IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v83y2010i2d10.1007_s11192-009-0108-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring relatedness between technological fields

Author

Listed:
  • Si Hyung Joo

    (Seoul National University)

  • Yeonbae Kim

    (Seoul National University)

Abstract

Intensified technology convergence, increasing relatedness between technological fields, is a mega-trend in 21st century science and technology. However, scientometrics has been unsuccessful in identifying this techno-economic paradigm change. To address the limitations and validity problems of conventional measures of technology convergence, we introduce a multi-dimensional contingency table representation of technological field co-occurrence and a relatedness measure based on the Mantel–Haenszel common log odds ratio. We used Korean patent data to compare previous and proposed methods. Results show that the proposed method can increase understanding of the techno-economic paradigm change because it reveals significant changes in technological relatedness over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Si Hyung Joo & Yeonbae Kim, 2010. "Measuring relatedness between technological fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(2), pages 435-454, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:83:y:2010:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-009-0108-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-009-0108-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-009-0108-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-009-0108-9?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. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Katherine W. McCain, 1991. "Mapping economics through the journal literature: An experiment in journal cocitation analysis," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 42(4), pages 290-296, May.
    3. Arnold Verbeek & Koenraad Debackere & Marc Luwel & Petra Andries & Edwin Zimmermann & Filip Deleus, 2002. "Linking science to technology: Using bibliographic references in patents to build linkage schemes," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 54(3), pages 399-420, July.
    4. Tijssen, Robert J. W., 1992. "A quantitative assessment of interdisciplinary structures in science and technology: Co-classification analysis of energy research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 27-44, February.
    5. Mosahid Khan & Hélène Dernis, 2006. "Global Overview of Innovative Activities from the Patent Indicators Perspective," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2006/3, OECD Publishing.
    6. Iain M. Cockburn & Samuel Kortum & Scott Stern, 2002. "Are All Patent Examiners Equal? The Impact of Examiner Characteristics," NBER Working Papers 8980, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 1989. "Patents' Innovative Activity," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 373-376, Oct-Dec.
    8. Hariolf Grupp, 1998. "Foundations of the Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1390.
    9. Criscuolo, Paola & Verspagen, Bart, 2005. "Does it matter where patent citations come from? Inventor versus examiner citations in European patents," Research Memorandum 017, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    10. Eaton, Jonathan & Kortum, Samuel, 1996. "Trade in ideas Patenting and productivity in the OECD," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-4), pages 251-278, May.
    11. Healey, Peter & Rothman, Harry & Hoch, Paul K., 1986. "An experiment in science mapping for research planning," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 233-251, October.
    12. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 1989. "Patents as a Measure of Innovative Activity," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 171-180, August.
    13. Lionel Nesta & Pier Paolo Saviotti, 2005. "Coherence Of The Knowledge Base And The Firm'S Innovative Performance: Evidence From The U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 123-142, March.
    14. Loet Leydesdorff, 2008. "Patent classifications as indicators of intellectual organization," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 59(10), pages 1582-1597, August.
    15. Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B, 1989. "Patents as a Measure of Innovative Activity," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 171-180.
    16. Jesper W. Schneider & Pia Borlund, 2007. "Matrix comparison, Part 1: Motivation and important issues for measuring the resemblance between proximity measures or ordination results," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(11), pages 1586-1595, September.
    17. Martin Meyer, 2000. "What is Special about Patent Citations? Differences between Scientific and Patent Citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 49(1), pages 93-123, August.
