New Zealand’s IP shake-up: a bold experiment in trusting inventors

New Zealand has just rewritten the rules for who commercialises innovation. The Government’s new national intellectual property (IP) policy gives university researchers the first right to commercialise inventions from projects funded through the Science, Innovation and Technology portfolio.

Universities can still assist, but their equity share will normally be limited to about five to ten per cent. It is the most significant shift in decades in how this country turns public research into enterprise—an experiment in researcher trust that could unleash a new generation of ventures.

From July 2026, scientists and academics working on eligible, government-funded research will hold those first rights to commercialise. They can take their discoveries forward independently or in partnership with their university. Public Research Organisations (PROs) retain the first option to commercialise, but if they decline, the inventors may take over.

The model draws inspiration from the University of Waterloo in Canada, where a long-standing creator-owned system has helped drive a vibrant start-up culture.

New Zealand’s version, however, isn’t a true creator-owned approach and adds more layers of procedure. It distinguishes between researcher-led and organisation-directed projects, with the Minister for Science, Innovation and Technology or a delegate deciding which applies. Inventors must disclose new IP promptly and reach an agreement within ninety days on who will lead commercialisation.

Although billed as a national framework, the policy will only apply to research funded through the Government’s science, innovation and technology portfolio. Other projects will continue under existing institutional IP policies or the terms of industry contracts. Instead of simplifying rules for all research, it adds new ones for government-sourced funding.

Even so, the direction is right. The reform marks a decisive move away from institution-centred control toward researcher-led innovation. It signals that the government wants scientists to take the lead in translating ideas into impact, while setting limits on how much universities can retain.

If executed well, the policy could improve both speed and confidence in commercialisation. Clearer ownership encourages earlier investor engagement, and capping university equity makes start-ups more investable.

Universities that already operate on a “trust-and-serve” model by supporting researchers rather than focusing on ownership are well-positioned. Others will need to adapt. Their commercialisation offices must become service partners, helping researchers protect and develop their IP, connect with investors, and move quickly when opportunities arise.

The announcement also promises national guidelines on how researchers, research organisations and partners should engage. These must be straightforward, practical, and consistent to reduce negotiation delays and provide investors with certainty. However, guidance alone will not bring about change.

To make this work, New Zealand needs to fund a national programme of capability development so that more researchers have the skills and confidence to lead commercialisation. A few academics are already accomplished entrepreneurs, but success at scale will require culture change across the system.

Universities must value and reward commercial activity alongside traditional research outputs, and departments need the flexibility to allow academics to pursue commercialisation-oriented career paths. Researchers, for their part, must see commercialisation not as a distraction from scholarship but as another way of creating impact.

This transformation cannot be driven solely by the government. It requires leadership from universities, commitment from senior academics, and a collective willingness to re-imagine how research careers are built.

Internationally, New Zealand’s new approach stands out. Most countries give universities ownership of publicly funded inventions. Some, like Italy, which until 2023 operated a “professor’s privilege” model, have reversed course, returning IP rights to institutions.

If implemented effectively and supported by real capability building and culture change, New Zealand’s policy could become a global benchmark for how small nations translate research into prosperity. If it isn’t supported, or sinks into rules and exceptions, it will show how easily a policy based on trust can be lost in translation.