Silviase/jgov_v1.4_full_ann huggingface dataset:
知的財産の創造・保護・活用

# 出願に向けた特許マインド向上活動

## 知的財產

キーワード：知財創出・発明発掘・共同研究・研究成果・技術移転

## 本事例の関係者

## 富山県立大学

大学教員

産学連携事務局

地域連携センター

## 富山県

知的所有権センター

文部科学省産学官連携

コーディネーター

知的財産研修会

## 共同研究

年度 (H)	件数 (件)	金額 (M¥)
16	26	24
17	40	28
18	41	40
19	46	37
20	48	54

## 特許出願環境作りで出願件数増加

## 【要約】

大学の研究成果が企業へ技術移転され生産現場で活用されるには、知的財産の取得が不可欠である。コーディネーターは教員の特許出願に対する課題を調査し、大学の「職務発明取扱規程」の改定および知的財産研修会等を開催して知財に対する教員意識の醸成を行い、『特許の無い技術は使われない』を掲げて知財の重要性を訴え、教員の知財創出に対するモチベーションの向上及び特許出願件数の増加を達成した。

## 【きっかけ】

## ●特許出願に関する課題調査

コーディネーターは共同研究の件数に比べて職務発明特許件数の少ないことが気になり、教員72名と個々に面談し特許出願に関する課題を調査した。その結果、発明委員会へ提出する発明申請書類の作成が煩雑である、その審査認定に時間がかかる、出願を全て企業に任せた方が手間がかからず楽である、等の課題が明らかとなった。また、この調査を通じて、特許制度の概要や明細書の書き方等、知財に関する研修会の開催要求が多いことも判明した。

## 【段取り・プロセス】

● 「職務発明取扱規程」の改訂（平成19.4.1施行）

上記調査結果を基に事務局担当者と協議を重ね、「職務発明取扱規程」の大幅改定を行った。例えば、個人発明と職務発明の2本立てであった従来の発明の範囲を原則職務発明のみとする等、その主な改定内容は以下の通りである。

・職務発明の範囲・発明委員会の随時開催・発明委員会委員の人選・学生の取扱い・発明届書類の簡略化・その他

## ●知財に対する教員意識の醸成

知財関連研修会等を開催し、参加の呼びかけを行い多くの教員の参加を得た。

(1) 知的財産研修会（6回シリーズ）

富山県知的所有権センター特許流通アドバイザー4回、弁理士2回

(2) 大学知財セミナー（2回シリーズ）

金沢大学吉国知財本部長、名城大学松吉科学技術コーディネーター

(3) 知的財産特別講義（2回）県知的所有権センター特許流通アドバイザー

(4) 加工学講座夏季合同セミナー（1回）

コーディネーター

表 特許出願件数 *見込み

## 【成果・結果や活動後の変化】

●知財創出に向けた教員の関心度が向上

◆研修会等へ延べ112名（実数43名、全教員の約40%）の教員が参加

◆・H19年度以後の特許出願件数の増加・明細書を自ら作成し電子出願（2件）

・30条適用出願の減少（外部資金獲得やJST外国出願支援申請等を意識）

・先行技術調査方法を含め知財に関する問い合わせ件数増加

年度	個人 発明	職務 発明	計 (件)
H16	6	9	15
H17	5	4	9
H18	2	13	15
H19	-	20	20
H20	-	26*	26*
# 「この技術を特許にしたい」が全ての出発点

## ●応援団は周りに大勢居る

特許制度の概要や出願手続き、明細書の書き方等を教員に理解してもらうことは重要だが、教員が研究成果を権利化したいと思わなければ第一步は踏み出せない。教員の「この技術を特許にしたい」の一声が全ての出発点であり、弁理士や特許流通アドバイザーなど出願作業を手伝う応援団は周りに大勢存在する。大学教員は特許出願の重要性を認識するべきである。すなわち（1）教員の産業界への貢献は特許等の知的財産権を通して可能であることや（2）特許収入による研究の一層の推進、いわゆる知的創造サイクルの有用性を教員が理解することである。この教員の特許マインドの向上を図るべく、コーディネーター自らもセミナー講師を務め「大学からなぜ特許出願？」でその重要性を訴えた。

