IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/cepnwp/hal-03059466.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Firm Patenting and Types of innovation in Least Developed Countries. An Empirical Investigation on Patenting Determinants

Author

Listed:
  • Mounir Amdaoud

    (CEPN - Centre d'Economie de l'Université Paris Nord - LABEX ICCA - UP13 - Université Paris 13 - Université Sorbonne Nouvelle - Paris 3 - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UPCité - Université Paris Cité - Université Sorbonne Paris Nord - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - Université Sorbonne Paris Nord)

  • Christian Le Bas

Abstract

This paper aims to account for the determinants of firm patenting behaviour in developing countries. The literature has accumulated numerous evidence and trends as far as developed countries' firm patenting is concerned. However, only a small amount of information concerning least developed countries' firm patenting is available. With the present study we wish to fill this gap creatively. The core assumption of this paper is that the occurrence of firm patenting is positively related with innovation strategies. As a result we place the emphasis on the diverse ways to innovate and account for the effects on a firm's probability to patent. Our findings indicate that despite the weaknesses of their patenting system in least developed countries (LDCs) there is no huge gap between the determinants of patenting behaviour from firms in these countries, and those the literature considers to be important for developed countries firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Mounir Amdaoud & Christian Le Bas, 2020. "Firm Patenting and Types of innovation in Least Developed Countries. An Empirical Investigation on Patenting Determinants," CEPN Working Papers hal-03059466, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:cepnwp:hal-03059466
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-03059466
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-03059466/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gaétan Rassenfosse, 2012. "How SMEs exploit their intellectual property assets: evidence from survey data," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 437-452, September.
    2. Mohieddine Rahmouni, 2014. "Perception des obstacles aux activités d'innovation dans les entreprises tunisiennes," Revue d’économie du développement, De Boeck Université, vol. 22(3), pages 69-98.
    3. Kim, Yee Kyoung & Lee, Keun & Park, Walter G. & Choo, Kineung, 2012. "Appropriate intellectual property protection and economic growth in countries at different levels of development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 358-375.
    4. Christian Le Bas & Nicolas Poussing, 2014. "Are Complex Innovators More Persistent Than Single Innovators? An Empirical Analysis Of Innovation Persistence Drivers," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 1-21.
    5. Tavassoli, Sam & Karlsson, Charlie, 2015. "Persistence of various types of innovation analyzed and explained," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1887-1901.
    6. Charlie Karlsson & Sam Tavassoli, 2016. "Innovation strategies of firms: What strategies and why?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(6), pages 1483-1506, December.
    7. Petr Hanel, 2008. "The Use Of Intellectual Property Rights And Innovation By Manufacturing Firms In Canada," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 285-309.
    8. da Motta e Albuquerque, Eduardo, 2000. "Domestic patents and developing countries: arguments for their study and data from Brazil (1980-1995)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1047-1060, December.
    9. Kenneth E. Knight, 1967. "A Descriptive Model of the Intra-Firm Innovation Process," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40, pages 478-478.
    10. Bronwyn H. Hall & Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers & Vania Sena, 2013. "The importance (or not) of patents to UK firms," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 603-629, July.
    11. Harabi, Najib, 1995. "Appropriability of technical innovations an empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 981-992, November.
    12. Lall, Sanjaya, 2003. "Indicators of the relative importance of IPRs in developing countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1657-1680, October.
    13. Julio Raffo & Stephane Lhuillery & Luis Miotti, 2008. "Northern and southern innovativity: a comparison across European and Latin American countries," The European Journal of Development Research, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 219-239.
    14. Rahmouni, Mohieddine & Ayadi, Mohamed & YIldIzoglu, Murat, 2010. "Characteristics of innovating firms in Tunisia: The essential role of external knowledge sources," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 181-196, August.
