Equitable Governance Frameworks for University IP Tokenization in Developing and Developed Economies
Keywords:
Intellectual Property Governance, Blockchain Regulation, University Funding Policy, Knowledge Accessibility, Institutional Development, Digital TransformationAbstract
Universities worldwide face a profound paradox. While confronting severe fund ing constraints as public support diminishes and operational costs escalate, they simultaneously manage intellectual property portfolios of substantial value that remain largely underutilized. This paper examines blockchain-based tokenization of university IP as a potential policy solution, with particular emphasis on its implications for public governance, legal frameworks, and equitable knowledge access. Through comprehensive analysis of early tokenization experiments and comparative examination of regulatory approaches, this research identifies patterns that suggest both significant opportunities and substantial risks for global knowledge equity. The technology itself remains neutral; however, implementation choices determine whether tokenization democratizes innovation funding or exacerbates academic inequalities. Case studies ranging from European biomedical ventures to African agricultural cooperatives reveal that success depends critically on governance structures that balance competing stakeholder interests while protecting public access to knowledge This analysis provides neither wholesale endorsement nor blanket rejection of tokenization but rather develops a comprehensive framework for navigating complex policy challenges. The recommendations emerge from systematic observation of pioneering institutions as they confront legal uncertainties, governance challenges and equity concerns. For policymakers and institutional leaders willing to proceed thoughtfully, tokenization offers pathways toward financial sustainability that preserve universities’ public mission. For those who proceed without adequate safeguards, it presents risks of expensive failure and erosion of public trust. Keywords: intellectual property governance; blockchain regulation; university funding policy; knowledge accessibility; institutional development; digital transformation.
References
1. Acemoglu, D., & Akcigit, U. (2012). Intellectual property rights policy, competition and innovation. Journal of the European Economic Association, 10(1), 1–42.
2. Afshar, M., Adelaine, S., Resnik, F., Mundt, M. P., Long, J., Leaf, M., Ampian, T.,Wills, G. J., Schnapp, B., Chao, M., Brown, R., Joyce, C., Sharma, B., Dligach, D., Burnside, E. S., Mahoney, J., Churpek, M. M., Patterson, B. W., & Liao, F. (2023). Deployment of Real-time Natural Language Processing and Deep Learning Clinical Decision Support in the Electronic Health Record: Pipeline Implementation for an Opioid Misuse Screener in Hospitalized Adults. JMIR Medical Informatics, 11, e44977.
3. Agrawal, A., Catalini, C., & Goldfarb, A. (2014). Some simple economics of crowd- funding. Innovation Policy and the Economy, 14(1), 63–97.
4. Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2017). Digital Compass Learning: Distance Education Enrollment Report 2017. Babson Survey Research Group.
5. Association of University Technology Managers. (2022). AUTM Licensing Activity Survey: FY2021. AUTM.
6. Baldwin, C., & Von Hippel, E. (2011). Modeling a paradigm shift: From producer innovation to user and open collaborative innovation. Organization Science, 22(6), 1399–1417.
7. Beck, R., Müller-Bloch, C., & King, J. L. (2018). Governance in the blockchain economy: A framework and research agenda. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 19(10), 1020–1034.
8. Beckert, J. (2016). Imagined Futures: Fictional Expectations and Capitalist Dynam- ics. Harvard University Press.
9. Belchior, R., Vasconcelos, A., Guerreiro, S., & Correia, M. (2021). A Survey on Blockchain Interoperability: Past, Present, and Future Trends. ACM Computing Surveys, 54(8), 1–41.
10. Berman, E. P. (2012). Creating the Market University: How Academic Science Be- came an Economic Engine. Princeton University Press.
11. Bloom, N., Schankerman, M., & Van Reenen, J. (2013). Identifying technology spillovers and product market rivalry. Econometrica, 81(4), 1347–1393.
12. Bùi, K. (2024). Academic Capitalism and Research Integrity. Journal of Academic Ethics.
13. Calzada, I. (2023). Disruptive Technologies for e-Diasporas: Blockchain, DAOs, Data Cooperatives, Metaverse, and ChatGPT. Futures, 154, 103258.
