IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hit/remfce/48.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovation and collaboration patterns between research establishments

Author

Listed:
  • Inoue, Hiroyasu
  • Nakajima, Kentaro
  • Saito, Yukiko Umeno

Abstract

This study empirically investigates the determinants of the productivity of knowledge creation by collaboration. By using the Japanese patent database, we extracted establishment-level patent co-invention information, and found the following results. First, we find an inverse U-shaped pattern in the relationship between the similarity of knowledge stocks and the quality of patents. That is, moderate diversity in knowledge stocks between establishments rather than extreme similarity or extreme diversity is important for knowledge creation. Second, focusing on the differences in technology class, we find inverse U-shaped pattern only in the high-technology class. This implies that the common knowledge between establishments is important in the invention of high technology patents. Third, we find that the physical distance between collaborating establishments has a negative effect on the quality of patents.

Suggested Citation

  • Inoue, Hiroyasu & Nakajima, Kentaro & Saito, Yukiko Umeno, 2016. "Innovation and collaboration patterns between research establishments," HIT-REFINED Working Paper Series 48, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    • Handle: RePEc:hit:remfce:48
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/hermes/ir/re/27781/wp048.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marcus Berliant & Masahisa Fujita, 2008. "Knowledge Creation As A Square Dance On The Hilbert Cube," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 49(4), pages 1251-1295, November.
    2. Benner, Mary & Waldfogel, Joel, 2008. "Close to you? Bias and precision in patent-based measures of technological proximity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1556-1567, October.
    3. Breschi, Stefano & Lissoni, Francesco & Malerba, Franco, 2003. "Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 69-87, January.
    4. INOUE Hiroyasu & NAKAJIMA Kentaro & SAITO Yukiko, 2014. "Localization of Knowledge-creating Establishments," Discussion papers 14053, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    5. 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.
    6. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    7. Hiroyasu Inoue & Kentaro Nakajima & Yukiko Umeno Saito, 2019. "Localization of collaborations in knowledge creation," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 62(1), pages 119-140, February.
    8. Garcia-Vega, Maria, 2006. "Does technological diversification promote innovation?: An empirical analysis for European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 230-246, March.
    9. Goto, Akira & Motohashi, Kazuyuki, 2007. "Construction of a Japanese Patent Database and a first look at Japanese patenting activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1431-1442, November.
    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. Hiroyasu Inoue, 2018. "The community structure of business establishments and its properties: evidence from joint patent applications," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 465-475, December.
    2. Mori, Tomoya & Sakaguchi, Shosei, 2018. "Collaborative knowledge creation: Evidence from Japanese patent data," MPRA Paper 88716, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Hiroyasu Inoue & Kentaro Nakajima & Yukiko Umeno Saito, 2019. "Localization of collaborations in knowledge creation," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 62(1), pages 119-140, February.
    4. Tomoya Mori & Shosei Sakaguchi, 2019. "Creation of knowledge through exchanges of knowledge: Evidence from Japanese patent data," Papers 1908.01256, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.

    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. Hiroyasu Inoue, 2018. "The community structure of business establishments and its properties: evidence from joint patent applications," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 465-475, December.
    2. Burak Dindaroğlu, 2018. "Determinants of patent quality in U.S. manufacturing: technological diversity, appropriability, and firm size," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 1083-1106, August.
    3. Maïder SAINT-JEAN & Nabila ARFAOUI & Eric BROUILLAT & David VIRAPIN, 2019. "Mapping technological knowledge patterns: evidence from ocean energy technologies," Cahiers du GREThA 2019-09, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée(GREThA).
    4. 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).
    5. Battke, Benedikt & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Stollenwerk, Stephan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Internal or external spillovers—Which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-41.
    6. Krzysztof Klincewicz & Szymon Szumiał, 2022. "Successful patenting—not only how, but with whom: the importance of patent attorneys," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5111-5137, September.
    7. Figueroa, Nicolás & Serrano, Carlos J., 2019. "Patent trading flows of small and large firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1601-1616.
    8. Hiroyasu Inoue & Kentaro Nakajima & Yukiko Umeno Saito, 2019. "Localization of collaborations in knowledge creation," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 62(1), pages 119-140, February.
    9. Jackie Krafft & Francesco Quatraro, 2011. "The Dynamics of Technological Knowledge: From Linearity to Recombination," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. 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.
    11. Bart Leten & Rene Belderbos & Bart Van Looy, 2016. "Entry and Technological Performance in New Technology Domains: Technological Opportunities, Technology Competition and Technological Relatedness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(8), pages 1257-1291, December.
    12. Jackie Krafft & Francesco Quatraro, 2011. "The dynamics of technological knowledge," Post-Print halshs-00727633, HAL.
    13. Feng Zhang & Guohua Jiang, 2019. "Combination of Complementary Technological Knowledge to Generate “Hard to Imitate” Technologies," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(02), pages 1-24, June.
    14. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    15. Dibiaggio, Ludovic & Nasiriyar, Maryam & Nesta, Lionel, 2014. "Substitutability and complementarity of technological knowledge and the inventive performance of semiconductor companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1582-1593.
    16. Lechevalier, Sébastien & Nishimura, Junichi & Storz, Cornelia, 2014. "Diversity in patterns of industry evolution: How an intrapreneurial regime contributed to the emergence of the service robot industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 1716-1729.
    17. Lichtenthaler, Ulrich, 2010. "Determinants of proactive and reactive technology licensing: A contingency perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 55-66, February.
    18. Wadhwa, Anu & Phelps, Corey & Kotha, Suresh, 2016. "Corporate venture capital portfolios and firm innovation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 95-112.
    19. Katsuyuki Kaneko & Yuya Kajikawa, 2023. "Novelty Score and Technological Relatedness Measurement Using Patent Information in Mergers and Acquisitions: Case Study in the Japanese Electric Motor Industry," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 24(2), pages 163-177, June.
    20. Jason Li-Ying & Yuandi Wang & Lutao Ning, 2016. "How do dynamic capabilities transform external technologies into firms’ renewed technological resources? – A mediation model," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 1009-1036, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Diversity; Knowledge creation;

    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
    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes
    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights

    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:hit:remfce:48. 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: Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iehitjp.html .

    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.