1 10 100 1 000 10 000 100 000 1 000 000 “BERD”, despesas em I&D pelo sector privado (log) Família de patentes* (log) 10 100 1 000 10 000 100 000 Famílias de patentes e despesa de investigação pelo sector privado em 1991-1999 Fonte: OECD, Patent and R&D Databases, Novembro 2003. 0 Turkey Portug al Slovak Republic Greece Icelan d Poland Czech Republic Mexico Hungary Ireland Norway Spain Russian Federation DenmarkIsrael New Zealand Austral ia Canada Korea Italy Sweden Belgium Finland Austria Netherlands France United Kingdom Switzerland Germany Japan United States EU * Patentes registadas na Europa, Estados Unidos e Japão (EPO, USPTO, JPO).
Transcript
1 10 100 1 000 10 000 100 000 1 000 000“BERD”, despesas em I&D pelo sector privado (log)
Família de patentes* (log)
10
100
1 000
10 000
100 000
Famílias de patentes e despesa de investigação pelo sector privado em 1991-1999Fonte: OECD, Patent and R&D Databases, Novembro 2003.
0
TurkeyPortugal
Slovak Republic
GreeceIceland
PolandCzech RepublicMexico
Hungary
Ireland
Norway SpainRussian Federation
Denmark Israel
New Zealand
AustraliaCanada
KoreaItalySwedenBelgium
FinlandAustria
Netherlands
FranceUnited KingdomSwitzerland
Germany
JapanUnited States
EU
* Patentes registadas na Europa, Estados Unidos e Japão (EPO, USPTO, JPO).
Taxa de crescimento nas publicações, apesar de baixos valores absolutosIndícios de mudança qualitativa…Indícios de mudança qualitativa…
Scientific Publications
PT
LU
EL
SPIE
IT
JPDL
FR EU AUBEUS
NL UK
FLDK
SW
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Annual growth rate %, 1995-2000
Num
ber p
ublic
atio
ns /
MN
pop
ulat
ion,
200
0
Growth Rates: Scientific publications / Patents at the USPTO
Protection methods for innovations in PT, by sector and by size-class, 1998-2000(1)Source: Eurostat NewCronos Database –CIS 3 Results
(1) Reference population is all EU enterprises with Innovation Activity
(1) Reference population is all Portuguese enterprises with Innovation Activity
European Innovation Scoreboard Indicators• 19 main indicators: to summarize the main drivers and outputs of innovation.
– Human resources for innovation (5 indicators); – the Creation of new knowledge (4 indicators); – the Transmission and application of knowledge (3 indicators); – Innovation finance, output and markets (7 indicators). Once split indicators for services/manufacturing and USPTO/EPO patents are counted, there
are 28 indicators in total.
• Summary Innovation Index (SII) -1: based on all main EIS indicators.The SII-1 is calculated for the EU member states plus
Switzerland, Iceland and Norway. It is not calculated for the Acceding and Candidate countries and for the US and Japan because of missing data for many of the indicators.
• Summary Innovation Index (SII) -2: restricted set of ten indicators that are available for almost all countries. – S&E graduates (1.1), – working population with a tertiary education (1.2), – lifelong learning (1.3), – employment in high tech manufacturing (1.4), – employment in high tech services (1.5), – public R&D (2.1), – business R&D (2.2), – high tech patents (2.3 split between the EPO and USPTO), – all patents (2.4 split between the EPO and USPTO)– ICT expenditures.
Overall Country Trends by Summary Innovation Index-2(Innovation Scoreboard 2003)
Although there is a long tradition of supporting property rights in the US (it is part of the original US Constitution), in the 1980s and onwards there has been an increasing intensification of fillings and granting of patents, namely due to:
The creation of a federal court focusing on patent litigation The Bayh-Dole Act, which has permitted outcomes of
federal-funded (publicly funded) research to be patented The increase breadth of patent claims allowed by the US
Patent Office Widening of national patent and intellectual property rights
to the global level (namely through the WTO Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, or TRIPS, agreements)
Private mechanisms for S&T : US
Private incentives, by awarding property rights to the creator, in which case private resources are devoted to innovative and scientific effort
The Analytical Perspective - 1The “standard” ways of promoting science and technology:
Public incentives, by publicly supporting science and technology, and requiring R&D results to remain public or to serve public purposes (as in defense procurement, for example)
Property
PatronagePublic Provision
A serious threat: “the tragedy of the commons” ...Paul David(2000)
ill-considered public support for expanding legal means of controlling access to information for the purpose of extracting private economic rents is resulting in the “over-fencing of the public knowledge commons” in science and engineering
The need for open, collaborative research...
