It Takes a Village, and a Transfer Office

AI Generated Image Depicting Technology Transfer Office Across Africa // Gemini Nano Banana

There is a quiet crisis playing out across African university campuses. Not a crisis of intellect. Not a crisis of ambition.

The crisis is one of capture.

In laboratories from Lagos to Lusaka, in engineering faculties from Cairo to Cape Town, researchers are generating innovations with genuine commercial and social impact potential. They are publishing, discovering, inventing. And then, in the absence of institutional infrastructure to catch those innovations and carry them forward, the ideas stall. They sit in journals. They gather dust. Or worse, they follow the researcher out of the door as they pack their bags for Europe or North America or Asia, where the systems exist to take their work to commercialisation.

Africa has the village. It is missing the pan-African Technology Transfer Office.

The Promise and the Gap

Africa's higher education sector is, by any measure, growing. The continent now hosts over 1,500 universities. Student enrolment has expanded faster than anywhere else in the world over the past two decades. Research output is rising year on year, with South Africa, Egypt, Nigeria, Kenya, and Ethiopia consistently emerging as the continent's most prolific publishers of peer-reviewed work.

Yet the conversion rate from research to commercial reality remains painfully low.

A 2024 study published in the Springer Open Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship found that only a minority of African universities have fully functional Technology Transfer Offices, and most lack sufficient capacity for effective patent management and commercialisation.^[1] A separate 2025 study across 13 South African public institutions, published in Huria Journal, sharpened that picture considerably. Where TTOs do exist, 77% of TTO managers reported that their institutions had filed more than 50 patent applications since their offices were established, and 62% reported more than 50 patents granted. Commercialisation through licensing and start-up formation was also increasing.^[2] When the infrastructure is in place, the pipeline flows.

This is not a reflection of the quality of the research. It is a reflection of the systems, or lack thereof, designed to take that research to market. The problem is that the infrastructure is the exception, not the rule.

A Proven Model with a 50-Year Head Start

The concept of the Technology Transfer Office did not emerge from thin air. It has a specific origin story, a clear catalyst, and a measurable track record.

For most of the 20th century, research generated at publicly funded universities in the United States remained largely locked within academia. Inventions were made, papers were published, and the innovations quietly gathered dust, legally owned by the federal government with no clear mechanism for getting them to market. The turning point came in 1980, with the passage of the Bayh-Dole Act, legislation that allowed American universities to retain ownership of inventions developed through federal funding and to license them to the private sector. The effect was transformative. US universities went from filing a few hundred patents a year to thousands. Stanford's licensing of the technology underpinning Google, MIT's role in commercialising countless biotech breakthroughs, and the formation of thousands of university spin-outs all trace their roots to that single piece of legislation.^[3]

Other nations took note. The UK, Germany, Japan, South Korea, and others developed their own equivalents over the following two decades, each building the institutional infrastructure to translate public research investment into economic and social return. By the early 2000s, the Technology Transfer Office had become a standard fixture of any serious research university.^[4] Not a luxury. Not an optional add-on. A fundamental part of how a university justifies its existence in a knowledge economy.

That head start matters enormously when thinking about Africa. The continent's universities are not behind because their researchers are less capable or their ideas less valuable. They are behind because the infrastructure that the rest of the world spent 40 years building, through government policy, institutional investment, and private sector partnership, was never built here at equivalent scale. The appetite is clearly growing. South Africa legislated in 2008 with its Intellectual Property Rights from Publicly Financed Research and Development Act.^[5] Kenya has committed $15 million to a national TTO programme targeting 50% of its institutions by 2030.^[6] These are meaningful signals. But building a fully resourced TTO inside every African university, across 54 countries, 1,500-plus institutions, and two major regional IP systems, is not a problem any single government can solve alone. The opportunity, however, is one the entire continent stands to benefit from: a 1.58 billion-person market hungry for the innovations that are already being created inside its universities, waiting for the infrastructure to bring them to life.

The Three Drains

Understand the African TTO challenge and you quickly see it is not one problem. It is three, operating simultaneously.

The first is brain drain. This is the one everyone talks about, and for good reason. Africa loses an estimated 20,000 skilled professionals to emigration every year.^[7] For universities, the impact is compounded. When a researcher leaves, they take not just their expertise but their in-progress inventions, their industry contacts, and their institutional knowledge. The absence of a functioning TTO means there is rarely a mechanism to capture and protect intellectual property before it walks out of the door. No handover. No record. No return.

