IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v50y2021i2s0048733320302195.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Natural language processing to identify the creation and impact of new technologies in patent text: Code, data, and new measures

Author

Listed:
  • Arts, Sam
  • Hou, Jianan
  • Gomez, Juan Carlos

Abstract

We develop natural language processing techniques to identify the creation and impact of new technologies in the population of U.S. patents. We validate the new techniques and their improvement over traditional metrics based on patent classification and citations in two case-control studies. First, we collect patents linked to awards such as the Nobel prize and the National Inventor Hall of Fame. These patents likely cover radically new technologies with a major impact on technological progress and patenting. Second, we identify patents granted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office but simultaneously rejected by both the European and Japanese patent office. Such patents arguably lack novelty or cover small incremental advances over prior art and should have little impact on technological progress. We provide open access to code, data, and new measures for all utility patents granted by the USPTO up to May 2018 (see https://zenodo.org/record/3515985, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3515985).

Suggested Citation

  • Arts, Sam & Hou, Jianan & Gomez, Juan Carlos, 2021. "Natural language processing to identify the creation and impact of new technologies in patent text: Code, data, and new measures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:50:y:2021:i:2:s0048733320302195
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2020.104144
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733320302195
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104144?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juan Alcácer & Michelle Gittelman, 2006. "Patent Citations as a Measure of Knowledge Flows: The Influence of Examiner Citations," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 774-779, November.
    2. Mark A. Lemley & Carl Shapiro, 2005. "Probabilistic Patents," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 75-98, Spring.
    3. Brachtendorf, Lorenz & Gaessler, Fabian & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2020. "Truly Standard-Essential Patents? A Semantics-Based Analysis," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 265, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    4. Adam B. Jaffe & Benjamin F. Jones, 2015. "The Changing Frontier: Rethinking Science and Innovation Policy," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number jaff13-1, March.
    5. Schnitzer, Monika & Krieger, Joshua & Watzinger, Martin, 2019. "Standing on the shoulders of science," CEPR Discussion Papers 13766, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Bryan Kelly & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Matt Taddy, 2021. "Measuring Technological Innovation over the Long Run," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 303-320, September.
    7. Manuel Trajtenberg, 1990. "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 172-187, Spring.
    8. MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki & ZHU Chen, 2020. "Technological Competitiveness of China's Internet Platforms: Comparison of Google and Baidu Using Patent Text Information," Discussion papers 20045, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Lei, Zhen & Wright, Brian D., 2017. "Why weak patents? Testing the examiner ignorance hypothesis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 43-56.
    13. Leonid Kogan & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Noah Stoffman, 2017. "Technological Innovation, Resource Allocation, and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(2), pages 665-712.
    14. Sam Arts & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2020. "Taste for science, academic boundary spanning, and inventive performance of scientists and engineers in industry [Industry or academia, basic or applied? Career choices and earnings trajectories of," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(4), pages 917-933.
    15. Sarah Kaplan & Keyvan Vakili, 2015. "The double-edged sword of recombination in breakthrough innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(10), pages 1435-1457, October.
    16. Jaffe, Adam B. & Jones, Benjamin F. (ed.), 2015. "The Changing Frontier," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780226286723, December.
    17. Sam Arts & Lee Fleming, 2018. "Paradise of Novelty—Or Loss of Human Capital? Exploring New Fields and Inventive Output," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1074-1092, December.
    18. Russell J. Funk & Jason Owen-Smith, 2017. "A Dynamic Network Measure of Technological Change," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(3), pages 791-817, March.
    19. Antonin Bergeaud & Yoann Potiron & Juste Raimbault, 2017. "Classifying patents based on their semantic content," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-22, April.
    20. Sam Arts & Bruno Cassiman & Juan Carlos Gomez, 2018. "Text matching to measure patent similarity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 62-84, January.