    18. 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.
    19. David J. Teece & Richard Rumelt & Giovanni Dosi & Sidney Winter, 2000. "Understanding Corporate Coherence: Theory and Evidence," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 9, pages 264-293, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Engelsman, E. C. & van Raan, A. F. J., 1994. "A patent-based cartography of technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 1-26, January.
    21. Breschi, Stefano & Lissoni, Francesco & Malerba, Franco, 2003. "Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 69-87, January.
    22. Loet Leydesdorff & Liwen Vaughan, 2006. "Co‐occurrence matrices and their applications in information science: Extending ACA to the Web environment," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(12), pages 1616-1628, October.
    23. Lionel Nesta & Pier Paolo Saviotti, 2005. "Coherence of the Knowledge Base and the Firms’ Innovative Performance. Evidence from the Bio-Pharmaceutical Industry," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03417696, 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. Emanuele Pugliese & Lorenzo Napolitano & Andrea Zaccaria & Luciano Pietronero, 2019. "Coherent diversification in corporate technological portfolios," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-22, October.
    2. Jeff Alstott & Giorgio Triulzi & Bowen Yan & Jianxi Luo, 2017. "Mapping technology space by normalizing patent networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 443-479, January.
    3. 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).
    4. Maryann Feldman & Dieter Kogler & David Rigby, 2013. "rKnowledge: The Spatial Diffusion of rDNA Methods," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1311, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2013.
    5. Stefano Basilico & Holger Graf, 2023. "Bridging technologies in the regional knowledge space: measurement and evolution," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 1085-1124, September.
    6. Emanuele Pugliese & Lorenzo Napolitano & Andrea Zaccaria & Luciano Pietronero, 2017. "Coherent diversification in corporate technological portfolios," Papers 1707.02188, arXiv.org.
    7. Heo, Pil Sun & Lee, Duk Hee, 2019. "Evolution patterns and network structural characteristics of industry convergence," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 405-426.
    8. Eum, Wonsub & Lee, Jeong-Dong, 2019. "Role of production in fostering innovation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 84, pages 1-10.
    9. Gohar Feroz Khan & Junghoon Moon & Han Woo Park, 2011. "Network of the core: mapping and visualizing the core of scientific domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(3), pages 759-779, December.
    10. Woo Jin Lee & Won Kyung Lee & So Young Sohn, 2016. "Patent Network Analysis and Quadratic Assignment Procedures to Identify the Convergence of Robot Technologies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, October.
    11. Jingjing Zhang & Yan Yan & Jiancheng Guan, 2015. "Scientific relatedness in solar energy: a comparative study between the USA and China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1595-1613, February.
    12. Sungho Son & Nam-Wook Cho, 2020. "Technology Fusion Characteristics in the Solar Photovoltaic Industry of South Korea: A Patent Network Analysis Using IPC Co-Occurrence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-19, October.
    13. Byunghoon Kim & Gianluca Gazzola & Jae-Min Lee & Dohyun Kim & Kanghoe Kim & Myong K. Jeong, 2014. "Inter-cluster connectivity analysis for technology opportunity discovery," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 1811-1825, March.
    14. H. Simon & N. Sick, 2016. "Technological distance measures: new perspectives on nearby and far away," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1299-1320, June.
    15. Fusillo, Fabrizio, 2020. "Are Green Inventions really more complex? Evidence from European Patents," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 202015, University of Turin.
    16. Hofmann, Peter & Keller, Robert & Urbach, Nils, 2019. "Inter-technology relationship networks: Arranging technologies through text mining," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 202-213.
    17. Dieter F. Kogler & Jürgen Essletzbichler & David L. Rigby, 2017. "The evolution of specialization in the EU15 knowledge space," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 345-373.
    18. Basole, Rahul C. & Park, Hyunwoo & Barnett, Brandon C., 2015. "Coopetition and convergence in the ICT ecosystem," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 537-552.
    19. Chunjuan Luan & Zeyuan Liu & Xianwen Wang, 2013. "Divergence and convergence: technology-relatedness evolution in solar energy industry," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(2), pages 461-475, November.