## ●特許出願をし易くする環境作り

事務局担当者と協力して「職務発明取扱規程」の大幅改定を行った。これにより発明委員会の随時開催（迅速性）や発明委員会への届け出書類の簡略化など、従来の特許出願時の課題を低減すると同時に教員が気楽に相談に来れる雰囲気作りにも配慮した。その結果、先行技術調査の方法や30条適用出願の弊害等、知的財産に関する相談を受ける回数が増加した。

## 知的財產

## 失敗の事例

## 特許出願にコーディネーターは最初から関与

## ● 「教員任せはトラブル発生」と認識

特許制度の基礎知識の希薄が招いた以下の失敗事例の反省から、コーディネーターは特許出願の意志決定から出願手続きに至るまで深く関与すべきであった。

## ◆「出願人と発明者」の権利と義務

共同研究開始直前に教員のこれまでの研究成果を特許出願したが、出願書類の出願人は企業のみであった。教員は「俺の特許」出願で一安心し、企業は出願手続きやその費用の負担で教員の研究成果を独り占めしたことになる。後日、コーディネーターが企業と折衝し、共願のための出願人名義変更届を提出した。

## 特許法第30条適用出願

学会発表の半年後に出願したが「半年の期限」に間に合わず、せっかくの出願が無駄になった。原因は教員が学会当日の口頭発表の日から半年と思いこみ、予稿集発行日を考慮しなかったことによる。なお、明細書は教員が自ら作成し、発明協会富山県支部の協力を得て電子出願したものである。

## 産学官連携の新たな展開に向けた提言

## 外国出願に向けた特許の質の向上が重要

## ●外国出願を目指さない特許は出願すべきでない

特許出願時、事務担当者から「この特許は外国出願するのですか」と質問されることがあるが、必ず「外国出願する」と答えている。独創的で将来大きなマーケット形成に寄与する技術であればあるほど、その技術は模倣される。ここで問題になるのが外国出願費用である。企業との共同出願であれば、外国出願の可否の判断やその費用は企業に負担してもらうことも可能だが、大学単独出願の場合はJST「海外出願支援制度」に頼ることになる。相手企業を見つける目的でJST新技術説明会や協力会会員へ未公開特許を開示することも行われているが、要は外国出願するに値する特許の質、研究の中身が問われることになる。

大学の研究テーマは先端技術の基礎研究が主であり、その応用範囲が広いため大学発の特許は全て外国出願すべきである。特許は登録・実施化までに時間がかかりその評価は難しいが、出願時の特許戦略と厳しい目利きが必要である。

## 成功と失敗の 分かれ道

武器となる特許の権利取得には、研究者と関係者の強い信念と執念が不可欠である。

## ☆]-デ ネ-タ-の一言

「特許のない技術は使われない」、「特許のない研究は産学連携を実施したことにならない」を掲げて知財の重要性を訴え、特許マインドの向上を目指す。
OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE IN FY2007

Chapter 1 Japan’s Official Development Assistance in Terms of Disbursement

Chapter 2 Details about Japan’s Official Development Assistance

Section 1. Assistance Relating to the Basic Policies of the ODA Charter

Section 2. Measures for Each of the Priority Issues

Section 3. Assistance for Each Region

Section 4. Operational Status of the Principle of Assistance Implementation

Section 5. Formulation and Implementation of ODA Policy

Chapter 3 International Trends of Assistance and Japan's Commitments

Section 1. Consolidation of the Result-Oriented Tendency in Aid

Section 2. Collaboration among Donor Countries

Section 3. Trends in the United Nations and Other Organizations and Japan's Commitments
# Japan’s Official Development Assistance in Terms of Disbursement

(Source: AFP=Jiji)

Japan’s net bilateral ODA disbursements $ ^{1} $ in 2007 totaled approximately US5,777.97 million (approximately ¥680.6 billion). Japan’s contributions to international organizations totaled approximately US1,900.80 million (approximately ¥223.9 billion) $ ^{2} $ in 2007. These figures make for a 31% reduction to approximately US7,678.76 million in 2007, compared with overall ODA disbursements in the previous fiscal year (approximately a 30.2% decrease compared to the previous year on a yen base, to approximately ¥904.6 billion). $ ^{3} $

With regard to gross disbursements excluding received loan aid, bilateral ODA disbursements $ ^{4} $ totaled approximately US13,566.11 million (approximately ¥1,598.1 billion). This represented a decline by roughly 20.5% (approximately a 19.5% decrease on a yen base) on the previous year.