    21. Mikko Packalen & Jay Bhattacharya, 2015. "New Ideas in Invention," NBER Working Papers 20922, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2001. "The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," NBER Working Papers 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. Petra Moser & Joerg Ohmstedt & Paul W. Rhode, 2018. "Patent Citations—An Analysis of Quality Differences and Citing Practices in Hybrid Corn," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 1926-1940, April.
    24. Jonathan H. Ashtor, 2019. "Investigating Cohort Similarity as an Ex Ante Alternative to Patent Forward Citations," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 848-880, December.
    25. 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.
    26. Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & F. M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1999. "Citation Frequency And The Value Of Patented Inventions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 511-515, August.
    27. Madeline K. Kneeland & Melissa A. Schilling & Barak S. Aharonson, 2020. "Exploring Uncharted Territory: Knowledge Search Processes in the Origination of Outlier Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 535-557, May.
    28. David Hirshleifer & Po-Hsuan Hsu & Dongmei Li, 2018. "Innovative Originality, Profitability, and Stock Returns," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(7), pages 2553-2605.
    29. Peter Thompson & Melanie Fox-Kean, 2005. "Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 465-466, March.
    30. Scherer, F. M. & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2000. "Technology policy for a world of skew-distributed outcomes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 559-566, April.
    31. Benjamin Balsmeier & Mohamad Assaf & Tyler Chesebro & Gabe Fierro & Kevin Johnson & Scott Johnson & Guan‐Cheng Li & Sonja Lück & Doug O'Reagan & Bill Yeh & Guangzheng Zang & Lee Fleming, 2018. "Machine learning and natural language processing on the patent corpus: Data, tools, and new measures," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 535-553, September.
    32. Jan M. Gerken & Martin G. Moehrle, 2012. "A new instrument for technology monitoring: novelty in patents measured by semantic patent analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 645-670, June.
    33. Peter Thompson & Melanie Fox-Kean, 2005. "Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 450-460, March.
    34. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Pellegrino, Gabriele & Raiteri, Emilio, 2024. "Do patents enable disclosure? Evidence from the invention secrecy act," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    35. Adam B. Jaffe & Michael S. Fogarty & Bruce A. Banks, 1998. "Evidence from Patents and Patent Citations on the Impact of NASA and Other Federal Labs on Commercial Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 183-205, June.
    36. Alessandro Iaria & Carlo Schwarz & Fabian Waldinger, 2018. "Frontier Knowledge and Scientific Production: Evidence from the Collapse of International Science," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(2), pages 927-991.
    37. David Argente & Salomé Baslandze & Douglas Hanley & Sara Moreira, 2020. "Patents to Products: Product Innovation and Firm Dynamics," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2020-4, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    38. Picard, Pierre M. & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2013. "Patent office governance and patent examination quality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 14-25.
    39. Michael D. Frakes & Melissa F. Wasserman, 2017. "Is the Time Allocated to Review Patent Applications Inducing Examiners to Grant Invalid Patents? Evidence from Microlevel Application Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(3), pages 550-563, July.
    40. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    41. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    42. Carpenter, Mark P. & Narin, Francis & Woolf, Patricia, 1981. "Citation rates to technologically important patents," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 160-163, October.
    43. Reitzig, Markus, 2004. "Improving patent valuations for management purposes--validating new indicators by analyzing application rationales," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 939-957, September.
    44. Nagaoka, Sadao & Motohashi, Kazuyuki & Goto, Akira, 2010. "Patent Statistics as an Innovation Indicator," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1083-1127, Elsevier.
    45. Charles A. W. deGrazia & Jesse P. Frumkin & Nicholas A. Pairolero, 2020. "Embracing invention similarity for the measurement of vertically overlapping claims," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 113-146, February.
    46. Jeffrey Kuhn & Kenneth Younge & Alan Marco, 2020. "Patent citations reexamined," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(1), pages 109-132, March.
    47. Dahlin, Kristina B. & Behrens, Dean M., 2005. "When is an invention really radical?: Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 717-737, June.
    48. Joshua Krieger & Danielle Li & Dimitris Papanikolaou, 2022. "Missing Novelty in Drug Development," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 35(2), pages 636-679.
    49. Righi, Cesare & Simcoe, Timothy, 2019. "Patent examiner specialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 137-148.
