The main objective of this study is to produce a conclusive technical report aimed at understanding the standards, guidelines and parameters that should be included in an innovation policy aimed at private universities. To this end, a survey of the items in the guidance guide for developing the innovation policy of the ICTS was carried out. A situational analysis of which actions foster entrepreneurship and innovation in the educational institution where the study was conducted was also carried out. Finally, innovation policies that already exist in private administrative educational institutions were compared. The study had a qualitative approach and its objective was exploratory and descriptive. The methodology was divided into three steps. The first was data collection, in which innovation policies from universities that already had them were selected and evaluated using the documentary technique, extracting their objectives, guidelines and the actions taken to comply with them. The second step dealt with the analysis of this material, analyzing the various policies and evaluating their various points of view in order to identify the main items contained in order to develop a new innovation policy. Finally, the items evaluated were adapted to the reality of the private university, both organizationally and regionally. A bibliographical research was also carried out to support the work and understand what had been written on the subject. In the results presented from the bibliographical research, publications from Federal and State educational institutions, that is, from public administration, were found, which did not contribute to the study, and no publications were found that discussed innovation policies and technological innovation centers of private institutions. Six innovation policies of private educational institutions responding to the Fortec Innovation report published in 2022 were evaluated, and their structure follows that determined by the guidance guide, following the structure of the policy context, justification and then presentation of the objectives and guidelines. The institution where the study was developed contributes to innovation and entrepreneurship, having innovative potential, it also has a structure that can be shared in order to contribute to research, however, not having a technological innovation center and a defined innovation policy, it does not yet have an external partnership following the model proposed by Etzkowitz and Zhou of Triple Helix. Upon completion of the study, there is a proposal for the construction of an innovation policy for a university center, adapted to both the regional reality and the administration of the institution and the undergraduate courses it offers.

The objective of this study is to analyze the level of technological maturity (TRL) of projects in the Agribusiness area at the State University of Mato Grosso (UNEMAT).  As a research methodology, it was qualitative and quantitative in nature, with a descriptive and explanatory objective. As for the type, documentary research and case study. For this, the research universe was UNEMAT, the sample was made up of the institution's 13 campuses, with project publications and research reports linked to the agribusiness area being the object of analysis. For analysis, the Technological Maturity Level Scale (TRL) was used, considering 9 levels ranging from basic research (TRL 1) to commercial implementation (TRL 9), to classify the technological maturity of the research. To construct the theoretical review chapter, a study was carried out using the bibliometric technique in the Web of Science database (CAPES, 2024), searching for “Technology Readiness Levels” (TRL) OR “Manufacturing Readiness Levels” (MRL), to identify publications over the last 10 years, with the aim of knowing the annual frequencies of article publications, authors, affiliations, countries, areas, languages and, frequency of citations and mention of studies most cited by other authors. Therefore, it emphasizes that it is not yet part of this work, however, the analysis is under construction, according to the following stages: in the first phase, data collection was carried out with the Dean of Research and Postgraduate Studies (PRPPG) from UNEMAT, which provided information and documents related to institutionalized research groups, ongoing projects and number of teachers per campus. Next, AGINOV's Intellectual Property portfolio, 2022 edition, was analyzed to verify the institution's technological showcase, including data on patents, computer programs, cultivars and innovation environments.

The Technology Reference Unit (URT) is a modality of technology transfer (TT) that demonstrates a practical application of the Crop-Livestock Integration (ICL) system, with expected impacts of an increase in adoption rate of integrated systems. This study evaluated the impact of URT presence on ICL adoption in Mato Grosso using a staggered-entry Difference-in-Differences (DD) model and the estimator proposed by Callaway and Sant’Anna (2021). This estimator calculates the Average Treatment Effect on the Treated (ATT) by combining Inverse Probability Weighting (IPW) with regression adjustment. Results show that the presence of a URT in a municipality increased the area devoted to ICL by approximately 11,000 hectares compared to the counterfactual scenario (i.e., absence of a URT). When neighboring municipalities were included as the URT’s area of influence, the estimated ATT suggests an additional increase of about 3,300 hectares. In proportional terms, URT presence raised the agricultural area under ICL by 11 percentage points relative to the untreated scenario. However, when the analysis was extended to the area of influence, the ATT was not statistically significant. We conclude that URT presence contributed significantly to the expansion of ICL area in the municipalities studied, confirming the effectiveness of this technology-transfer modality in promoting sustainable production systems. A SWOT analysis and a Business Model Canvas did not identify any significant barriers to URT implementation, which was carried out through partnerships without generating direct revenues or costs.