##

Japan’s 2007 ODA net disbursements ranked fifth, behind the United States, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, amongst the members of OECD-DAC $ ^{5} $ member countries. $ ^{6} $ The main causes for the decrease included contributions to international organizations and a shrink in debt relief. Contributions to international organizations decreased due to decreased lending to international institutions. Decrease of debt relief is explained mainly by a lack of massive debt relief in 2007 as Japan did for Nigeria in 2006, for instance.

A breakdown of 2007 ODA disbursements (net base) shows that bilateral ODA accounted for roughly 75.2% of overall disbursements, while ODA via international organizations accounted for approximately 24.8%. Bilateral ODA is to contribute for strengthening of the relationship between Japan and developing countries, as assistance is
provided after discussions are held with these countries. Provision of ODA via international organizations carries the benefits of being able to utilize specialized knowledge, to ensure political neutrality, and to allow for assistance for countries and regions that are difficult to deliver to on a governmental level. Therefore, Japan flexibly distinguishes between bilateral assistance and assistance via international organizations, while instituting collaborations between these two means and ensuring the manner of assistance is adequate.

##

## Breakdown by method $ ^{7} $

A breakdown of bilateral ODA indicates that disbursements calculated as grant aid totaled approximately US$3,413.91 million, amounting to roughly 44.5% of overall net ODA disbursements. Of this amount, debt relief accounted for US$1,941.35 million at roughly 25.3%; grant aid through international organizations accounted for around 5.1% at US$395.03 million; and funds provided by Japan for grant aid excluding other aforementioned categories accounted for about 14% at US$1,077.53 million.

Additionally, technical cooperation accounted for around 33.5% at roughly US2,568.73 million; loan aid amounted to approximately -US204.67 million; $ ^{8} $ and loan aid excluding debt relief amounted to approximately US160.85 million.

## Breakdown by region

When looking at bilateral ODA by region, Asia $ ^{9} $ accounts for 28.3% at approximately US1,633.58 million (approximately ¥192.4 billion). Africa accounts for 29.4% at US1,700.53 million (approximately ¥200.3 billion) and the Middle East accounts for 16.4% at US948.28 million (approximately ¥111.7 billion). Latin America accounts for 3.9% at US225.60 million (approximately ¥266.6 billion); Oceania comprises 1.2% at US70.29 million (approximately ¥8.3 billion); and Europe 0.8% at US47.55 million (approximately ¥5.6 billion). Assistance covering multiple regions accounts for the rest, at about US1,152.32 million (approximately ¥135.7 billion).

Looking at debt relief by region, Asia $ ^{10} $ accounts for about US10.78 million (approximately ¥1.3 billion), Africa for US815.60 million (approximately ¥96.1 billion), and the Middle East for US749.44 million (approximately ¥88.3 billion).

Chart III-2. Japan's Bilateral Official Development Assistance by Type

Notes: (1) Due to rounding, the total figure may not match the sum of individual parts.

(2) Excluding assistance to Eastern Europe and graduated countries.

2007

Notes: (1) Due to rounding, the total figure may not match the sum of individual parts.

(2) Excluding debt relief and assistance to Eastern Europe and graduated countries.
Chart III-3. Trends in Japan’s ODA Budget and Other Major Expenditures

Note: Numbers in parentheses are budget figures.

Chart III-4. Trends in Bilateral ODA by Region (Net Disbursement)

Notes: (1) ODA to the European region from 1990-2006 includes aid to the Eastern Europe.

(3) Assistance encompassing multiple regions includes the dispatch of survey groups, administrative costs and promotion of development awareness, all encompassing multiple regions.

(2) If the amount received of loan aid exceeds its disbursements, the figure can be negative.
Chart III-5. Trends in the ODA of Major DAC Countries (Net Disbursement)

Source: DAC Press Release 2008; Development Co-operation Report 2007

Notes: (1) Excluding assistance to Eastern Europe and graduated countries.