    50. Kristina Dahlin & Deans M. Behrens, 2005. "When is an invention really radical? Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Post-Print hal-00480416, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kok, Holmer & Faems, Dries & de Faria, Pedro, 2022. "Pork Barrel or Barrel of Gold? Examining the performance implications of earmarking in public R&D grants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    2. Nils Grashof & Holger Graf, 2023. "Universities that matter for regional knowledge base renewal - the role of multilevel embeddedness," Jena Economics Research Papers 2023-009, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    3. Pezzoni, Michele & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Visentin, Fabiana, 2022. "How fast is this novel technology going to be a hit? Antecedents predicting follow-on inventions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    4. Max Nathan & Anna Rosso, 2017. "Innovative events," Development Working Papers 429, Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano, University of Milano, revised 08 Apr 2019.
    5. Hong, Suckwon & Kim, Juram & Woo, Han-Gyun & Kim, Young-Choon & Lee, Changyong, 2022. "Screening ideas in the early stages of technology development: A word2vec and convolutional neural network approach," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    6. Christian Fons-Rosen & Pau Roldan-Blanco & Tom Schmitz, 2022. "The Effects of Startup Acquisitions on Innovation and Economic Growth," Working Papers 944, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    7. Wei Du & Yibo Wang & Wei Xu & Jian Ma, 2021. "A personalized recommendation system for high-quality patent trading by leveraging hybrid patent analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9369-9391, December.
    8. Matthias Niggli & Christian Rutzer, 2023. "Digital technologies, technological improvement rates, and innovations “Made in Switzerland”," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Springer;Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, vol. 159(1), pages 1-31, December.
    9. Plantec, Quentin & Le Masson, Pascal & Weil, Benoît, 2021. "Impact of knowledge search practices on the originality of inventions: A study in the oil & gas industry through dynamic patent analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    10. Mario Daniele Amore & Mariano Mastrogiorgio, 2022. "Technological Entry, Redeployability, and Firm Value," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(7), pages 1688-1722, November.
    11. Jiang, Cuiqing & Zhou, Yiru & Chen, Bo, 2023. "Mining semantic features in patent text for financial distress prediction," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    12. Jan Malek & Melissa Newham & Jo Seldeslachts & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2024. "Acquiring R&D projects: who, when, and what? Evidence from antidiabetic drug development," Working Papers of Department of Management, Strategy and Innovation, Leuven 735739, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Management, Strategy and Innovation, Leuven.
    13. Nathan, Max & Rosso, Anna, 2022. "Innovative events: product launches, innovation and firm performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    14. Yang, Zaoli & Wu, Qingyang & Venkatachalam, K. & Li, Yuchen & Xu, Bing & Trojovský, Pavel, 2022. "Topic identification and sentiment trends in Weibo and WeChat content related to intellectual property in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    15. Sam Arts & Nicola Melluso & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2023. "Beyond Citations: Measuring Novel Scientific Ideas and their Impact in Publication Text," Papers 2309.16437, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    16. Nils Grashof & Alexander Kopka, 2023. "Artificial intelligence and radical innovation: an opportunity for all companies?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 771-797, August.
    17. Sajad Ashouri & Anne-Laure Mention & Kosmas X. Smyrnios, 2021. "Anticipation and analysis of industry convergence using patent-level indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5727-5758, July.
    18. Doblinger, Claudia & Surana, Kavita & Li, Deyu & Hultman, Nathan & Anadón, Laura Díaz, 2022. "How do global manufacturing shifts affect long-term clean energy innovation? A study of wind energy suppliers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    19. Chen, Wei & Yan, Yan, 2023. "New components and combinations: The perspective of the internal collaboration networks of scientific teams," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).
    20. Waßenhoven, Anna & Rennings, Michael & Laibach, Natalie & Bröring, Stefanie, 2023. "What constitutes a “Key Enabling Technology” for transition processes: Insights from the bioeconomy's technological landscape," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    21. Lee, Honggi, 2023. "The heterogeneous effects of patent scope on licensing propensity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(3).
    22. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Jungkyu Suh, 2022. "Science and the Market for Technology," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(10), pages 7176-7201, October.
    23. Puccetti, Giovanni & Giordano, Vito & Spada, Irene & Chiarello, Filippo & Fantoni, Gualtiero, 2023. "Technology identification from patent texts: A novel named entity recognition method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PB).
    24. Kang, Byeongwoo & Bekkers, Rudi, 2022. "The determinants of parallel invention : Measuring the role of information sharing and personal interaction between inventors," IIR Working Paper 22-06, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.