It is crucial to mobilize the creative and entrepreneurial capacity of individuals and firms
The Analytical Perspective - 2
Why do we not rely only on public incentives?
The market is very effective at adapting, ameliorating and diffusing technologies
Many firms, especially in specific sectors such as pharmaceuticals and semiconductors, currently hold a substantial part of the available scientific and technological
capacity Public allocation of resources may not adequately meet the
technological and business opportunities that may entice firms and individuals to engage in creative effort
Externalities (spillovers) from new technologies entail that private investment is often sub-optimal
The Analytical Perspective - 3
Why do we not rely only on private incentives?
The market may lack the incentives for “public good” types of
objectives that require scientific and technological advancements Private incentives are inadequate to stimulate long-term, basic research
The overall science and technological system relies on institutions and activities that are primarily publicly funded (universities, for example)
At the conceptual level, it is difficult to answer this question, other than to say that there should be a balance, rather than going all the way to private or to public incentives alone
The Analytical Perspective - 4What, then, is the right balance between private and public incentives?
Mostly an empirical question: Is the balance adequately meeting the social and economic demands for new
science and technology, as expressed by economic and political expressions?
Is the balance adequately facing not only our current demands, but making the investments needed to meet the challenges of the future?
...see, for example, Paul Rommer (2000)
The Analytical Perspective - 4
…this question is too simplistic! countries should not rush to emulate the
apparent swinging of the pendulum towards private incentives.
The previous analysis suggests that, at least in the case of the US, but increasingly in the OECD as a whole, the “pendulum” is swinging towards private incentives, and
that this corresponds to the current economic and political demands of our time.
Is this so?
• 1. Intellectual Property Protection: concepts
• 2. The Patent Systems
• 3. The process of Technology Transfer
CONTENTS. Part 1
1- Intellectual Property: What is it?
A Case Study:
During a master degree in Biotechnology, the student and her Coordinator developed an improved process for “clavulanic acid production” with licensing potential to the pharmaceutical industry…
• Which are the rights of the student in this invention?
• Which are the rights of the University?
• Which kind of protection will be provided?
• What could be considered a disclosure?
2 - Intellectual Property: What is it?
creations of the human knowledge based on two principles:
moral - the authorship should be protected and
recognized to the authors
economic - the warranty of exclusiveness and
loyalty competition provided by the
State, favours the exploitation of inventions/creations.
… but the fundamental goal is to promote “institutional integrity”,
and to contirbute for the diffusion of knowledge and innovation
3 - Intellectual Property: What is it?
• Industrial Property:
• utility patents
• trademarks
• designs
• service marks
• trade secrets
• Copyrights:
• literary works
• computer programs
• multimedia works
• audiovisual works
• informational databases
• authored works
COPYRIGHT PROTECTION
1. Right to reproduce the work2. Right to prepare derivative works3. Distribution rights4. Right to public display and public performance5. Prevents unauthorized copying
EXCLUSION FROM COPYRIGHT
1. Ideas as opposed to the creative expression of ideas2. Short names and slogans (generally not subject)3. Factual information
COPYRIGHTS
COPYRIGHT REGISTRATION1. Not mandatory2. Prerequisite to filing an infringement lawsuit3. Consists in filling out of a form and sending it to theCopyright Office, with at least one deposit copy of the work4. Much less expensive than a patent application
TERM OF COPYRIGHT
1. Life of the author plus 70 years or…2. In the case of works for hire, 70 years from publication
A copyright notice is no longer mandatory, but can help to defeat a claim to innocent, non-willful, infringement.
What is a patent and what are its advantages?
• a title that gives to the owner the exclusive right tomanufacture, market or exploit for gain the inventionclaimed in the patent
• excludes others from the use of an invention without theconsent of the owner (negative right), for 20 years from date of the filing
• also prohibits the import of protected products from countries in which the invention is not patented
What is a patent and what are its advantages?
• Promotes institutional integrity
• Promotes commercialization strategies
• Patents are a source of information of new products and processes
What is patentable?
