IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v55y2023i60p7178-7193.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Blockchain innovation and firm’s financial performance: patent analysis based on firm-level information

Author

Listed:
  • JaeYeon Sim
  • Kyungmyung Jang

Abstract

This research makes an initial attempt to analyse the effects of blockchain patents on a firm’s financial performance. Blockchain technology has received increased attention since bitcoin prices skyrocketed in 2016, and applications for blockchain patents rapidly increased thereafter. Prior studies have documented that blockchain innovation could add economic value to firms, but without robust empirical analyses. Therefore, this study provides the first empirical approach to determine the effect of blockchain patents on a firm’s financial performance. We find that a firm’s blockchain patents are positively associated with firm value and firm performance. Moreover, the association between a firm’s blockchain patents and firm value or performance is more pronounced in markets with higher competition. This study provides theoretical and practical implications. The empirical results of this study lend credence to the argument that blockchain patent contributes to real value creation. We also add to blockchain literature and extend the literature discussing environmental uncertainty. Moreover, this study suggests useful insights for firms that consider developing blockchain patents and implies the signalling effect of blockchain patent in the capital market.

Suggested Citation

  • JaeYeon Sim & Kyungmyung Jang, 2023. "Blockchain innovation and firm’s financial performance: patent analysis based on firm-level information," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(60), pages 7178-7193, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:55:y:2023:i:60:p:7178-7193
    DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2023.2166665
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00036846.2023.2166665
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00036846.2023.2166665?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. Ernst, Holger, 2001. "Patent applications and subsequent changes of performance: evidence from time-series cross-section analyses on the firm level," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 143-157, January.
    2. García-Manjón, Juan V. & Romero-Merino, M. Elena, 2012. "Research, development, and firm growth. Empirical evidence from European top R&D spending firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1084-1092.
    3. 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.
    4. Hausman, Jerry & McFadden, Daniel, 1984. "Specification Tests for the Multinomial Logit Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(5), pages 1219-1240, September.
    5. Justin J. P. Jansen & Frans A. J. Van Den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2006. "Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1661-1674, November.
    6. Urquhart, Andrew, 2018. "What causes the attention of Bitcoin?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 40-44.
    7. James Bessen & Robert M. Hunt, 2007. "An Empirical Look at Software Patents," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 157-189, March.
    8. Eleftherios Sapsalis & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2007. "The Institutional Sources Of Knowledge And The Value Of Academic Patents," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 139-157.
    9. Anandhi S. Bharadwaj & Sundar G. Bharadwaj & Benn R. Konsynski, 1999. "Information Technology Effects on Firm Performance as Measured by Tobin's q," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(7), pages 1008-1024, July.
    10. Blind, Knut & Cremers, Katrin & Mueller, Elisabeth, 2009. "The influence of strategic patenting on companies' patent portfolios," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 428-436, March.
    11. Natarajan Balasubramanian & Jagadeesh Sivadasan, 2011. "What Happens When Firms Patent? New Evidence from U.S. Economic Census Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(1), pages 126-146, February.
    12. Robert G. Fichman, 2004. "Real Options and IT Platform Adoption: Implications for Theory and Practice," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 132-154, June.
    13. Neil A. Morgan & Douglas W. Vorhies & Charlotte H. Mason, 2009. "Market orientation, marketing capabilities, and firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(8), pages 909-920, August.
    14. Kim, Yee Kyoung & Oh, Jun Byoung, 2017. "Examination workloads, grant decision bias and examination quality of patent office," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 1005-1019.
    15. Birger Wernerfelt, 1984. "A resource‐based view of the firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 171-180, April.
    16. Guilhem Bascle, 2008. "Controlling for endogeneity with instrumental variables in strategic management research," Post-Print hal-00576795, HAL.
    17. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2011. "The puzzle of patent value indicators," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 33-62.
    18. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie, 2011. "Entry and Patenting in the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 915-933, May.
    19. Florian Schuett, 2013. "Patent quality and incentives at the patent office," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 44(2), pages 313-336, June.
    20. Ling Xue & Gautam Ray & Bin Gu, 2011. "Environmental Uncertainty and IT Infrastructure Governance: A Curvilinear Relationship," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(2), pages 389-399, June.
    21. Arellano, Manuel & Bover, Olympia, 1995. "Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 29-51, July.
    22. Junbyoung Oh & Yee Kyoung Kim, 2017. "Examination workloads, grant decision bias and examination quality of patent office," Inha University IBER Working Paper Series 2017-3, Inha University, Institute of Business and Economic Research, revised Apr 2017.
    23. Emma L. Schultz & David T. Tan & Kathleen D. Walsh, 2010. "Endogeneity and the corporate governance - performance relation," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 35(2), pages 145-163, August.
    24. Amal Hamrouni & Rim Boussaada & Nadia Ben Farhat Toumi, 2019. "Corporate social responsibility disclosure and debt financing," Journal of Applied Accounting Research, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 20(4), pages 394-415, May.
    25. Hu, Yang & Hou, Yang (Greg) & Oxley, Les & Corbet, Shaen, 2021. "Does blockchain patent-development influence Bitcoin risk?," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    26. Blundell, Richard & Bond, Stephen, 1998. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 115-143, August.