    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. 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.
    2. 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).
    3. Jonathan H. Ashtor, 2019. "Investigating Cohort Similarity as an Ex Ante Alternative to Patent Forward Citations," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 848-880, December.
    4. 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).
    5. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara DiGuardo, 2017. "Sustainability of patent-based competitive advantage in the U.S. communications services industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 1334-1361, December.
    6. Biggi, Gianluca & Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Benfenati, Emilio, 2022. "Patent Toxicity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
      • Gianluca Biggi & Elisa Giuliani & Arianna Martinelli, 2020. "Patent Toxicity," LEM Papers Series 2020/33, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    7. 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).
    8. Michele Cincera & Ela Ince, 2019. "Types of Innovation and Firm performance," Working Papers TIMES² 2019-032, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    9. Verluise, Cyril & Cristelli, Gabriele & Higham, Kyle & de Rassenfosse, Gaetan, 2020. "The Missing 15 Percent of Patent Citations," SocArXiv x78ys, Center for Open Science.
    10. Nagaoka, Sadao & Motohashi, Kazuyuki & Goto, Akira, 2010. "Patent Statistics as an Innovation Indicator," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1083-1127, Elsevier.
    11. Forman, Chris & van Zeebroeck, Nicolas, 2019. "Digital technology adoption and knowledge flows within firms: Can the Internet overcome geographic and technological distance?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    12. Ron Boschma & Ernest Miguelez & Rosina Moreno & Diego B. Ocampo-Corrales, 2021. "Technological breakthroughs in European regions: the role of related and unrelated combinations," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2118, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jun 2021.
    13. Yuandi Wang & Xiongfeng Pan & Yantai Chen & Xin Gu, 2013. "Do references in transferred patent documents signal learning opportunities for the receiving firms?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 731-752, May.
    14. Sarah Kaplan & Keyvan Vakili, 2015. "The double-edged sword of recombination in breakthrough innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(10), pages 1435-1457, October.
    15. Sun, Bixuan & Kolesnikov, Sergey & Goldstein, Anna & Chan, Gabriel, 2021. "A dynamic approach for identifying technological breakthroughs with an application in solar photovoltaics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    16. Nemet, Gregory F., 2012. "Inter-technology knowledge spillovers for energy technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1259-1270.
    17. Michael J. Andrews, 2021. "Historical patent data: A practitioner's guide," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 368-397, May.
    18. A. Fronzetti Colladon & B. Guardabascio & F. Venturini, 2023. "A new mapping of technological interdependence," Papers 2308.00014, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    19. Petra Moser & Joerg Ohmstedt & Paul W. Rhode, 2018. "Patent Citations—An Analysis of Quality Differences and Citing Practices in Hybrid Corn," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 1926-1940, April.
    20. Nemet, Gregory F. & Johnson, Evan, 2012. "Do important inventions benefit from knowledge originating in other technological domains?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 190-200.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Natural language processing; Patent; Novelty; Impact; Breakthrough; Award;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    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:eee:respol:v:50:y:2021:i:2:s0048733320302195. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.