Inventions which are:
1. NEW
2. Involve an INVENTIVE STEP
3. Susceptible of INDUSTRIAL APPLICATION
An invention is new if...
…prior to the date of filing or to the “priority date”,
it was not already known to the public in any form
(written, oral or through use), i.e. it did not form part
of the “state of the art”.
What is the grace period?
The period that the inventor has to file a patent application from the time of the invention’s disclosure (by printed publication, public use or sale, etc).
Portugal - 1 year Mexico - 1year
USA - 1 year Japan - 6 months
European patent - 6 months
Novelty Check List
1. Open literature2. Inclusion in a thesis or other accessible document deposited in a library3. On Internet4. Oral disclosure at scientific meetings (including poster sessions)5. Any talk or demonstration at colloquium, lecture, or the like6. To any visitors to the laboratory, in a non-confidential manner7. By being put to public use after experimental trial8. By advertisement, sale, or any other form of commercial activity which is public
(based on R S Crespi, Patenting in the Biological Sciences, John Wiley 1982)
An invention involves an inventive step if...
…based on the state-of-the-art, it is not
obvious to a person skilled in the art.
An invention is susceptible of industrial application if...
…it can be made or used in any kind of
industry (including agriculture).
What is not patentable?
The European Patent Convention (1973) excluded fromthe European patent the following:• aesthetic creations;• mathematical formulae;• business methods• computer programs• discoveries• immoral or anti-social inventions• animal and plant varieties• essentially biological processes• medical methods - surgery, etc.
The Patent Systems
No World Patent System / various regional treaties instead
European Patent Convention: a regional system for Europe (19 States)
Patent Cooperation Treaty: the broadest international scope (70 States)
National Patent Systems continue to grant national patents
European Patent Convention
• European Patent Organization is an inter-governmental bodyestablished by the European Patent Convention (EPC), which entered into force in 1977.
• All member States of the European Union are EPC Contracting States
- Infringement of EP = National Law in each contracting state
• European Patent Office (EPO) grants European Patents, which can obtain protection in all 19 member states
What is a European Patent?
it is a bundle of National Patents, for example: - European Patent (UK) = UK National Patent - European Patent (Germany) = German National Patent (more countries we want it to cover, more expensive it is)
Translations must be presented in English, French or German
applications filed with the EPO in Munich, its branches in Hague and Berlin, and with the national patent authorities of the member states
Granted after Legal and Technical examination by the EPO
Infringement of EP = National Law in each contracting state
How much does a European patent cost? …
EUROS 2 710 - filing, search and designation fees due at the beginning
EUROS 5 650 - average European application (with 8 designated States), includes the filing, search, designation, examination and grant fees, as well as the
renewal fees for the 3rd and 4th year
Please don’t forget …- the translation costs (most countries require a translation of the patent in their official language)- patent attorney’s fees (if your residence or principal place of business is in one of the member states, you are not obliged to be represented by apatent attorney)
Comparative Costs of Patent Applications
EuropeanPatent
USPatent
JapanesePatent
Patent Office Fees 8 250 3 304 2 000
Representationexpenses
25 771 9 000 12 859
TOTAL 34 221 12 304 14 859
Source: IRDAC, 1996, in “IPR: Patents and Innovation in the International Context” OCDE, June 1997, pp. 22
(in DM)
Green Paper on the Community Patent
1975 - Community Patent Convention (not yet in operation)
1997 - Green Paper on the Community Patent (consultation is underway)
Community patent:• single application through the EPO will mature in a single title of property covering the whole of the European Union• English as the Community patent language ? (political difficulties and implications)• litigation - Whose court should have jurisdiction over a Community patent ? (political and constitutional issues)
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Application
Patent Cooperation Treaty is a multilateral treaty, concluded in Washington in 1970
entered into force 1978
administered by the International Bureau of WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization - Geneva)
70 members states
PCT BENEFITS
• PRO
• Postpone fees (filing•and maintenance) up to•30 months
• International search
• Allows commercial •evaluation
• Selection of countries
• English prosecution
•CON
• Extra expense
• Delays prosecution
• Non-binding
patentability •opinion
PRINCIPAL PATENTING OPTIONS
E xerc is e op tion to p roceedin e lec ted cou n tr ies /re g ion s
O ffic ia l ad vis ory op in io nh an d ed d ow n
In even t o f o ffic ia l ob jec t ion s ,am en d c la im s if n ec ess a ry
P ay fees fo r s u b s ta n tiveexam in a tion
E xerc ice op tio nto p roced e ind es ig n a ted
c ou n tries /re g ion s
P C T ap p lic a t ion p u b lish edw ith o ffic ia l sea rch
F ile P C T ap p lic a tion inan y m em b er c ou n try
F ile p a ten t ap p lic a tionin h om e c ou n try
File patent applicationsin all countries /regionsof interest
Many countries publishapplications with
official search
Pay fees for substantiveexamination (not in USA).