(2) US figures for 1990-1992 exclude military debt relief.

(3) Provisional value for 2007, except Japan.

Chart III-6. Trends in the ODA of Major DAC Countries (Gross Disbursement)

Source: DAC Press Release 2008; Development Co-operation Report 2007

Notes: (1) Excluding assistance to Eastern Europe and graduated countries.

(2) US figures for 1990-1992 exclude military debt relief.

(3) Provisional value for 2007, except Japan.
Chart III-7. Per Capita ODA in DAC Countries

Source: DAC Press Release 2008 (2007 disbursements) was used for disbursement figures, and the Development Co-operation Report 2007 (2006 figures) for the population figures.

Notes: (1) Excluding assistance to Eastern Europe and graduated countries.

(2) Provisional values, except for Japan.

Chart III-8. Ratio of ODA to GNI in DAC Countries

Source: DAC Press Release 2008; Development Co-operation Report 2007

Notes: (1) Countries are placed in descending order of their ratios of ODA to GNI in 2007.

(2) Provisional values, except for Japan
Chart III-9. Trends in Japan's ODA and as Percent of GNI

Notes: (1) Up until 1998 the figures show ODA Disbursements as percent of GNP, from 1999 onward they show it as percent of GNI. (2) Excluding assistance to Eastern Europe and graduated countries.

Chart III-10. Amount of Assistance to Least Developed Countries in Japan’s Bilateral Assistance
Chart III-11. Ratio of Grants to LDC in Japan’s Bilateral Assistance

Notes: (1) Calculation for the ratio of grants:

$$

\frac{\text{Total Grants}}{\text{Total Bilateral ODA}} \times 100 (\%)

$$

If the repaid amount exceeds the value of ODA loans and other ODA credits, the grant rate is greater than 100%.

(2) Excluding debt cancellation.

(3) Excluding assistance to Eastern Europe and graduated countries.
図表2-3-1-3 年齢階級別にみた健診や人間ドックを受けなかった理由の割合(%) (20歳以上・複数回答)

資料：厚生労働省大臣官房統計情報部「国民生活基礎調査」(2004年)

コラム

## 保健指導の様々なかたち

地域や職域における健康教育は、面接・教室などの対面型アプローチが中心であり、働きかけられる人数や住民層に限界がある。そこで、電子メール・インターネット・電話・郵便などを利用した非対面型の健康教育プログラムの開発と実践が試みられている。そのメリットとしては、①多様な住民層へのアプローチ、②プログラムの個別化、③データ管理の効率化に、特に期待が寄せられている。住民間の不平等や個人情報漏洩が懸念されているが、インフラ整備や携帯電話の効果的な利用、情報セキュリティを高めることで解決できると考えられる。さらに近年では、生活習慣の評価・教材作成・データ蓄積などの部分にもITが活用されている。それにより、より利便性が高く、効果的で費用対効果に優れた非対面型プログラムが可能となっている。

2005（平成17）年2月現在、ITを用いた非対面型プログラムを実践しているのは、人口5万人以上の比較的大きな自治体でも4％と少ない。しかし、42％はその必要性を感じており、今後、使いやすいツールが開発・提供されることで、非対面型の健康教育プログラムの有用性について検討の余地はある。

図表 Ⅱ を用いた非対面型の健康教育に期待するメリットと予想されるデメリット

資料：平成16年度厚生労働科学研究長寿科学総合研究事業「老人保健事業の推進のためのITを活用した地域健康づくりの推進方策と指導者教育法の確立に関する研究」（主任研究者：中村正和）
## SECTION 2 RECENT REFORM OF WASTE MANAGEMENT AND RECYCLING POLICY TOWARD REALIZING A “SOUND MATERIAL-CYCLE SOCIETY”

SECTION 2

Having experienced waste-related crises, Japan has reinforced its policy measures toward tackling waste issues. As it proceeds in this direction, Japan has moved from the development of policy to strengthen its “3R” (recycle, reduce, and reuse) framework and measures over the past dozen years. It has done so by seeing waste not simply as things to be disposed of, but rather as a valuable resource. In this way, Japan is steadily implementing approaches toward the establishment of a “Sound Material-Cycle Society (SMS)” with “circulative resources (CRs)”, such as waste that can be properly utilized and treated.

