IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/25266.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring Technological Innovation over the Long Run

Author

Listed:
  • Bryan Kelly
  • Dimitris Papanikolaou
  • Amit Seru
  • Matt Taddy

Abstract

We use textual analysis of high-dimensional data from patent documents to create new indicators of technological innovation. We identify significant patents based on textual similarity of a given patent to previous and subsequent work: these patents are distinct from previous work but are related to subsequent innovations. Our measure of patent significance is predictive of future citations and correlates strongly with measures of market value. We identify breakthrough innovations as the most significant patents – those in the right tail of our measure – to construct indices of technological change at the aggregate, sectoral, and firm level. Our technology indices span two centuries (1840-2010) and cover innovation by private and public firms, as well as non-profit organizations and the US government. These indices capture the evolution of technological waves over a long time span and are strong predictors of productivity at the aggregate and sectoral level.

Suggested Citation

  • Bryan Kelly & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Matt Taddy, 2018. "Measuring Technological Innovation over the Long Run," NBER Working Papers 25266, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:25266
    Note: CF EFG PR DAE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w25266.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert J. Gordon, 2016. "The Rise and Fall of American Growth: The U.S. Standard of Living since the Civil War," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10544.
    2. Matthew Gentzkow & Bryan T. Kelly & Matt Taddy, 2017. "Text as Data," NBER Working Papers 23276, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Miles S. Kimball & John G. Fernald & Susanto Basu, 2006. "Are Technology Improvements Contractionary?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1418-1448, December.
    4. Kortum, Samuel & Lerner, Josh, 1998. "Stronger protection or technological revolution: what is behind the recent surge in patenting?," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 247-304, June.
    5. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    6. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1991. "Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(1), pages 43-61.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Robert J. Gordon, 2016. "Perspectives on The Rise and Fall of American Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 72-76, May.
    10. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1997. "Industry costs of equity," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 153-193, February.
    12. Leonid Kogan & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Noah Stoffman, 2017. "Technological Innovation, Resource Allocation, and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(2), pages 665-712.
    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. Michelle Alexopoulos, 2011. "Read All about It!! What Happens Following a Technology Shock?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1144-1179, June.
    15. Patrick Kline & Neviana Petkova & Heidi Williams & Owen Zidar, 2019. "Who Profits from Patents? Rent-Sharing at Innovative Firms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(3), pages 1343-1404.
    16. Òscar Jordà, 2005. "Estimation and Inference of Impulse Responses by Local Projections," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 161-182, March.
    17. Tom Nicholas, 2008. "Does Innovation Cause Stock Market Runups? Evidence from the Great Crash," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1370-1396, September.
    18. Hodrick, Robert J, 1992. "Dividend Yields and Expected Stock Returns: Alternative Procedures for Inference and Measurement," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 5(3), pages 357-386.
    19. Austin, David H, 1993. "An Event-Study Approach to Measuring Innovative Output: The Case of Biotechnology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 253-258, May.
    20. Nathan Goldschlag & Travis J. Lybbert & Nikolas J. Zolas, 2016. "An ‘Algorithmic Links with Probabilities’ Crosswalk for USPC and CPC Patent Classifications with an Application Towards Industrial Technology Composition," Working Papers 16-15, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    21. Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & F. M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1999. "Citation Frequency And The Value Of Patented Inventions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 511-515, August.
    22. Alexander J. Field, 2003. "The Most Technologically Progressive Decade of the Century," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1399-1413, September.
    23. Benjamin Balsmeier & Mohamad Assaf & Tyler Chesebro & Gabe Fierro & Kevin Johnson & Scott Johnson & Guan‐Cheng Li & Sonja Lück & Doug O'Reagan & Bill Yeh & Guangzheng Zang & Lee Fleming, 2018. "Machine learning and natural language processing on the patent corpus: Data, tools, and new measures," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 535-553, September.
    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. Leonid Kogan & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Noah Stoffman, 2017. "Technological Innovation, Resource Allocation, and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(2), pages 665-712.
    2. Danilo Cascaldi-Garcia & Marija Vukotic, 2022. "Patent-Based News Shocks," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 104(1), pages 51-66, March.
    3. Bergeaud Antonin & Schmidt Julia & Zago Riccardo, 2022. "Patents that Match your Standards: Firm-level Evidence on Competition and Growth," Working papers 876, Banque de France.
    4. Ma, Yu Luen & Ren, Yayuan, 2023. "InsurTech—Promise, threat or hype? Insights from stock market reaction to InsurTech innovation," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    5. Alex Bell & Raj Chetty & Xavier Jaravel & Neviana Petkova & John Van Reenen, 2019. "Who Becomes an Inventor in America? The Importance of Exposure to Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(2), pages 647-713.
    6. Baslandze, Salomé & Argente, David & Hanley, Douglas & Moreira, Sara, 2020. "Patents to Products: Product Innovation and Firm Dynamics," CEPR Discussion Papers 14692, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Bell, Alex & Chetty, Raj & Jaravel, Xavier & Petkova, Neviana & Van Reenen, John, 2019. "Do tax cuts produce more Einsteins? The impacts of financial incentives vs. exposure to innovation on the supply of inventors," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121796, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Haddad, Valentin & Ho, Paul & Loualiche, Erik, 2022. "Bubbles and the value of innovation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 69-84.
    9. Stephen G. Dimmock & Jiekun Huang & Scott J. Weisbenner, 2022. "Give Me Your Tired, Your Poor, Your High-Skilled Labor: H-1B Lottery Outcomes and Entrepreneurial Success," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(9), pages 6950-6970, September.
    10. Griffin, Paul A. & Hong, Hyun A. & Ryou, Ji Woo, 2018. "Corporate innovative efficiency: Evidence of effects on credit ratings," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 352-373.
    11. Ward, Colin, 2020. "Is the IT revolution over? An asset pricing view," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 283-316.
    12. Hsu, Po-Hsuan, 2009. "Technological innovations and aggregate risk premiums," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 264-279, November.
    13. Arts, Sam & Hou, Jianan & Gomez, Juan Carlos, 2021. "Natural language processing to identify the creation and impact of new technologies in patent text: Code, data, and new measures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    14. Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars & Svensson, Roger, 2017. "Verifying High Quality: Entry for Sale," Working Paper Series 1186, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    15. Carlino, Gerald & Kerr, William R., 2015. "Agglomeration and Innovation," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 349-404, Elsevier.
    16. Felix Bracht & Dennis Verhoeven, 2021. "Air pollution and innovation," CEP Discussion Papers dp1817, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    17. Lybbert, Travis J. & Zolas, Nikolas J., 2014. "Getting patents and economic data to speak to each other: An ‘Algorithmic Links with Probabilities’ approach for joint analyses of patenting and economic activity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 530-542.
    18. Tu Nguyen & Jing Zhao, 2021. "Industry tournament incentives and corporate innovation," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(9-10), pages 1797-1845, October.
    19. Kemnitz, Alexander & Knoblach, Michael, 2020. "Endogenous sigma-augmenting technological change: An R&D-based approach," CEPIE Working Papers 02/20, Technische Universität Dresden, Center of Public and International Economics (CEPIE).
    20. Antonin Bergeaud & Julia Schmidt & Riccardo Zago, 2022. "Patents that match your standards: firm-level evidence on competition and innovation," CEP Discussion Papers dp1881, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • E22 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Investment; Capital; Intangible Capital; Capacity
    • E32 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles - - - Business Fluctuations; Cycles
    • N1 - Economic History - - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics; Industrial Structure; Growth; Fluctuations
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights
    • O4 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity

    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:nbr:nberwo:25266. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.