IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01904734.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comment l'analyse des modèles de l'invention dans le droit de la propriété intellectuelle permet de caractériser des régimes de conception et des stratégies d'organisation des connaissances

Author

Listed:
  • Chipten Valibhay

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Pascal Le Masson

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Benoit Weil

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Chipten Valibhay & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2018. "Comment l'analyse des modèles de l'invention dans le droit de la propriété intellectuelle permet de caractériser des régimes de conception et des stratégies d'organisation des connaissances," Post-Print hal-01904734, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01904734
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://minesparis-psl.hal.science/hal-01904734v2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://minesparis-psl.hal.science/hal-01904734v2/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adam B. Jaffe & Josh Lerner, 2006. "Innovation and its Discontents," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 6, pages 27-66, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2010. "La conception innovante comme mode d'extension et de régénération de la conception réglée : les expériences oubliées aux origines des bureaux d'études," Post-Print hal-00696132, HAL.
    3. W. Rupert Maclaurin, 1953. "The Sequence from Invention to Innovation and Its Relation to Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 67(1), pages 97-111.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Olga Kokshagina & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2017. "Should we manage the process of inventing? Designing for patentability," Post-Print hal-01481889, HAL.
    7. Griliches, Zvi, 1998. "R&D and Productivity," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226308869, December.
    8. 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.
    9. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    10. Petra Moser & Tom Nicholas, 2004. "Was Electricity a General Purpose Technology? Evidence from Historical Patent Citations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(2), pages 388-394, May.
    11. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2005. "Exploring the Patent Explosion," Springer Books, in: Albert N. Link & F. M. Scherer (ed.), Essays in Honor of Edwin Mansfield, pages 195-208, Springer.
    12. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril98-1, May.
    13. 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.
    14. Vernon W. Ruttan, 1959. "Usher and Schumpeter on Invention, Innovation, and Technological Change," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 73(4), pages 596-606.
    15. Basberg, Bjorn L., 1987. "Patents and the measurement of technological change: A survey of the literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2-4), pages 131-141, August.
    16. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    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. Chipten Valibhay & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2019. "The 'Distinctive Capacity': Managing the invention process by managing the prior art," Post-Print hal-02095821, HAL.

    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. Chipten Valibhay & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2019. "The 'Distinctive Capacity': Managing the invention process by managing the prior art," Post-Print hal-02095821, HAL.
    2. Luigi Orsi & Andrea Ganzaroli & Ivan De Noni & Federica Marelli, 2016. "Evaluating post-acquisition technological performance by measuring absorption-related invention," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 20(1/2), pages 117-146.
    3. Thomas Bolli & Martin Woerter, 2013. "Technological Diversification and Innovation Performance," KOF Working papers 13-336, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    4. Soumyananda Dinda, 2018. "Production technology and carbon emission: long-run relation with short-run dynamics," Journal of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 106-121, January.
    5. Hana Kim & Eungdo Kim, 2018. "How an Open Innovation Strategy for Commercialization Affects the Firm Performance of Korean Healthcare IT SMEs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-14, July.
    6. John Van Reenen & Rupert Harrison & Rachel Griffith, 2006. "How Special Is the Special Relationship? Using the Impact of U.S. R&D Spillovers on U.K. Firms as a Test of Technology Sourcing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1859-1875, December.
    7. Douglas Hanley, 2014. "Innovation, Technological Interdependence, and Economic Growth," Working Paper 533, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jan 2014.
    8. Nathan Goldschlag & Elisabeth Perlman, 2017. "Business Dynamic Statistics of Innovative Firms," Working Papers 17-72, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    9. Lin, Chen & Lin, Ping & Song, Frank M. & Li, Chuntao, 2011. "Managerial incentives, CEO characteristics and corporate innovation in China's private sector," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 176-190, June.
    10. Estolatan, Eric & Geuna, Aldo, 2019. "Looking forward via the Past: An Investigation of the Evolution of the Knowledge Base of Robotics 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 201904, University of Turin.
    11. Seh-Hyun Yoo & Chang-Yang Lee, 2023. "Technological diversification, technology portfolio properties, and R&D productivity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 2074-2105, December.
    12. Thomas J. Hannigan & Alessandra Perri & Vittoria Giada Scalera, 2016. "The Dispersed Multinational: Does Connectedness Across Spatial Dimensions Lead to Broader Technological Search?," Working Papers 11, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    13. Maria Cipollina & Federica Demaria & Filomena Pietrovito, 2016. "Determinants of Trade: the Role of Innovation in Presence of Quality Standards," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 455-475, December.
    14. Burcu Fazlıoğlu & Başak Dalgıç & Ahmet Burçin Yereli, 2019. "The effect of innovation on productivity: evidence from Turkish manufacturing firms," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4), pages 439-460, April.
    15. Douglas Hanley, 2015. "Innovation, Technological Interdependence, and Economic Growth," 2015 Meeting Papers 1491, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    16. Deepak Somaya & Ian O. Williamson & Xiaomeng Zhang, 2007. "Combining Patent Law Expertise with R&D for Patenting Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 922-937, December.
    17. Hagedoorn, John & Cloodt, Myriam, 2003. "Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1365-1379, September.
    18. Wang, Shaojian & Zeng, Jingyuan & Liu, Xiaoping, 2019. "Examining the multiple impacts of technological progress on CO2 emissions in China: A panel quantile regression approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 140-150.
    19. Iris Claus & Les Oxley & Peilei Fan, 2014. "Innovation In China," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 725-745, September.
    20. François Lafond & Daniel Kim, 2019. "Long-run dynamics of the U.S. patent classification system," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 631-664, April.

    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:hal:journl:hal-01904734. 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.