14. Catalini, C., & Gans, J. S. (2020). Some simple economics of the blockchain. Com- munications of the ACM, 63(7), 80–90.
15. Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business School Press.
16. Chiles, R. M., Broad, G., Gagnon, M., Negowetti, N., Glenna, L., Griffin, M. A. M., Tami-Barrera, L., Baker, S., & Beck, K. (2021). Democratizing ownership and participation in the 4th Industrial Revolution: challenges and opportunities in cellular agriculture. Agriculture and Human Values, 38(4), 943–961.
17. Cong, L. W., & He, Z. (2019). Blockchain disruption and smart contracts. The Review of Financial Studies, 32(5), 1754–1797.
18. Corrado, C., Hulten, C., & Sichel, D. (2005). Measuring capital and technology: An expanded framework. In C. Corrado, J. Haltiwanger, & D. Sichel (Eds.), Measuring Capital in the New Economy (pp. 11–45). University of Chicago Press.
19. Davidson, S., De Filippi, P., & Potts, J. (2018). Blockchains and the economic insti- tutions of capitalism. Journal of Institutional Economics, 14(4), 639–658.
20. de Boer, H., Enders, J., & Leisyte, L. (2007). Public sector reform in Dutch higher ed- ucation: The organizational transformation of the university. Public Administration, 85(1), 27–46.
21. Deloitte. (2023). Real Estate Tokenization: Market Analysis and Growth Prospects. Deloitte Financial Services Industry Insights.
22. Depoorter, B. (2022). Intellectual Property and the Blockchain. Minnesota Law Re- view, 106(3), 1071–1118.
23. Dixit, A. K., & Pindyck, R. S. (1994). Investment under Uncertainty. Princeton University Press.
24. Doraszelski, U., & Jaumandreu, J. (2013). R&D and productivity: Estimating en- dogenous productivity. The Review of Economic Studies, 80(4), 1338–1383.
25. Dwivedi, Y. K., et al. (2023). Blockchain Technology Applications in Academic Set- tings. International Journal of Information Management.
26. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2024). The Commercialization of Academic Science: Progress and Perils. Academy of Management Annals, 18(1), 1–44.
27. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.
28. European Union. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 on Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA). Official Journal of the European Union.
29. Farzin, Y. H., Huisman, K. J. M., & Kort, P. M. (1998). Optimal timing of technology adoption. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 22(5), 779–799.
30. Finck, M. (2019). Blockchain Regulation and Governance in Europe. Cambridge Uni- versity Press.
31. Gehman, J., Etzion, D., & Ferraro, F. (2022). Robust Action: Advancing a Distinc- tive Approach to Grand Challenges. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 79, 259–278.
32. Geuna, A., & Rossi, F. (2011). Modifications to university intellectual property rights regulations in Europe and their effects on academic patenting. Research Policy, 40(8), 1068–1076.
33. Gornitzka, Å., Kyvik, S., & Larsen, I. M. (2005). The collegial democracy of univer- sities and the new managerialism. European Journal of Education, 40(4), 423–437.
34. Hall, B. H., & Mairesse, J. (1995). Exploring the relationship between R&D and productivity in French manufacturing firms. Journal of Econometrics, 65(1), 263– 293.
35. Heller, M. A., & Eisenberg, R. S. (1998). Can patents inhibit innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science, 280(5364), 698–701.
36. Henderson, R., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (1998). Universities as a source of commercial technology: a detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965–1988. Re- view of Economics and Statistics, 80(1), 119–127.
37. Huisman, K. J. M., & Kort, P. M. (2004). Strategic technology adoption taking into account future technological improvements: A real options approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 159(3), 705–728.
38. Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S.-H. (2015). Dreamscapes of Modernity: Sociotechnical Imagi- naries and the Fabrication of Power. University of Chicago Press.
39. Kamien, M. I., & Schwartz, N. L. (1991). Dynamic Optimization: The Calculus of Variations and Optimal Control in Economics and Management. North-Holland.
40. Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Busi- ness Review, 73(2), 59–67.
41. Krücken, G., & Meier, F. (2006). Turning the university into an organizational actor. In G. S. Drori, J. W. Meyer, & H. Hwang (Eds.), Globalization and Organization (pp. 241–257). Oxford University Press.
42. Lawton, R., Boswell, S., & Crockett, K. (2023). The GM AI Foundry: A Paradigm for Enhancing SME Competence in Responsible AI. 2021 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI), 1781–1787.
43. Lemley, M. A. (2020). The splinternet and intellectual property. Duke Law Journal, 70(6), 1397–1453.
44. Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2005). Universities as research partners. Review of Eco- nomics and Statistics, 87(4), 645–652.
45. Lundvall, B.-Å. (1992). National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Inno- vation and Interactive Learning. Pinter Publishers.
46. Marginson, S., & Considine, M. (2000). The Enterprise University: Power, Gover- nance and Reinvention in Australia. Cambridge University Press.
47. Meyer, K. E., Li, C., & Schotter, A. (2020). Managing the MNE Subsidiary: Advanc- ing a Multi-Level and Dynamic Research Agenda. Journal of International Business Studies, 51, 538–576.
48. Mirowski, P. (2011). Science-Mart: Privatizing American Science. Harvard Univer- sity Press.
49. Mollick, E. (2014). The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 1–16.
50. Montgomery, L., Hartley, J., Neylon, C., Gillies, M., Gray, E., Herrmann-Pillath, C., Huang, C.-K., Leach, J., Potts, J., Ren, X., Skinner, K., Sugimoto, C. R., & Wilson, K. (2021). Open Knowledge Institutions. The MIT Press.
51. Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., Sampat, B. N., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2001). The growth of patenting and licensing by US universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole act of 1980. Research Policy, 30(1), 99–119.
52. Murray, F., & O’Mahony, S. (2007). Exploring the foundations of cumulative innova- tion: Implications for organization science. Organization Science, 18(6), 1006–1021.
53. Muscio, A., & Vallanti, G. (2014). Does government funding complement or substi- tute private research funding to universities? Research Policy, 43(1), 63–75.
54. Muscio, A., Quaglione, D., & Ramaciotti, L. (2016). The effects of university rules on spinoff creation: The case of academia in Italy. Research Policy, 45(7), 1386–1396.
55. Nelson, R. R. (1993). National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford University Press.
56. Newfield, C. (2016). The Great Mistake: How We Wrecked Public Universities and How We Can Fix Them. Johns Hopkins University Press.
57. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press.
58. OECD. (2021). Regulatory Governance in the Digital Age. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
59. Owen, R., Macnaghten, P., & Stilgoe, J. (2012). Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy, 39(6), 751–760.
60. Pennings, E., & Lint, O. (1997). The option value of advanced R&D. European Journal of Operational Research, 103(1), 83–94.
61. Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Broström, A., D’Este, P., Fini, R., Geuna, A., Grimaldi, R., Hughes, A., et al. (2013). Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations. Research Policy, 42(2), 423–442.
62. Pistor, K. (2019). The Code of Capital: How the Law Creates Wealth and Inequality. Princeton University Press.
63. Po, L., et al. (2021). Blockchain Technology in Intellectual Property Management. International Journal of Information Management.
64. Reijers, W., Wuisman, I., Mannan, M., De Filippi, P., Wray, C., Rae-Looi, V., Cubillos Vélez, A., & Orgad, L. (2021). Governance in blockchain technologies & social contract theories. Ledger, 6.
65. Rip, A. (2006). A co-evolutionary approach to reflexive governance–and its ironies. Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development, 82–100.
66. Savelyev, A. (2018). Copyright in the blockchain era: Promises and challenges. Com- puter Law & Security Review, 34(3), 550–561.
67. Shah, D. (2017). MOOC adoption and implementation: The UK experience. Distance Education, 38(1), 67–84.
68. Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27–48.
69. Singh, M., et al. (2022). Blockchain Governance in Universities. Journal of Higher Education Policy.
70. Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. L. (1997). Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies, and the Entrepreneurial University. Johns Hopkins University Press.
71. Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic Capitalism and the New Economy: Markets, State, and Higher Education. Johns Hopkins University Press.
72. Smith, A., & Stirling, A. (2010). Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges. Research Policy, 39(4), 435–448.
73. Stirling, A. (2008). Science, precaution, and the politics of technological risk: Con- verging implications in evolutionary and social scientific perspectives. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1128(1), 95–110.
74. Tembinè, H., et al. (2024). Ethics in Blockchain Governance. Technology and Society.
75. Teubner, G. (1983). Substantive and reflexive elements in modern law. Law and Society Review, 17(2), 239–285.
76. Thiel, L., & Bernhardt, M. (2023). University Commercialization in the Digital Age. Higher Education Quarterly.
77. Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2002). Who is selling the ivory tower? Sources of growth in university licensing. Management Science, 48(1), 90–104.
78. Von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation: The evolving phenomenon of user innovation. Journal für Betriebswirtschaft, 55(1), 63–78.
79. Von Schomberg, R. (2013). A vision of responsible research and innovation. In R. Owen, J. Bessant, & M. Heintz (Eds.), Responsible Innovation: Managing the Re- sponsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society (pp. 51–74). Wiley.
80. Voß, J.-P., & Kemp, R. (2006). The politics of reflexive governance: challenges for designing adaptive management and transition management. Ecology and Society, 11(2).
81. Wang, L., et al. (2018). Public Perceptions of University Commercialization. Science and Public Policy.
82. World Bank. (2023). Blockchain Technology in Developing Countries: Opportunities and Challenges. World Bank Group.
83. Ziolkowski, R., Miscione, G., & Schwabe, G. (2020). Decision problems in blockchain governance: Old wine in new bottles or walking in someone else’s shoes? Journal of Management Information Systems, 37(2), 316–348.
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
All data used in this article are publicly available or derived from open-access policy documents and legal sources. No proprietary or restricted data were used. Supplementary references and methodological notes are available from the author upon request.
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Author
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
Similar Articles
- Naveen Talawar, Beyond the Bench: Implications of the Supreme Court's Ruling on Marriage Equality in India , International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2025): Volume 2, Issue1 International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development
- Ayodeji Emmanuel Aimasiko, The Constitutionality of Fine Imposition Under the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023 and its Implications , International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development: Vol. 2 No. 3 (2025): Volume 2, Issue 3 International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development
- María Fernanda Luna Vega, Equity on the Moon and Beyond: Legal Analysis and Proposals for Space Regulation in the 21st Century , International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development: Vol. 2 No. 3 (2025): Volume 2, Issue 3 International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development
- Peter Terkaa Akper, PhD, SAN, OFR*, Realising The Untapped Potentials of Nigeria’s Mining Sector: Policy, Legal and Institutional Reform Imperatives forNigeria , International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development: Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): Volume 1, Issue1 International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development
- Matteo Maria Cati, Strategic Innovation and Market Adaptation: Biofarma Group's Leadership in the Global CDMO Landscape , International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2025): Volume 2, Issue1 International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development
- Dr. Narender Kumar, Examining Money Laundering Practices through a Legal Perspective: Scrutiny under the ED's Oversight , International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development: Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): Volume 1, Issue1 International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development
- David Ellerman, On Tocqueville, Pauperism, and Employee Ownership , International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2025): Volume 2, Issue1 International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development
- Alexander Plant, Aziz Ben Jemia, Stephen Foster, Beyond Certainty: Statistical Pitfalls in Forensic Signature Analysis , International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development: Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): Volume 1, Issue1 International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development
- Aziz Ben Jemia, Alexander Plant, Stephen Foster, Examining Errors in Forensic Signature Analysis: A Statistical Perspective , International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development: Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): Volume 1, Issue1 International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development
- Darina Shamatonova, Are The Existing Cybercrime Offences Effective in Addressing the Challenges Raised By Stealing Data , International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development: Vol. 2 No. 2 (2025): Volume 2, Issue 2 International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development
You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.