In event of official objections,amend claims if necessary
Patent granted:specification (re)published as amended
Convert regionalpatent into national
patents
Patents expirePay renewal fees on rising scale until expiry
Months
0
12
18
19 20
30
$$
$$
$$
$$$
$$$
$$$
$$
$$
$$/$$$
Adapted from “Patents: An Overview” by BTG
Worldwide Patent Applicationby origin (1995)
Japan60%
USA25%
Europe11%
Others4%
Cordis nº121, “The importance of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) in innovation”
Typical published data
BUT, ... international comparisons can be misleading namely when Japanese patents are analyzed
Parte 2Protecção da Propriedade Intelectual:O caso das Universidades e Instituições Públicas de Investigação
MECANISMOS TRADICIONAIS DE PROMOÇÂO DAS UNIVERSIDADES e da I&D NA SOCIEDADE
O modelo: “american university” como referência !!
1. Protecção da Propriedade Intelectual
caracteristicas: impacto económico desprezável promove a integridade institucional requere adaptação e flexibilidade
2. Infraestruturas Tecnológicas e Parques de C&T caracteristicas: enfâse no desenvolvimento local
não têm promovido ligações U-I
Patentes em Universidades AmericanasUniversity Patents in 1995
University of California 219Massachusetts Institute of Technology 107University of Texas 90Stanford University 55University of Wisconsin 47Cornell University 41California Institute of Technology 38Iowa State University 37University of Florida 33North Carolina State University 31State University of New York 31University of Michigan 29Virginia Polytechnic Inst. & State University 29Johns Hopkins University 28University of Minnesota 27Duke University 26University of Pennsylvania 26
AUTM Licensing Survey, 1991-95 AUTM (1997)
Porquê as Universidades Protegem and Licenciam a Propriedade Intelectual
• Novas receitas, com “Royalties”Source: “Building Bridges”, Lita Nelsen, MIT
• Induz ligações com a sociedade, promovendo a integridade institucional
• Atrai financiamento industrial para a I&D, fomentando ligações com as empresas
• Motiva os docentes/investigadores:Aplicação de resultados•Oportunidades de consultoria
• Promove novas oportunidades para alunos
UniversityLicense Start-up
Company Xw/ Core
Technology
Own Products
(Later)
Company A
Company B
Company C
Product A
Product B
Product C
Source: “Building Bridges”, Lita Nelsen, MIT
Technology Transfer
START-UP COMPANIES
Advantages• Focus• Commitment to Technology• Product development in Parallel• Multiple Partnering• Upside Potential• If Direction of Product development Changes?• Local Economic Development
Source: “Building Bridges”, Lita Nelsen, MIT
START-UP COMPANIES
Disadvantages
• High Risks: Financial, Technical, Marketing, People
• Alienate Large Companies / Sponsors
• Conflicts of Interest: real and perceived
Source:“Building Bridges”, Lita Nelsen, MIT
When is a Start-up Attractive?
Source: “Building Bridges”, Lita Nelsen, MIT
Very Early Stage /High Risk Technology
Multiple Applications
No existing Industry
Active Participation by Inventors
The Virtual Incubator
“Incubation”
IDEA COMPANYFORMATION
PRODUCTDEVELOPMENT
PROFITABLEOPERATIONS& GROWTH
A BC
Source: “Building Bridges”, Lita Nelsen, MIT
Phase A
IDEA COMPANYFORMATION
WHAT’S NEEDED?Intellectual Property Protection Introduction to Investors
Company Conceptualization Seed Capital
Management Team Legal Advice
Business Plan Office Space
Source: “Building Bridges”, Lita Nelsen, MIT
Phase B
COMPANYFORMATION
PRODUCTDEVELOPMENT
WHAT’S NEEDED?
