IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ausecr/v56y2023i3p288-307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Changing Nature of Patents in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Sasan Bakhtiari

Abstract

Recent decades have seen substantial changes to the innovation systems of major economies, not least due to a paradigm shift caused by the digital revolution. Whether smaller advanced economies such as Australia have undergone a similar shift or moved to fill the void left by other countries is unclear. This issue is important as it sets the long‐term growth path of these economies. I use Australian patent data and show that there has been a similar surge in Australia in patenting, mainly driven by medical and digital technologies. Australia, however, is showing more strength in a few niche areas. At the same time, the scope of patents, as one measure of basicness, narrowed over the years. This has been driven by private companies opting for applied research and also refocusing their innovation efforts away from chemical and material technologies and onto digital technologies and other applied areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Sasan Bakhtiari, 2023. "Changing Nature of Patents in Australia," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 56(3), pages 288-307, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ausecr:v:56:y:2023:i:3:p:288-307
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-8462.12521
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8462.12521
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-8462.12521?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Higham, Kyle & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Jaffe, Adam B., 2021. "Patent Quality: Towards a Systematic Framework for Analysis and Measurement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    2. Bedford, Anna & Ma, Le & Ma, Nelson & Vojvoda, Kristina, 2022. "Australian innovation: Patent database construction and first evidence," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    3. Joshua Lerner, 1994. "The Importance of Patent Scope: An Empirical Analysis," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 319-333, Summer.
    4. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Cédric Schneider, 2009. "Why Challenge the Ivory Tower? New Evidence on the Basicness of Academic Patents," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(4), pages 488-499, November.
    5. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
    6. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    7. Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson & Adam Jaffe, 1997. "University Versus Corporate Patents: A Window On The Basicness Of Invention," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 19-50.
    8. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Dernis, Hélène & Guellec, Dominique & Picci, Lucio & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2013. "The worldwide count of priority patents: A new indicator of inventive activity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 720-737.
    9. Simon Feeny & Mark Rogers, 2003. "Innovation and Performance: Benchmarking Australian Firms," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 36(3), pages 253-264, September.
    10. Kyriakos Drivas & Claire Economidou, 2013. "Government sponsorship and nature of patenting activity of US universities and corporations," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(8), pages 775-806, November.
    11. David Hirshleifer & Po-Hsuan Hsu & Dongmei Li, 2018. "Innovative Originality, Profitability, and Stock Returns," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(7), pages 2553-2605.
    12. Jaffe, Adam B, 1989. "Real Effects of Academic Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 957-970, December.
    13. Deborah Strumsky & José Lobo & Sander van der Leeuw, 2012. "Using patent technology codes to study technological change," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 267-286, April.
    14. John Cantwell & Felicia Fai, 1999. "Firms as the source of innovation and growth: the evolution of technological competence," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 331-366.
    15. Hu, Albert G.Z. & Zhang, Peng & Zhao, Lijing, 2017. "China as number one? Evidence from China's most recent patenting surge," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 107-119.
    16. Hicks, Diana & Breitzman, Tony & Olivastro, Dominic & Hamilton, Kimberly, 2001. "The changing composition of innovative activity in the US -- a portrait based on patent analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 681-703, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hain, Daniel S. & Jurowetzki, Roman & Buchmann, Tobias & Wolf, Patrick, 2022. "A text-embedding-based approach to measuring patent-to-patent technological similarity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    2. Hsu, David H. & Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Zhao, Qifeng, 2021. "Rich on paper? Chinese firms’ academic publications, patents, and market value," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    3. Ugo Rizzo & Nicolò Barbieri & Laura Ramaciotti & Demian Iannantuono, 2020. "The division of labour between academia and industry for the generation of radical inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 393-413, April.
    4. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Cédric Schneider, 2012. "The nexus between science and industry: evidence from faculty inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 755-776, October.
    5. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Cédric Schneider, 2011. "Commercializing academic research: the quality of faculty patenting," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 20(5), pages 1403-1437, October.
    6. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Cédric Schneider, 2009. "Why Challenge the Ivory Tower? New Evidence on the Basicness of Academic Patents," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(4), pages 488-499, November.
    7. Barbieri, Nicolò & Marzucchi, Alberto & Rizzo, Ugo, 2020. "Knowledge sources and impacts on subsequent inventions: Do green technologies differ from non-green ones?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    8. Malva, Antonio Della & Hussinger, Katrin, 2012. "Corporate science in the patent system: An analysis of the semiconductor technology," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 118-135.
    9. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    10. Olof Ejermo & Urban Gråsjö, 2014. "Accessibility to R&D: a re-examination of the consequences for invention and innovation," Chapters, in: Charlie Karlsson & Börje Johansson & Kiyoshi Kobayashi & Roger R. Stough (ed.), Knowledge, Innovation and Space, chapter 3, pages 51-79, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. RAITERI Emilio, 2015. "A time to nourish? Evaluating the impact of innovative public procurement on technological generality through patent data," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2015-05, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    12. Li, Xiaogang, 2020. "Innovation, market valuations, policy uncertainty and trade: Theory and evidence," ISU General Staff Papers 202001010800009179, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    13. Raiteri, Emilio, 2018. "A time to nourish? Evaluating the impact of public procurement on technological generality through patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 936-952.
    14. Hur, Wonchang & Oh, Junbyoung, 2021. "A man is known by the company he keeps?: A structural relationship between backward citation and forward citation of patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    15. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & David L. Rigby, 2015. "The geography and evolution of complex knowledge," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1502, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jan 2015.
    16. Hanne Peeters & Julie Callaert & Bart Looy, 2020. "Do firms profit from involving academics when developing technology?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 494-521, April.
    17. Cappelli, Riccardo & Corsino, Marco & Laursen, Keld & Torrisi, Salvatore, 2023. "Technological competition and patent strategy: Protecting innovation, preempting rivals and defending the freedom to operate," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    18. Chen, Yongmin & Jiang, Haiwei & Liang, Yousha & Pan, Shiyuan, 2022. "The impact of foreign direct investment on innovation: Evidence from patent filings and citations in China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 917-945.
    19. Liu, Weiwei & Tao, Yuan & Bi, Kexin, 2022. "Capturing information on global knowledge flows from patent transfers: An empirical study using USPTO patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(5).
    20. Adam B. Jaffe & Gaétan de Rassenfosse, 2017. "Patent citation data in social science research: Overview and best practices," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(6), pages 1360-1374, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ausecr:v:56:y:2023:i:3:p:288-307. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mimelau.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.