Volume 1, Issue 1, February 2013, Page: 13-19
Open Innovation for Sustainability Lessons from the GreenXchange Experience, An ICTSD Policy Brief
Roya Ghafele, The University of Oxford; Oxford, UK
Robert D. O’Brien, The University of Oxford; Oxford, UK
Received: Feb. 19, 2013;       Published: Feb. 20, 2013
DOI: 10.11648/j.ijebo.20130101.12      View  2927      Downloads  184
The following policy brief discusses the natural experiment of ‘GreenXchange’ in the context of open innovation. Open innovation is a phrase popularized by Berkeley professor Henry Chesbrough who argues that firms should externalize R&D and other innovative activity for the sake of technological advancement. And GreenXchange was a Web-based program allowing for firms to share their intellectual property for the sake of sustainable innovation under the open innovation paradigm. Our research indicates that the mild success of GreenXchange demonstrates a gap between academic ideas and their utilization in practice.
Intellectual Property, Open Innovation, Sustainability
To cite this article
Roya Ghafele, Robert D. O’Brien, Open Innovation for Sustainability Lessons from the GreenXchange Experience, An ICTSD Policy Brief, International Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. Vol. 1, No. 1, 2013, pp. 13-19. doi: 10.11648/j.ijebo.20130101.12
Tapscott, Dan (2010) Bloomberg Businessweek January 27. Availablefrom: (accessed 21 May 2012).
GX consultant (2012). Interview conducted on 17 May 2012.
‘The GreenXchange’ (2010) Davos hand-out produced by Nike and Creative Commons. Available from: (accessed 19 May 2012).
Mazur, Agnes (2009) ‘Green Exchange: Creating a Meta-Map of Sustai nability’, WorldChanging May 5. Available from: (accessed 22 May 2012).
Greenxchange.cc (2012) ‘The GreenXchange: Accelerating sustainable innovation through IP sharing’ (official website of the GreenXchange). Available from: (accessed 23 May 2012).
Chesbrough, H. 2006. Emerging secondary markets for Intellectual Property. Research Report to National Center for Industrial Property Information and Traning (NCIPI).
Lord, M.D., Mandel, S.W., and Wager, J.D. 2002. ‘Spinning out a Star’, Harvard Business Review. June 2002.
Christensen, J.F., Olesen, M.H. and Kjær, J.S. 2005. "The Industrial Dynamics of Open Innovation — Evidence from the transformation of consumer electronics." Research Policy, 34, 10 (December): 1533-1549.
De Jong, Jeroen P. J., Kalvet, Tarmo, and Vanhaverbeke, Wim. "Exploring a theoretical framework to structure policy implications of OI." Technology Analysis & Strategic Man-agement 22 (8): p. 877 – 896.
Caves, R. E, H. Crookell, and J. P Killing. 1983.The Imperfect Market for Technology Licenses. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and statistics 45, no. 3: 249–267.
Teece, David J. 1986. Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy 15, no. 6 (December): 285-305. doi :10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2.
Arora, A. 1995. Licensing tacit knowledge: intellectual property rights and the market for know-how. Economics of innovation and new technology 4, no. 1: 41–60.
Parr, R. 2007. Royalty Rates for Licensing Intellectual Property, at pg. 18-19, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Teece, D. J. 1988. Technological change and the nature of the firm. Technical change and economic theory: 256.
McClure, I. D. 2008. Commoditizing Intellectual Property Rights: The Practicability of a Commercialized and Transparent International IPR Market and the Need for International Standards. Buffalo Intellectual Property Law Journal 6: 1.
O’Brien, K. 2007. The first intellectual property rights auction in Europe will be held in Munich. New York Times.
Nike employee (2012). Interview conducted on 11 May‘GreenXchange: Partners Collaboratory’ (2011). Greenx-change.cc January 23. Available from: (accessed 23 May 2012).
Broughton, P.D. 2010. "Another form of creative thinking" The Financial Times, November 17, 2010.
Browse journals by subject