    15. Rita Almeida & Ana Margarida Fernandes, 2008. "Openness and Technological Innovations in Developing Countries: Evidence from Firm-Level Surveys," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(5), pages 701-727.
    16. Crespi, Gustavo & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2012. "Innovation and Productivity: Evidence from Six Latin American Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 273-290.
    17. repec:adr:anecst:y:1998:i:49-50:p:11 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Bronwyn Hall & Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers & Vania Sena, 2014. "The Choice between Formal and Informal Intellectual Property: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(2), pages 375-423, June.
    19. repec:cup:jfinqa:v:46:y:2011:i:06:p:1545-1580_00 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
    21. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Tandon, Pankaj, 1982. "Optimal Patents with Compulsory Licensing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(3), pages 470-486, June.
    23. Owen-Smith, Jason & Powell, Walter W, 2001. "To Patent or Not: Faculty Decisions and Institutional Success at Technology Transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 99-114, January.
    24. Guellec, Dominique & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2007. "The Economics of the European Patent System: IP Policy for Innovation and Competition," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199216987.
    25. Ove Granstrand, 1999. "The Economics and Management of Intellectual Property," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1651.
    26. Pierre Mohnen, 2009. "Introduction and overview of the symposium issue: innovations and intellectual property values," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 121-127, April.
    27. Mohieddine Rahmouni & Mohamed Ayadi & Murat Yildizoglu, 2010. "Characteristics of innivation firms in Tunisia: the essential role of external knowledge sources," Post-Print hal-00546653, HAL.
    28. Mohieddine Rahmouni & Mohamed Ayadi & Murat Yildizoglu, 2010. "Characteristics of innovating manufacturing firms in Tunisia: the essential role of external knowledge sources," Post-Print hal-00779027, HAL.
    29. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    30. Emmanuel Duguet & Isabelle Kabla, 1998. "Appropriation Strategy and the Motivations to Use the Patent System: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level in French Manufacturing," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 49-50, pages 289-327.
    31. Martin Andersson & Hans Lööf, 2012. "Small business innovation: firm level evidence from Sweden," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 732-754, October.
    32. Walid Hadhri & Rigas Arvanitis & Hatem M’Henni, 2016. "Determinants of innovation activities in small and open economies: the Lebanese business sector," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(3), pages 77-107.
    33. Blind, Knut & Edler, Jakob & Frietsch, Rainer & Schmoch, Ulrich, 2006. "Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 655-672, June.
    34. Keupp, Marcus Matthias & Friesike, Sascha & von Zedtwitz, Maximilian, 2012. "How do foreign firms patent in emerging economies with weak appropriability regimes? Archetypes and motives," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1422-1439.
    35. Ayyagari, Meghana & Demirgüç-Kunt, Asli & Maksimovic, Vojislav, 2011. "Firm Innovation in Emerging Markets: The Role of Finance, Governance, and Competition," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(6), pages 1545-1580, December.
    36. Reddy, N. Mohan & Zhao, Liming, 1990. "International technology transfer: A review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 285-307, August.
    37. Alessandra Canepa & Paul Stoneman, 2008. "Financial constraints to innovation in the UK: evidence from CIS2 and CIS3," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 60(4), pages 711-730, October.
    38. Amara, Nabil & Landry, Réjean & Traoré, Namatié, 2008. "Managing the protection of innovations in knowledge-intensive business services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1530-1547, October.
    39. Zouhour Karray & Mohamed Kriaa, 2009. "Innovation and R&D Investment of Tunisian Firms: A Two-Regime Model with Selectivity Correction," Working Papers 484, Economic Research Forum, revised Apr 2009.
    40. Flaig, Gebhard & Stadler, Manfred, 1994. "Success Breeds Success. The Dynamics of the Innovation Process," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 55-68.
    41. Jan Fagerberg & Martin Srholec & Bart Verspagen, 2010. "The Role of Innovation in Development," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 1(2).
    42. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    43. Sanghoon Ahn & Bronwyn H. Hall & Keun Lee (ed.), 2014. "Intellectual Property for Economic Development," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15464.