### 1. The three main trends of waste and recycling measures

Japan’s waste management and recycling policy follows three main trends.

The first involves the problem of industrial waste, which makes up the majority of all waste. Although, historically, treatment of such waste was implemented on the concept of “bad money drives out good,” successive legal reforms have been reinforced to secure the responsibilities of waste-generating businesses and brought about a shift in waste management systems.

The second involves the formation of recycling policy. Specifically, it is based on the concept of “extended producer responsibility (EPR)”, in which product manufacturers assume certain responsibility to secure proper treatment of the waste generated by their products, even at stages following their use.

The last trend involves the problem of municipal waste, which is the waste that is most familiar to people in their daily lives. Given the fact that the close collaboration between municipalities and the central government has resulted in significant successes in the treatment of dioxins, even stronger efforts based on local-national cooperation will be required in the future.

#### 1.1. Reinforcing industrial waste measures based on the responsibility of waste-generating businesses

“Responsibility of waste-generating businesses” refers to the idea that businesses that generate waste should bear responsibility for its treatment through appropriate recycling, final disposal, etc. The foundation of this idea lies in the internationally-established “Polluter Pays Principle (PPP).” It sets forth the waste generator as the originator of environmental loads resulting from waste treatment and places responsibility for reducing the environmental loads on the generator.
##### 1.1.1. Reinforcing responsibility of waste-generating businesses through revision of the Waste Management Law

The Waste Management Law was enacted in 1970 to set up a major division of roles, placing waste treatment responsibility for industrial waste with waste-generating businesses and responsibility for municipal general waste with municipalities. However, because this division of roles did not resolve the problems of continuing environmental pollution caused by improper disposal and large-scale illegal dumping, the Waste Management Law has undergone numerous additional revisions concerning industrial waste, which accounts for approximately 90% of all waste generation. The following subsections overview the main points of these revisions.

## The manifest system

The objective of the manifest system is to prevent illegal dumping. This system enables an entity to accurately ascertain and manage conditions throughout the distribution flow of industrial waste and immediately identify the waste-generating businesses having responsibility for the treatment of that waste.

Revisions of the Waste Management Law made this system mandatory for “industrial waste under special control” from April 1993 and for all industrial waste from December 1998. Under this system, a waste-generating business has to fill in a manifest sheet when it consigns industrial waste to a collecting and transporting business. The collecting and transporting business stamps the manifest sheet to confirm that it has received the waste, and returns a copy of the manifest sheet to the waste-generating business.

## Reinforcement of licensing conditions for waste disposal businesses

In order to eliminate unreliable treatment businesses, the 1997 and 2000 revisions of the Waste Management Law reinforced disqualifications for industrial waste treatment businesses. These reinforcements included the regulation that disqualifies businesses from receiving licenses for engaging in industrial waste treatment business if they have violated environmental statutes (such as the Waste Management Law) and been sentenced to fines or higher punishments within the past five years, been affiliated with organized crime, etc.

##### 1.1.2. Promotion of appropriate treatment through the reinforcement of regulations to prevent illegal dumping

The three stakeholders of the central government (which is in charge of this system), local governments (which are responsible for the system's precise implementation and management), and waste-generating businesses (which have responsibility for waste treatment) jointly implement effective measures aiming at minimizing the negative environmental effect of illegal dumping that has already occurred.

## Measures for rehabilitation to original state

It is extremely important to steadily implement measures to restore the conditions of dumped sites to the state before illegal dumping (rehabilitation to original state).
However, such rehabilitation often comes at great expense. While this expense should be, in principle, compensated under the responsibility of the business that committed the illegal dumping, in many cases the location of the business cannot be identified or the business does not have the financial capacity to afford the expense. This forces the central government, local governments, and other administrative bodies to deal with the situation.

## (1) Increased flexibility and facilitation of procedures for rehabilitation to original state

When waste is disposed of in violation of disposal standards, such as illegally dumped waste, authorities are permitted to order the person on corporation that engaged in the disposal to take measures necessary to eliminate or prevent disruption for conservation of the living environment that is caused by the waste (a "restoration order"). However, because the conditions for issuing the restoration order had previously included the "occurrence of major interference in the preservation of living environments, or recognition that there is a possibility that such interference will occur," confirmation of the severity of the disruption was required. In some cases unclear conditions prevented the effective issuance of the orders. These included the fact that specific standards for evaluating the severity of disruption were unclear, and that it was difficult to conserve the living environment without implementing necessary measures prior to ascertaining the severity.

