IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/uncgec/2020_006.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Invention Disclosures and the Slowdown of Scientific Knowledge

Author

Listed:
  • Link, Albert

    (University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics)

  • Scott, John

    (Dartmouth College)

Abstract

Invention disclosures are one measure of new scientific knowledge that represents and predicts the future scientific research output of a U.S. federal laboratory. In this paper, we document a negative shift in the production function for new scientific knowledge as measured by invention disclosures at one federal laboratory, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, over the first 16 years of the new millennium. We find a negative shift of the production function for new scientific knowledge, and that shift might reflect the coincidence of the ICT revolution that enabled fast science, and the evaluation of research with uncritical use of citation counts that created incentives to focus on incremental research in crowded research topics.

Suggested Citation

  • Link, Albert & Scott, John, 2020. "Invention Disclosures and the Slowdown of Scientific Knowledge," UNCG Economics Working Papers 20-6, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:uncgec:2020_006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://bryan.uncg.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2020-06-Invention-Disclosures-and-the-Slowdown.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Link, Albert N. & Scott, John T., 2011. "Public Goods, Public Gains: Calculating the Social Benefits of Public R&D," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199729685.
    2. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. David P. Leech & John T. Scott, 2022. "Foreign patents for the technology transfer from laboratories of U.S. federal agencies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 937-978, August.

    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. Albert Link & Brent Rowe & Dallas Wood, 2011. "Information About Information: Public Investments in Information Retrieval Research," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 2(2), pages 192-200, June.
    2. Link, Albert N. & Antonelli, Cristiano, 2013. "Building the Economics of Knowledge: A Roadmap," UNCG Economics Working Papers 13-21, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.
    3. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi & Giovanni Marin & Elena Paglialunga, 2016. "Eco-innovation, sustainable supply chains and environmental performance in European industries," LEM Papers Series 2016/19, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    4. Heijs, Joost, 2003. "Freerider behaviour and the public finance of R&D activities in enterprises: the case of the Spanish low interest credits for R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 445-461, March.
    5. Ozgur Aydogmus & Erkan Gürpinar, 2022. "Science, Technology and Institutional Change in Knowledge Production: An Evolutionary Game Theoretic Framework," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1163-1188, December.
    6. Michael Fritsch & Viktor Slavtchev, 2007. "What determines the efficiency of regional innovation systems?," Jena Economics Research Papers 2007-006, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    7. Teimuraz Gogokhia & George Berulava, 2021. "Business environment reforms, innovation and firm productivity in transition economies," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(2), pages 221-245, June.
    8. Emanuela Marrocu & Raffaele Paci & Stefano Usai, 2013. "Productivity Growth In The Old And New Europe: The Role Of Agglomeration Externalities," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 418-442, August.
    9. Benjamin Montmartin & Nadine Massard, 2015. "Is Financial Support For Private R&D Always Justified? A Discussion Based On The Literature On Growth," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 479-505, July.
    10. Jos� Lobo & Charlotta Mellander & Kevin Stolarick & Deborah Strumsky, 2014. "The Inventive, the Educated and the Creative: How Do They Affect Metropolitan Productivity?," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 155-177, February.
    11. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan, 2013. "Do firms face a trade-off between the quantity and the quality of their inventions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1072-1079.
    12. Zhang, Feng & Jiang, Guohua & Cantwell, John A., 2015. "Subsidiary exploration and the innovative performance of large multinational corporations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 224-234.
    13. Jean O. Lanjouw & Ariel Pakes & Jonathan Putnam, 1998. "How to Count Patents and Value Intellectual Property: The Uses of Patent Renewal and Application Data," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 405-432, December.
    14. Alireza Naghavi & Chiara Strozzi, 2011. "Intellectual Property Rights, Migration, and Diaspora," Working Papers 2011.60, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    15. Prasanna Tambe & Lorin M. Hitt, 2014. "Measuring Information Technology Spillovers," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 53-71, March.
    16. Alan C. O'Connor & Albert N. Link & Brandon M. Downs & Laura M. Hillier, 2015. "The impact of public investment in medical imaging technology: an interagency collaboration in evaluation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(5), pages 510-531, July.
    17. Inglesi-Lotz, Roula, 2017. "Social rate of return to R&D on various energy technologies: Where should we invest more? A study of G7 countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 521-525.
    18. Chen, Ping-Chuan & Hung, Shiu-Wan, 2016. "An actor-network perspective on evaluating the R&D linking efficiency of innovation ecosystems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 303-312.
    19. Henrik Braconier & Fredrik Sjöholm, 1998. "National and international spillovers from R&D: Comparing a neoclassical and an endogenous growth approach," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 134(4), pages 638-663, December.
    20. Ioannis Giotopoulos & Alexander S. Kritikos & Aggelos Tsakanikas, 2023. "A lasting crisis affects R&D decisions of smaller firms: the Greek experience," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1161-1175, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Invention disclosures; Federal laboratory; Scientific knowledge; Knowledge production function; ICT revolution;
    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
    • O35 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Social Innovation
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:ris:uncgec:2020_006. 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: Albert Link (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edncgus.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.