The second is resource drain. Even where TTOs exist, they are chronically under-resourced. A 2022 analysis by Oxentia, produced in partnership with the British Council and Universities South Africa, found that the single greatest barrier to research commercialisation across South Africa's 26 public universities was funding, particularly at the early stage where ideas need support to move from prototype to market-ready product. Over a third of respondents in the same research disagreed that there is ongoing training and support for TTO personnel.^[8] That number, in the continent's most advanced technology transfer ecosystem, should give us pause. Elsewhere on the continent, the picture is considerably starker.

The third is structural drain. The Oxentia report also identified a deeper and more stubborn problem: culture. Academic researchers are rarely rewarded for commercialisation activity. It does not count meaningfully towards promotion. It is not recognised in most institutional KPI frameworks. And so, even where researchers have commercially viable ideas, they have little structural incentive to pursue them through official channels. The result is an ecosystem where the research element is thriving, in the report's own words the healthiest part of the innovation pipeline, while everything downstream is underdeveloped.^[8]

Add to this the fragmentation of Africa's IP landscape, with individual countries operating different patent systems, different policies on publicly funded research, and different levels of engagement with regional IP bodies, and you begin to see just how complex the structural challenge really is.

The Architecture That Already Exists

This is not to say the continent is starting from scratch. Two important regional IP structures already exist, and they matter enormously to understanding where the opportunity lies.

The African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO), established in 1976 and now comprising 22 member states predominantly across English-speaking Africa, provides a unified patent filing system allowing applicants to seek protection across multiple territories through a single application.^[9] This is critical infrastructure. It is also significantly underutilised by African universities, many of whom are simply unaware of it or lack the capacity to navigate it.

OAPI (Organisation Africaine de la Propriété Intellectuelle), ARIPO's francophone counterpart covering 17 member states across Central and West Africa, provides a similar function, with IP rights automatically valid across all member states upon grant.^[10] Together, ARIPO and OAPI represent the skeleton of a pan-African IP system. What is missing is the connective tissue between those bodies and the universities generating the research.

WIPO's engagement with Africa has also been growing, through capacity-building programmes, the Technology and Innovation Support Center (TISC) network, and initiatives tied to the African Union's Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy for Africa (STISA-2024).^[11] The political will at continental level is present and increasing. What is missing is the operational layer that sits between policy intent and institutional delivery.

National bodies like South Africa's NIPMO (National Intellectual Property Management Office) and TIA (Technology Innovation Agency) demonstrate what that operational layer can look like when it functions well.^[5] But these are nationally scoped, resource-intensive to build, and represent the upper end of what most African universities can realistically aspire to on their own.

The question is not whether Africa should build this infrastructure. It is how to build it at scale, at speed, and at a cost that does not price out the majority of institutions who need it most.

Kenya Points the Way, but Stops at the Border

One of the most instructive signals of where the sector is heading comes from Kenya, and it is worth examining closely, both for what it tells us and for where it leaves off.

Kenya's 10-Year Innovation Masterplan has set a specific, funded target: Technology Transfer Offices operational in 50% of the country's tertiary institutions by the end of fiscal year 2030, backed by a dedicated $15 million budget.^[6] Alongside this, the Kenya Network of Entrepreneurial Institutions Leaders (KNEIL), incubated by the Kenya National Innovation Agency (KeNIA), has developed a model they call Technology Transfer as a Service (TTaaS): a shared service approach designed to increase research commercialisation while reducing the cost burden on individual institutions. Their Innovation Exchange Platform adds another layer, enabling member institutions to trade innovation inputs, share knowledge, and move toward the secure exchange of intellectual property value across the network.^[12]

The logic is compelling and the ambition is real. KNEIL's framework identifies five levels of institutional maturity, from traditional academic institution through to world-class entrepreneurial institution, and provides graduated support structures at each stage. The long-term goal is not just IP registration but institutional revenue diversification and a stronger pipeline of investable ventures from African universities.^[12]

This is exactly the direction the continent needs to move in. And yet, even Kenya's masterplan acknowledges that reaching 50% of institutions by 2030 is a stretch goal, requiring significant funding, political will, and sustained implementation. And critically, it is Kenya only.

MARATTO™ is pan-African.