    27. Francesca Cornelli & Mark Schankerman, 1999. "Patent Renewals and R&D Incentives," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(2), pages 197-213, Summer.
    28. Sunghun Chung & Animesh Animesh & Kunsoo Han & Alain Pinsonneault, 2019. "Software Patents and Firm Value: A Real Options Perspective on the Role of Innovation Orientation and Environmental Uncertainty," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 1073-1097, September.
    29. Devi R. Gnyawali & Weiguo Fan & James Penner, 2010. "Competitive Actions and Dynamics in the Digital Age: An Empirical Investigation of Social Networking Firms," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 594-613, September.
    30. Giovanni Cerulli & Giovanni Marin & Eleonora Pierucci & Bianca Potì, 2022. "Do company-owned academic patents influence firm performance? Evidence from the Italian industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 242-269, February.
    31. Amal Hamrouni & Rim Boussaada & Nadia Ben Farhat Toumi, 2019. "Corporate social responsibility disclosure and debt financing," Post-Print hal-02521353, HAL.
    32. 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.
    33. Lara Agostini & Roberto Filippini & Anna Nosella, 2016. "Protecting intellectual property to enhance firm performance: does it work for SMEs?," Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 96-105, February.
    34. Fei Gao & De-Li Chen & Min-Hang Weng & Ru-Yuan Yang, 2021. "Revealing Development Trends in Blockchain-Based 5G Network Technologies through Patent Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-21, February.
    35. Sanjeev Bhojraj & Charles M. C. Lee & Derek K. Oler, 2003. "What's My Line? A Comparison of Industry Classification Schemes for Capital Market Research," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(5), pages 745-774, December.
    36. Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen, 2002. "Patents, Real Options and Firm Performance," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(478), pages 97-116, March.
    37. repec:eme:jaar00:jaar-01-2018-0020 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Kang, Martin & Miller, Andrew & Jang, Kyungmyung & Kim, Horim, 2022. "Firm performance and information security technology intellectual property," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    2. Horim Kim & Jaeyoung Kim & Kyungmyung Jang & Jaemin Han, 2020. "Are the Blockchain-Based Patents Sustainable for Increasing Firm Value?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, February.
    3. Sunghun Chung & Animesh Animesh & Kunsoo Han & Alain Pinsonneault, 2019. "Software Patents and Firm Value: A Real Options Perspective on the Role of Innovation Orientation and Environmental Uncertainty," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 1073-1097, September.
    4. 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).
    5. Dante I. Leyva-de la Hiz & J. Alberto Aragon-Correa & Andrew G. Earle, 2022. "Innovating for Good in Opportunistic Contexts: The Case for Firms’ Environmental Divergence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 176(4), pages 705-721, April.
    6. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2011. "The puzzle of patent value indicators," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 33-62.
    7. Christodoulou, Demetris & Lev, Baruch & Ma, Le, 2018. "The productivity of Chinese patents: The role of business area and ownership type," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 107-124.
    8. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2007. "Patents only live twice: a patent survival analysis in Europe," Working Papers CEB 07-028.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    9. Zhai, Zhe & Ghosal, Vivek, 2022. "Internationalization of innovation and firm performance in the pharmaceutical industry," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 882-905.
    10. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2009. "From patent renewals to applications survival: do portfolio management strategies play a role in patent length?," Working Papers CEB 09-028.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    11. Benjamin Barber & Luis Diestre, 2022. "Can firms avoid tough patent examiners through examiner‐shopping? Strategic timing of citations in USPTO patent applications," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(9), pages 1854-1871, September.
    12. Cédric Gossart & Altay Özaygen & Müge Özman, 2020. "Are Litigated Patents More Valuable? The Case of LEDs," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(3), pages 825-844, September.
    13. Grimaldi, Michele & Cricelli, Livio & Di Giovanni, Martina & Rogo, Francesco, 2015. "The patent portfolio value analysis: A new framework to leverage patent information for strategic technology planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 286-302.
    14. Appio, Francesco Paolo & Baglieri, Daniela & Cesaroni, Fabrizio & Spicuzza, Lucia & Donato, Alessia, 2022. "Patent design strategies: Empirical evidence from European patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    15. Moaniba, Igam M. & Su, Hsin-Ning & Lee, Pei-Chun, 2019. "On the drivers of innovation: Does the co-evolution of technological diversification and international collaboration matter?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    16. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2022. "Assessing the Impact of Patent Attributes on the Value of Discrete and Complex Innovations," Papers 2208.07222, arXiv.org.
    17. Niron Hashai & Sarit Markovich, 2017. "Market Entry by High Technology Startups: The Effect of Competition Level and Startup Innovativeness," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 141-160, September.
    18. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2021. "Identification of “Valuable” Technologies via Patent Statistics in India: An Analysis Based on Renewal Information," BASE University Working Papers 13/2021, BASE University, Bengaluru, India.
    19. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2017. "Does innovation respond to climate change? Empirical evidence from patents and greenhouse gas emissions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 49-62.
    20. Nicolas van Zeebroeck & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "Filing strategies and patent value," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 539-561, February.

    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:taf:applec:v:55:y:2023:i:60:p:7178-7193. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

    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.