Consequently, the Waste Management Law was revised in 1991 to replace “major interference with the preservation of living environments” with “occurrence of interference with the preservation of living environments.”

Moreover, although there is a system under the Administrative Subrogation Law to be applied when a disposing entity does not engage in rehabilitation to the original state despite receiving a restoration order, a 1997 revision of the Waste Management Law established exceptional procedures for the Administrative Subrogation Law and relaxed the conditions in the event that a prefectural governor takes measures to remove the waste. This revision makes it possible for prefectural governors to commence quickly with operations for rehabilitation to the original state.

In addition, the decision was made to fully enforce the principle of the “responsibility of the waste-generating business.” When a waste-generating business does not conduct with due diligence the securing of proper treatment in the process of waste generation to final disposal, the business becomes newly subject to a restoration order.

## (2) Responsibility for bearing expenses of rehabilitation to original state

In order to ensure that operation of rehabilitation to the original state can be conducted even in cases when the disposing person or waste-generating business cannot be identified, the law was revised to establish a fund made up of contributions from industry and national treasury subsidies. Should illegal dumping of industrial waste occur after the execution of the revised law, financial assistance could be provided through this fund to
cover a portion of the costs that arise when a prefecture issues a subrogation.

## Systematic approaches toward eradication of illegal dumping

Furthermore, in order to prevent illegal dumping before it occurs, an “Outline of the Action Plan toward Eradication of Illegal Dumping” was prepared in June 2004 as a comprehensive plan of policy measures against illegal dumping. This plan was prepared based on the need for measures at each stage of waste disposal flow, as well as measures to reinforce existing punishments.

## Outline of the Action Plan toward Eradication of Illegal Dumping

- Strengthening policy measures against littered wastes in the neighborhood (application of the “broken window theory”)

* Enhancing governmental support for efficient preparation of treatment facilities, and reinforcing safety measures for final disposal sites, etc.

$ ^{*} $ Human resource development in the central and local governments by dispatching experts and holding seminars on industrial waste treatment.

$ ^{*} $ Developing and expanding regional environmental offices and preparing prompt response system on the front line, and environmental monitoring (patrolling) system through setting up an illegal dumping prevention hot line.

Source: Ministry of the Environment

Creating a sound market that selects top-quality treatment businesses

Combined with full enforcement of treatment responsibility through regulations, the promotion of efforts to create a sound market in which top-quality industrial waste treatment businesses are fostered and in which these top-quality businesses are appropriately selected by waste-generating businesses is closely linked to the prevention of improper treatment. For this reason, projects aimed at fostering and evaluating such top-quality businesses are underway.

##### 1.1.3. Eliminating adverse legacies under national leadership (disposal of PCB waste)

Because PCB waste has remained in long-term storage, and because, in some cases, its location has become unknown or its storage conditions have deteriorated, the danger of environmental pollution exists.
This situation led to the establishment of the Law Concerning Special Measures against PCB Waste (PCB Special Measures Law) in FY2001, under the initiative of the central government, to build a disposal framework for it and to prepare disposal facilities on a nationwide scale. In concrete terms, regional disposal facilities for PCB waste are being established in five locations nationwide through the Japan Environmental Safety Corporation, which is a special company set up under the law.

Moreover, the central and prefectural governments are collaborating to set up a PCB waste treatment fund. This fund promotes the proper disposal of high-voltage transformers and condensers using PCBs that are stored by small- and medium-scale enterprises that have limited ability to bear their treatment costs.

Progress toward the establishment of Nationwide PCB waste disposal system based on regional disposal facilities

Source: Ministry of the Environment

#### 1.2. Creation and enhancement of recycling measures through extended producer responsibility

In Japan, specific legal systems based on the concept of “extended producer responsibility”—an internationally shared concept studied at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), such as recycling laws which differ according to the characteristics of items—have been prepared.