Labs
Money
Staff
Management Guidance
Business DevelopmentSource: “Building Bridges”, Lita Nelsen, MIT
ON-GOING DEBATE ...
Is IPP compatible with the emergence of the Knowledge Based Society?
Some readings:
• Thurow (1997), Harvard Business Review, September-October, pp. 95 - 103
• Conceição, Heitor and Oliveira (1998) Technovation, 18 (10), pp. 615 - 625
• Conceição, Heitor and Oliveira (1999), Kluwer Academic Publishers
USEFUL SITES
WIPO - http://www.wipo.org
EPO - http://www.european-patent-office.org
IPR Helpdesk - http://www.cordis.lu/ipr-helpdesk
AUTM - http://www.crpc.rice.edu/autm
USEFUL SITES Patent Databases
• Free Searches
•1. Esp@cenet • http://ep.dips.org
•2. IBM Server•http://patent.womplex.ibm.com
•3. USPTO• http://www.uspto.gov/patft
•Paid Searches
• 1. Dialog
• http://www.dialog.com
•2. Knowledge Express
•...www.KnowledgeExpres
s.com
Inovação em Portugal: Inovação em Portugal: O que sabemos?O que sabemos?
O que gostariamos de saber?O que gostariamos de saber?
...debate...debate
Parte 3: Difusão de C,T&I
em suma.......
Mas a concepção e implementação de políticas requer dois desafios:– A compreensão das barreiras e oportunidades– A falta de recursos humanos qualificados aptos a
promover a inovação como prioridade empresarial
Portugal requer evoluir de um modelo de crescimento económico de “catching-up” , para um modelo de “forging-ahead”, através da exploração da criatividade e da difusão da inovação.
Ou Ou
Há também sinais de alterações Há também sinais de alterações qualitativas?qualitativas?
Convergência: quantitativa vs. qualitativa ?Convergência: quantitativa vs. qualitativa ?
Business Expenditure in R&D and average growth rates, 1992-2001
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
1992 1995 1997 1999 2001
Mill
ion
PTE
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Gro
wth
rate
BERD at constant 1995 prices
Annual growth rates
Indícios de mudança qualitativa…Indícios de mudança qualitativa…
-
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
Cha
ngin
gE
nte
rpris
e's
Ma
rke
ting
Con
cep
ts/S
trat
egi
es
Adv
ance
dM
ana
gem
ent
Tech
niqu
es
Sig
nific
ant
Ae
sthe
tics'
Cha
nge
Ne
w C
orp
orat
eS
trate
gie
s
Cha
nge
dO
rga
niza
tion
alS
truc
ture
s
Cha
ngi
ng
Ent
erp
rise'
sM
arke
ting
Co
ncep
ts/S
trate
gie
s
Ad
vanc
edM
ana
gem
ent
Tech
niq
ues
Sig
nifi
cant
Aes
thet
ics'
Cha
nge
New
Cor
pora
teS
trate
gies
Ch
ang
edO
rgan
izat
iona
lS
truct
ure
s
Non-Innovators Innovators
Pro
porti
on
of E
nte
rpri
ses
(%)
Manufacturing Services
Indícios de persistência de debilidades estruturais…Indícios de persistência de debilidades estruturais…
CIS III population by Technological Intensity
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
High andMedium-HighTechnologies
Medium-LowTechnologies
LowTechnologies
Indícios de persistência de debilidades estruturais…Indícios de persistência de debilidades estruturais…
Main market scope of innovative enterprises
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Manufacture Services Total
International
National
Local
Indícios de persistência de debilidades estruturais…Indícios de persistência de debilidades estruturais…
Workforce with tertiary education
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Manufacture Services Total
Non-innovative Innovative
Indícios de persistência de debilidades estruturais…Indícios de persistência de debilidades estruturais…
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Qua
lifie
dPe
rson
nel
Org
anis
atio
nal
Rig
iditie
s
Inno
vatio
n C
osts
Sour
ces
ofFi
nanc
e
Info
rmat
ion
onTe
chno
logy
Econ
omic
Ris
ks
Info
rmat
ion
onM
arke
ts
Reg
ulat
ions
and
Stan
dard
s
Cus
tom
erR
espo
nsiv
enes
s
Pro
porti
on o
f Ent
erpr
ises
(%)
CIS III CIS II CIS II EU Average
A percepção das barreiras á inovação
Indícios de persistência de debilidades estruturais…Indícios de persistência de debilidades estruturais…
Manufacture
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Proportion of Enterprises w ith Innovating Activities involved in Cooperation (%)
Prop
ortio
n of
Inno
vatin
g En
terp
rises
(%)
Coke and Chemicals
Electrical and Optical Equipment
Machinery and Equiment non-NEC
Basic Metals and Fabricated Products
Rubber, Non-Mettalic
Food Product
s
Textiles and Leather
Manufacturing NEC and Recycling
Wood, Pulp, Publishing
Transport Equipment
Do CIS II para o CIS III: níveis de cooperação inter-empresas continuam baixos!