    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. Loet Leydesdorff & Dieter Franz Kogler & Bowen Yan, 2017. "Mapping patent classifications: portfolio and statistical analysis, and the comparison of strengths and weaknesses," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1573-1591, September.
    2. Colombelli, Alessandra & Krafft, Jackie & Quatraro, Francesco, 2013. "Properties of knowledge base and firm survival: Evidence from a sample of French manufacturing firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(8), pages 1469-1483.
    3. Alessandra Colombelli & Francesco Quatraro, 2014. "The persistence of firms' knowledge base: a quantile approach to Italian data," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(7), pages 585-610, October.
    4. Mewes Lars & Broekel Tom, 2017. "Unrelated und Related Variety im Kontext öffentlicher F&E: empirische Evidenz aus deutschen Arbeitsmarktregionen," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 61(1), pages 23-37, May.
    5. Lorenz, Steffi, 2015. "Diversität und Verbundenheit der unternehmerischen Wissensbasis: Ein neuartiger Messansatz mit Indikatoren aus Innovationsprojekten," Discussion Papers on Strategy and Innovation 15-01, Philipps-University Marburg, Department of Technology and Innovation Management (TIM).
    6. Krafft Jackie & Quatraro Francesco & Colombelli Alessandra, 2011. "High Growth Firms and Technological Knowledge: Do gazelles follow exploration or exploitation strategies?," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201114, University of Turin.
    7. Antonelli, Cristiano & Krafft, Jackie & Quatraro, Francesco, 2010. "Recombinant knowledge and growth: The case of ICTs," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 50-69, March.
    8. Jackie Krafft & Francesco Quatraro & Pier Paolo Saviotti, 2011. "The knowledge-base evolution in biotechnology: a social network analysis," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 445-475.
    9. Barirani, Ahmad & Beaudry, Catherine & Agard, Bruno, 2017. "Can universities profit from general purpose inventions? The case of Canadian nanotechnology patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 271-283.
    10. Antonelli Cristiano & Colombelli Alessandra, 2013. "Knowledge cumulability and complementarity in the knowledge generation function," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201305, University of Turin.
    11. Nikulainen, Tuomo & Pajarinen, Mika & Palmberg, Christopher, 2005. "Patents and Technological Change - A Review with Focus on the FEPOCI Database," Discussion Papers 984, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    12. Ahmad Barirani & Bruno Agard & Catherine Beaudry, 2013. "Discovering and assessing fields of expertise in nanomedicine: a patent co-citation network perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1111-1136, March.
    13. Maryann Feldman & Dieter Kogler & David Rigby, 2013. "rKnowledge: The Spatial Diffusion of rDNA Methods," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1311, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2013.
    14. Jackie Krafft & Francesco Quatraro & Pier Saviotti, 2014. "Knowledge characteristics and the dynamics of technological alliances in pharmaceuticals: empirical evidence from Europe, US and Japan," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 587-622, July.
    15. Luigi Aldieri & Maxim Kotsemir & Concetto Paolo Vinci, 2020. "The role of environmental innovation through the technological proximity in the implementation of the sustainable development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 493-502, February.
    16. Angelica Sbardella & Andrea Zaccaria & Luciano Pietronero & Pasquale Scaramozzino, 2021. "Behind the Italian Regional Divide: An Economic Fitness and Complexity Perspective," LEM Papers Series 2021/30, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    17. Nakamura, Hiroko & Suzuki, Shinji & Sakata, Ichiro & Kajikawa, Yuya, 2015. "Knowledge combination modeling: The measurement of knowledge similarity between different technological domains," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 187-201.
    18. Burhan, Muqbil & Singh, Anil K. & Jain, Sudhir K., 2017. "Patents as proxy for measuring innovations: A case of changing patent filing behavior in Indian public funded research organizations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 181-190.
    19. Colombelli Alessandra & Quatraro Francesco, 2012. "Persistence of innovation and knowledge structure: Evidence from a sample of Italian firms," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201205, University of Turin.
    20. Francesco Lamperti & Franco Malerba & Roberto Mavilia & Giorgio Tripodi, 2019. "Does the Position in the Inter-sectoral Knowledge Space affect the International Competitiveness of Industries?," LEM Papers Series 2019/23, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.

    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:spr:scient:v:83:y:2010:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-009-0108-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.