IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssa/lemwps/2004-15.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Trademarks as an Indicator of Innovation and Industrial Change

Author

Listed:
  • Sandro Mendonça
  • Tiago Santos Pereira
  • Manuel Mira Godinho

Abstract

As innovation becomes an ever more central issue for the development of firms and world economies, so the need for improved assessments of innovative performance grows more urgent. This paper suggests that trademark analysis can contribute in capturing relevant aspects of innovation phenomena and the process of industrial change. We propose trademarks as a complementary indicator in the portfolio of available empirical tools of innovation studies and industrial dynamics. Our empirical exploration is based on a study of Community Trade Marks, an intellectual property right granted in the European Union, and draws on recent research on trademarking trends in Portugal. Quantitative as well as qualitative data, including survey data from a representative sample of Portuguese manufacturing and services firms, are used to identify the advantages and limitations of this indicator.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandro Mendonça & Tiago Santos Pereira & Manuel Mira Godinho, 2004. "Trademarks as an Indicator of Innovation and Industrial Change," LEM Papers Series 2004/15, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    • Handle: RePEc:ssa:lemwps:2004/15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lem.sssup.it/WPLem/files/2004-15.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ulrich Schmoch, 2003. "Service marks as novel innovation indicator," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 149-156, August.
    2. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Ian Miles, 1995. "Innovation in Services," Chapters, in: Mark Dodgson & Roy Rothwell (ed.), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation, chapter 18, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Martin, Ben R. & Irvine, John, 1993. "Assessing basic research : Some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 106-106, April.
    5. Ove Granstrand, 1999. "The Economics and Management of Intellectual Property," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1651.
    6. 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.
    7. Godin, Benoit, 2003. "The emergence of S&T indicators: why did governments supplement statistics with indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 679-691, April.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Smith, Keith, 2002. "What is the 'Knowledge Economy'? Knowledge Intensity and Distributed Knowledge Bases," UNU-INTECH Discussion Paper Series 2002-06, United Nations University - INTECH.
    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. Fontana, Roberto & Nuvolari, Alessandro & Shimizu, Hiroshi & Vezzulli, Andrea, 2013. "Reassessing patent propensity: Evidence from a dataset of R&D awards, 1977–2004," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(10), pages 1780-1792.
    2. Godinho, Manuel Mira & Ferreira, Vítor, 2012. "Analyzing the evidence of an IPR take-off in China and India," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 499-511.
    3. Junghee Han & Almas Heshmati, 2021. "Innovation and SMEs patent propensity in Korea," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 42(1/2), pages 51-68.
    4. 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).
    5. Barros, Henrique M., 2008. "The interaction between patents and other appropriability mechanisms: firm-level evidence from UK manufacturing," Insper Working Papers wpe_105, Insper Working Paper, Insper Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa.
    6. Sternitzke, Christian, 2013. "An exploratory analysis of patent fencing in pharmaceuticals: The case of PDE5 inhibitors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 542-551.
    7. 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.
    8. Michele Cincera, 2005. "Firms' productivity growth and R&D spillovers: An analysis of alternative technological proximity measures," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(8), pages 657-682.
    9. Crass, Dirk & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Do trademarks diminish the substitutability of products in innovative knowledge-intensive services?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. 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.
    11. Barirani, Ahmad & Beaudry, Catherine & Agard, Bruno, 2017. "Can universities profit from general purpose inventions? The case of Canadian nanotechnology patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 271-283.
    12. 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.
    13. Bannò, Mariasole, 2016. "Propensity to patent by family firms," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 238-248.
    14. Nelson, Andrew J., 2009. "Measuring knowledge spillovers: What patents, licenses and publications reveal about innovation diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 994-1005, July.
    15. Ughetto, Elisa, 2010. "Assessing the contribution to innovation of private equity investors: A study on European buyouts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 126-140, February.
    16. Simeth, Markus & Raffo, Julio D., 2013. "What makes companies pursue an Open Science strategy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1531-1543.
    17. Francesco Paolo Appio & Fabrizio Cesaroni & Alberto Minin, 2014. "Visualizing the structure and bridges of the intellectual property management and strategy literature: a document co-citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 623-661, October.
    18. Sandro Mendonca, 2006. "The Revolution Within: Ict And The Shifting Knowledge Base Of The World'S Largest Companies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(8), pages 777-799.
    19. Bronwyn Hall & Rosemaire Ham Ziedonis, 2000. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the US Semiconductor Industry, 1979-95," Economics Series Working Papers 2000-W16, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    20. Bertoni, Fabio & Tykvová, Tereza, 2015. "Does governmental venture capital spur invention and innovation? Evidence from young European biotech companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 925-935.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Indicators; Trademarks; Innovation; Industrial Dynamics;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Lists

    This item is featured on the following reading lists, Wikipedia, or ReplicationWiki pages:
    1. Socio-Economics of Innovation

    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:ssa:lemwps:2004/15. 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/labssit.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.