• O desempenho de inovação pelas empresas portuguesas O desempenho de inovação pelas empresas portuguesas melhoroumelhorou, de acordo com estes indicadores agregados., de acordo com estes indicadores agregados.
Conclusões: Conclusões: o que já sabemoso que já sabemos
• Há uma Há uma correlação entre a inovação tecnológica e a correlação entre a inovação tecnológica e a inovação organizacionalinovação organizacional, indicando a importância dos custos , indicando a importância dos custos de adaptação organizacional.de adaptação organizacional.
• Permanecem importantes debilidades estruturaisPermanecem importantes debilidades estruturais, tanto , tanto devidas a factores externos como internos às empresas. Estas devidas a factores externos como internos às empresas. Estas atribuem maior importância aos factores que não controlam, atribuem maior importância aos factores que não controlam, pelo que provavelmente tendem a sub-investir naqueles que pelo que provavelmente tendem a sub-investir naqueles que podem influenciar.podem influenciar.
• Debilidade de interacção/cooperação entre os actoresDebilidade de interacção/cooperação entre os actores, , quer das empresas entre si, quer com as instituições quer das empresas entre si, quer com as instituições produtoras de conhecimento.produtoras de conhecimento.
Um novo modelo de crescimento económico baseado na inovação e no conhecimento requer:
•A orientação para novos mercados, mais sofisticados e concorrenciais
– Estimulam as empresas a aceder a bases de conhecimento e à mudança organizacional
– Estimulam a cooperação inter-institucional (condição de sobrevivência)
•O desenvolvimento/incorporação de novas competências, nomeadamente em C&T•A exposição a ambientes de alta intensidade tecnológica (ex.:CERN, ESA…)
Desafio: integração das políticas públicas sectoriais e mobilização de actores privados e públicos
• É preciso ir além deste tipo de estudo macro e baseado É preciso ir além deste tipo de estudo macro e baseado
em inovação auto-reportada: em inovação auto-reportada: caracterizar e tipificar os caracterizar e tipificar os
processosprocessos de inovação empresariais. de inovação empresariais.
• Quais são os Quais são os custos de adaptação e aprendizagem custos de adaptação e aprendizagem
organizacionalorganizacional da inovação? Como podem ser da inovação? Como podem ser
minimizados? Quais são as minimizados? Quais são as oportunidades criadas pela oportunidades criadas pela
mudança organizacionalmudança organizacional? Como podem ser ? Como podem ser
optimizadas?optimizadas?
Conclusões: Conclusões: O que seria importante saberO que seria importante saber
• Como Como activar a colaboraçãoactivar a colaboração das empresas entre si, com das empresas entre si, com
as instituições de investigação… para os sectores mais as instituições de investigação… para os sectores mais
dinâmicos “puxarem” os menos inovadores?dinâmicos “puxarem” os menos inovadores?
• Qual oQual o impacto das políticas públicas impacto das políticas públicas? Que políticas ? Que políticas
devem ser prosseguidas, desenvolvidas ou substituídas? devem ser prosseguidas, desenvolvidas ou substituídas?
Como devem ser combinadas e integradas?Como devem ser combinadas e integradas?
Conclusões: Conclusões: O que seria importante saberO que seria importante saber
![Installation Manual DOPPLER SPEED LOG Model DS-80 MANUALIME72470V_DS8… · Installation Manual DOPPLER SPEED LOG Model DS-80 ... [TFB-5000 (1)] DS-782 000-029-052 1 set Gate valve,](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5eb632ff5abddf6851514c7b/installation-manual-doppler-speed-log-model-ds-80-manualime72470vds8-installation.jpg)