows

• Endowed Fellows
• 18 premier scholars (professors) from various
  disciplines across UT Austin
• Work to expand the boundaries of science and
  technology in theory and in practice.
• Global Fellows
• Intellectual network of over 240 international
  fellows from academia, business, and government. 
• From the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Colombia
  (Rodrigo Varela), England, Portugal, Sweden,
  Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy, Russia, Israel,
  China, Japan, Singapore, and Australia. 

57
Visiting Scholars

• Over 100 scholars from 16 countries doing
  research on topics like regional economic
  development, incubator management, technology
  transfer and commercialization, technology
  marketing, technology-, civic- and
  social-entrepreneurship, and E-Learning
• Korea Telecom
• Coruna University, Spain
• Tohoku University, Japan
• Moscow Science Park Izmaylovo
• Russian Venture Capital Association
• Adelaide University, Australia
• Instituto Superior Tecnico, Portugal
• Many others

58
IC2s Selected Programs in Austin
59
Austin Technology Incubator (ATI)

• Non-profit organization that helps
  small-technology based companies to transition
  from early stage ventures to successful
  technology businesses. It was funded by the IC2
  Institute in 1989.
• 150 companies launched
• 10,000 jobs created (2,850 direct, 7,150
  indirect)
• 1.2 billion in revenue generated
• 500 million in VC and other investments
  secured
• ATI Incubators (1) Bioscience, (2) Clean Energy,
  
• (3) Information
• Technology and Wireless

60
Master in Science and Technology
Commercialization in Austin (MSTC)

• Objectives
• Learn to identify and evaluate emerging
  technologies (e.g., Quicklook)
• Identify customers and marketing strategies
• Develop broad, flexible business plans
• Build a high-functioning management team to drive
  the new venture
• Devise approaches for securing funding
• Manage and protect intellectual property
• Created in 1996
• 12 months (2 days per weekFriday and Saturday)
• Selected classes with Europe, Latin America,
  Russia, etc.
• In-Class Online (video cast)
• Average age 37

61
Selected IC2 Institutes International Projects
and Programs
62
CANADA Accelerating Technology-Based Economic
Growth and Entrepreneurship in Greater Moncton

• Study prepared for the Moncton Technology
  Planning Group (representatives from
  universities, local businesses, and the city).
• Provides select strategies to
• Accelerate targeted industry
• clusters
• Create partnership
• and alliances among
• business, academic,
• government, and support/networking
• groups.
• Identified Monctons benchmark city
• (Oulu, Finland)? 129,000 people
• Small in Size, Big in Technology.

63
MEXICOStrategic Plan to Accelerate Monterreys
Technology-Based Entrepreneurship

• Case studies of successful tech entrepreneurs
• Center for Global Innovation and Entrepreneurship
  (CGIE)
• Advisors to the IDB-fundedMonterreys City of
• Knowledge Plan II

64
MEXICOMaster of ST Commercializationin
Monterrey, Mexico

• Program
• Focuses on technology commercialization and
  acquiring the skills set necessary to take a
  product from lab to market.
• Teaches candidates how to "bridge the gap"
  between intellectual property (technology) and
  the needs of the marketplace.
• 12-course curriculum
• One-year
• Class of 2009 (August)
• First generation
• 42 graduates
• 7 from the private sector
• 35 from CONACYT as well as its sponsored RD
  Centers from universities like ITESM and UANL

65
MexicoTechBA Program INVITE Program

• Programs designed to
• Identify successful, high-value added Mexican
  technologies
• Provide training sessions to develop
  commercialization strategies
• Expose and position the tech businesses in global
  markets
• Facilitate their international interaction to
  accelerate growth, increase sales, generate
  strategic alliances, and attract investment
• TechBA
• Mexican Ministry of the Economy, FUMEC and
  ACELTEC
• In Austin, Silicon Valley, Detroit, Phoenix,
  Montreal and Madrid
• Why in IC2? Because of its successful history in
  tech business incubation and acceleration
• For private sector tech businesses
• INVITE
• Program by the State of Nuevo Leon (Mexico)
• For technologies developed at universities or in
  research laboratories

66
PORTUGALInternational Collaboratory for
Emerging Technologies

• Interdisciplinary research advanced education
  activities in digital media, advanced computing
  and mathematics.
• On-the-job training for entrepreneurs and
  technology transfer officers and related
  technology commercialization activities,
  including internships and an exchange programto
  form a University Technology Enterprise
  Network, UTEN.
• Continuous identification and promotion of
  cooperation in emerging technologies between
  UT-Austin and Portuguese institutions.

67
ChileTechnology Business Acceleration Program

• Offset program in collaboration with Lockheed
  Martin Aerospace, the Chilean Economic
  Development Agency (CORFO), and its Innovation
  Committee (INNOVA Chile)
• To develop an industry of tech incubation,
  commercialization business acceleration
  management
• The program
• Assesses Chilean incubators
• Assesses and selects Chilean technologies
• Assists in finding cooperative agreements outside
  Chile
• Helps to open new markets and opportunities for
  Chilean companies  
• Trains incubator managers, CORFO staff and
  entrepreneurs

68
IndiaLockheed Martin Innovation Growth Program

• To accelerate the launch of Indian early-stage
  technologies into the global marketplace
• To enhance the growth development of Indias
  entrepreneurial economy
• Features
• Competitive selection process
• Specialized training funding opportunities
• Professional business development support to
  enter global markets
• Open to all Indian researchers, inventors,
  entrepreneurs and companies with early stage
  technologies with promising commercial potential

69

• Thank You

http//www.ic2.utexas.edu/