    44. Chudnovsky, Daniel & Lopez, Andres & Pupato, German, 2006. "Innovation and productivity in developing countries: A study of Argentine manufacturing firms' behavior (1992-2001)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 266-288, March.
    45. Suzanne Scotchmer, 1991. "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 29-41, Winter.
    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. Messaoud Zouikri & Mounir Amdaoud, 2018. "Compétences externes et innovation: le cas des firmes de l'industrie manufacturière algérienne," EconomiX Working Papers 2018-37, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    2. Barros, Henrique M., 2021. "Neither at the cutting edge nor in a patent-friendly environment: Appropriating the returns from innovation in a less developed economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    3. Thomä, Jörg & Bizer, Kilian, 2013. "To protect or not to protect? Modes of appropriability in the small enterprise sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 35-49.
    4. Mounir Amdaoud & Christian Bas, 2021. "Patent Determinants for SMEs in Least-Developed Countries: How Enterprise Size Makes the Difference," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(2), pages 943-961, June.
    5. Tomasz Kijek, 2016. "Intellectual Property Rights And Appropriability Of Innovation Capital: Evidence From Polish Manufacturing Firms," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 11(2), pages 387-399, June.
    6. Francesco Chirico & Giuseppe Criaco & Massimo Baù & Lucia Naldi & Luis R. Gomez-Mejia & Josip Kotlar, 2020. "To patent or not to patent: That is the question. Intellectual property protection in family firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 44(2), pages 339-367, March.
    7. Sara Amoroso & Albert N. Link, 2021. "Intellectual property protection mechanisms and the characteristics of founding teams," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7329-7350, September.
    8. Thomä Jörg & Zimmermann Volker, 2013. "Knowledge Protection Practices in Innovating SMEs," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 233(5-6), pages 691-717, October.
    9. Capponi, Giovanna & Criscuolo, Paola & Martinelli, Arianna & Nuvolari, Alessandro, 2019. "Profiting from innovation: Evidence from a survey of Queen's Awards winners," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 155-169.
    10. Crass, Dirk & Garcia Valero, Francisco & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2016. "Protecting innovation through patents and trade secrets: Determinants and performance impacts for firms with a single innovation," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    11. Sanghoon Ahn & Bronwyn H. Hall & Keun Lee (ed.), 2014. "Intellectual Property for Economic Development," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15464.
    12. Bernhard Ganglmair & Imke Reimers, 2019. "Visibility of Technology and Cumulative Innovation: Evidence from Trade Secrets Laws," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2019_119v1, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    13. Crass, Dirk & Valero, Francisco Garcia & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2019. "Protecting Innovation Through Patents and Trade Secrets: Evidence for Firms with a Single Innovation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 117-156.
    14. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Bart Leten, 2020. "How Valuable are Patent Blocking Strategies?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 56(3), pages 409-434, May.
    15. Insu Cho & Heejun Park & Joseph Kim, 2012. "The moderating effect of innovation protection mechanisms on the competitiveness of service firms," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 6(3), pages 369-386, September.
    16. Katrin Hussinger, 2006. "Is Silence Golden? Patents Versus Secrecy At The Firm Level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(8), pages 735-752.
    17. Bronwyn H. Hall & Vania Sena, 2017. "Appropriability mechanisms, innovation, and productivity: evidence from the UK," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1-2), pages 42-62, February.
    18. Bos, Brenda & Broekhuizen, Thijs L.J. & de Faria, Pedro, 2015. "A dynamic view on secrecy management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2619-2627.
    19. Blind, Knut & Filipović, Ellen & Lazina, Luisa K., 2022. "Motives to Publish, to Patent and to Standardize: An Explorative Study Based on Individual Engineers’ Assessments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    20. Jérôme Danguy & Gaetan de Rassenfosse & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2014. "On the origins of the worldwide surge in patenting: an industry perspective on the R&D–patent relationship," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 23(2), pages 535-572.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Patent; appropriation; innovation; developing economies. JEL Codes : O31; O32; O33; O34;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:cepnwp:hal-03059466. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.