That distinction is not a marketing point. It is a fundamental difference in scope, in ambition, and in the problem being solved. The fragmentation of Africa's innovation infrastructure is not just a challenge within countries, it is a challenge between them. A researcher at a Rwandan university navigating ARIPO has different needs to one at a francophone institution in Senegal navigating OAPI. A Zimbabwean university with strong engineering research faces different barriers to commercialisation than one in Ghana or Ethiopia. A 1.58 billion-person market is not unlocked country by country. It is unlocked by infrastructure that thinks and operates at continental scale.

From Cairo to Cape Town: A Continent Converging on the Same Answer

What is particularly striking about the current moment is that Kenya is not an outlier. Across the continent, from North Africa to Southern Africa, different nations are independently arriving at the same conclusion: the standalone, institution-by-institution TTO model is too slow and too expensive. The future is networked, shared, and coordinated.

In Egypt, the Academy of Scientific Research and Technology (ASRT) has established a nationwide network of Technology Innovation and Commercialisation Offices, known as TICOs, across its research institutions. Each TICO follows a standardised structure comprising three integrated sub-offices: a Technology Transfer Office, a Grants and International Cooperation Office, and a Technology Innovation Support Center aligned with WIPO's TISC network.^[13] The genius of the Egyptian model is its consistency. Rather than leaving each institution to reinvent the wheel, ASRT provides a shared playbook for IP management and commercialisation that smaller or newer research centres can plug into immediately, without the years of institutional development that building from scratch would require.

In Southern Africa, the Southern African Research and Innovation Management Association (SARIMA) operates as a regional shared resource across the SADC bloc. Through a centralised Research and Innovation Management Handbook and a WIPO-supported Technology Transfer Mentorship Programme, SARIMA gives universities in countries like Namibia, Botswana, and Malawi access to frameworks and expertise developed by more mature systems, particularly South Africa's, at a fraction of the cost of developing that capability independently.^[8] It is, in effect, a regional TTO service layer operating across borders.

Rwanda, meanwhile, is finalising its Technology Transfer and Commercialisation Strategy covering 2025 to 2030, with its National Council for Science and Technology shifting toward a national governance framework that facilitates IP and commercialisation programmes across both public and private institutions.^[14] Given Kenya and Rwanda's track record of co-leading African innovation initiatives, from AI policy to drone technology regulation, Rwanda is well positioned to adapt KNEIL's maturity framework for its own context, creating a natural East African corridor of shared TTO thinking.

The pattern is unmistakable. Egypt is building it nationally. Southern Africa is building it regionally. Kenya and Rwanda are building it collaboratively. The continent is converging on the shared service model from multiple directions simultaneously.

What does not yet exist is a pan-African layer that connects these efforts, bridges the anglophone and francophone divide, navigates both ARIPO and OAPI, and makes the cumulative benefit of all this momentum accessible to the university in Kampala or Lomé or Antananarivo that has not yet made it onto any national masterplan. That is the gap. That is the opportunity. And that is precisely where MARATTO™ sits.

The African Zebra Opportunity

There is a powerful counter-narrative emerging alongside the challenges, and it is one worth naming explicitly.

The African Zebra Thesis, which informs our thinking at Dazzle Africa, the organisation behind the MARATTO™ platform, rejects the idea that African ventures must chase the Silicon Valley unicorn playbook. Zebras build to last. They are resilient, community-oriented, and profitable by design rather than by exit. They create value that is distributed, not extracted.^[15]

African university research is, by its very nature, zebra-shaped. It is produced in communities, funded by public money, and motivated by problems that matter to people's lives: food security, health, energy, infrastructure, climate resilience. The researchers generating it are not typically chasing billion-dollar valuations. They are trying to solve things.

The Oxentia report makes a related point that often gets missed in commercialisation conversations: the most under-served research in Africa is not in STEM. It is in Social Sciences, Arts, and Humanities. These disciplines are engaging with some of the continent's most complex and urgent challenges, from traditional knowledge systems to social enterprise and community development, yet they are almost entirely excluded from existing technology transfer frameworks.^[8] A truly pan-African approach to research commercialisation has to be broader than patents and engineering. It has to make room for the full range of knowledge Africa is producing.

The tragedy is not the nature of the research. The tragedy is that, without the right infrastructure to protect and commercialise it, even zebra-shaped innovation cannot survive long enough to be useful.

