The fine print of collaboration: How contractual provisions govern IP and disclosure in publicly funded research

We investigate how public funding and competing orientations shape the contractual provisions regarding intellectual property (IP) and disclosure in university–industry collaborations. By systematically coding and analysing the contracts of 484 collaborations funded by the Research Council of Norway, we identify considerable heterogeneity in IP ownership, exploitation rights, publication policies, and confidentiality rules. Our cluster analysis reveals three distinct governance models: proprietary partnerships, controlled access agreements, and open science collaborations. Controlled access agreements—where universities retain IP ownership, but industry partners hold exploitation rights and impose disclosure restrictions—are the most common. Regression analyses show that higher public funding shares are significantly associated with reduced industry ownership and use rights, but not with publication or confidentiality restrictions. Moreover, projects with more diverse consortia and research-oriented funding instruments tend to adopt less restrictive disclosure provisions. These findings challenge the simplistic open–closed dichotomy and offer a nuanced understanding of how contractual provisions mediate the diffusion of publicly funded research. Our study contributes to debates on open science, knowledge monopolies, and the strategic governance of research outcomes. • We examined contracts of 484 university–industry research projects. • Contracts vary in ownership, use rights, publishing, and confidentiality. • We identify three governance models: closed, controlled access, and open. • More public funding reduces company ownership and rights to use results. • Findings challenge the open–closed science dichotomy.