What the Next Four Years Could Look Like

We are writing this in 2026. Kenya has committed $15 million and a national masterplan to get TTOs into half its universities by 2030. ARIPO and OAPI are actively expanding their university engagement. A new generation of thinking is emerging about what the continent's research infrastructure should look like, and for the first time in a long while, the conversation is shifting from diagnosis to delivery.

The conditions for a step-change have arguably never been better. The question is whether the infrastructure can be built fast enough to meet the moment.

By 2030, Africa's university-age population will have grown significantly. Research output will continue to climb. The ideas will keep coming. The issue is not whether Africa will produce the innovations the continent needs. It is whether those innovations will be captured, protected, and commercialised before they are lost to under-resourcing, emigration, or institutional inertia.

The window is open. It will not stay open indefinitely.

For universities that act now, the reward is significant: a functioning commercialisation pipeline, a strengthened IP portfolio, industry partnerships that generate income and impact, and a competitive reputation that attracts the researchers and students who have choices about where they go. For universities that wait, the brain drain continues, the ideas keep walking out of the door, and the window narrows.

What MARATTO Is Building

We give universities the infrastructure to identify, protect, and commercialise their research without the cost, complexity, or years it typically takes to build a TTO internally. We are not here to replace the village. We are here to give the village a system.

In practical terms, this means working with universities that have research worth protecting but no mechanism to protect it. It means providing patent advisory services, commercialisation strategy, licensing support, and connections to the industry and investment partners who can take innovations to market. It means navigating both ARIPO and OAPI on behalf of institutions who should not need to become IP lawyers to access pan-African patent protection. It means building the kind of graduated, contextualised support that recognises a university in Kigali has different strengths and challenges to one in Accra, Harare, or Tunis.

And it means doing this at continental scale. Not country by country. Not institution by institution. But as a shared layer of infrastructure that any African university can access without bearing the full cost of building it themselves, plugging directly into a 1.58 billion-person market that is ready for what Africa's universities are already producing.

Kenya is building toward 50% of its institutions having TTO capability by 2030. That is admirable and important. MARATTO™'s ambition is to make TTO-equivalent capability available to any African university that needs it, regardless of which side of a border they sit on, which language they teach in, or how large their budget is.

We are building this because the cost of not building it is too high. Every innovation that dies in a filing cabinet is a problem that stays unsolved. Every researcher who emigrates because their home institution cannot support their ambitions is a loss the continent cannot afford.

But we are also building this because we are genuinely excited. The research is there. The talent is there. The ideas are there. Africa does not need to invent the concept of a technology transfer office. It needs to dramatically lower the barrier to accessing one, and then remove that barrier entirely.

It Takes a Village

The proverb, of course, is right. It takes a village to raise a child, to build a community, to sustain anything worth sustaining.

Africa's universities are the village. They are producing the next generation of ideas that this continent, and frankly the world, needs. But a village also needs roads, and wells, and markets. It needs the connective tissue that turns individual effort into collective progress.

That is what technology transfer infrastructure is. That is what MARATTO™ exists to provide. And if we move quickly, thoughtfully, and together across this continent, not one country at a time, but all of it, 2030 could look very different from today.

Not because Africa suddenly had better ideas. It already has those.

But because, finally, the ideas had somewhere to go.

MARATTO™ is Africa's Outsourced Technology Transfer Office, giving universities the infrastructure to identify, protect, and commercialise their research. To learn more about our work or to discuss how MARATTO™ can support your institution, visit maratto.africa.

About the author

Phin Mpofu-Masamba II

Venture & Ecosystem Builder

Phin Mpofu-Masamba II is the Founding Curator of Dazzle Africa, the trust and intelligence layer facilitating trade and growth across Africa's startup-to-scaleup ecosystem. Dazzle Africa's flagship product is MARATTO, Africa's outsourced Technology Transfer Office, giving universities the infrastructure to identify, protect, and commercialise their research without the cost of building it internally. Dazzle Africa sits within V.ONE, his boutique Venture Studio that builds digital platforms solving real problems across commerce, community, and comparison. With 25+ years of experience building global startup ecosystems, Phin previously served as Director of Global Community at Startup Grind, where he helped scale the community to over 600 chapters across 120 countries. He has a deep passion for building infrastructure that keeps African innovation on the continent, addressing the brain drain, resource drain, and structural drain that hold back commercialisation of world-class research. His work has earned recognition including being named to the Maserati 100 and winning the CMX Professional of the Year award. Phin currently resides in Cheshire, England with his wife and three children.

View profile