IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/zewdok/0901.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Schwerpunktbericht zur Innovationserhebung 2008: Innovationspartnerschaften - Schutz und Verletzung von intellektuellem Eigentum

Author

Listed:
  • Rammer, Christian
  • Bethmann, Nicola

Abstract

Das Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung (ZEW) erhebt seit 1993 jährlich die Innovationsaktivitäten der deutschen Wirtschaft durch. Die Erhebungen finden im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) statt und sind als ein Panel konzipiert (Mannheimer Innovationspanels - MIP). Die Innovationserhebungen werden in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Fraunhofer Institut für System- und Innovationsforschung sowie dem Institut für angewandte Sozialwissenschaft (infas) durchgeführt. Die Innovationserhebungen im Rahmen des MIP sind gleichzeitig der deutsche Beitrag zu den Community Innovation Surveys (CIS) der Europäischen Kommission. In diesem Bericht werden ausgewählte Ergebnisse der Erhebung des Jahres 2008 präsentiert. Das MIP-Erhebungsdesign sieht vor, abwechselnd eine Kurz- und eine Langerhebung durchzuführen. Die Erhebung des Jahres 2008 war eine Kurzerhebung. Das bedeutet unter anderem, dass das Fragenspektrum vorrangig auf Fragen zu den Kernindikatoren des Innovationsverhaltens eingeschränkt wurde. Die Haupterhebungsergebnisse zu diesen Kernindikatoren wurden in Form eines Indikatorenberichts (vgl. Aschhoff et al., 2009) sowie in Form von 21 Branchenberichten veröffentlicht. Zusätzlich zu den Fragen, die die Kernindikatoren bilden, wurden in die Erhebung 2008 auch zwei Schwerpunktfragen aufgenommen. Erstens wurden die Innovationspartner von Unternehmen erfasst, d.h. den Unternehmen und Einrichtungen, mit denen im Rahmen von Innovationsprojekten zusammengearbeitet wird. Zweitens wurden verschiedene Aspekte des Schutzes von intellektuellem Eigentum im Zusammenhang mit Innovationsaktivitäten erhoben, nämlich die eingesetzten rechtlichen Schutzmaßnahmen, das Auftreten möglicher Schwierigkeiten in Innovationsprojekten aufgrund der Schutzrechtssituation, und die Beeinträchtigung verschiedener Arten von intellektuellem Eigentum der Unternehmen durch Dritte differenziert nach dem Vorliegen eines rechtlichen Schutzes und der regionalen Herkunft der Beeinträchtiger von intellektuellem Eigentum. Der vorliegende Bericht fasst zentrale deskriptive Ergebnisse zu diesen beiden Schwerpunktfragen zusammen und stellt einige methodische Aspekte der Innovationserhebung 2008 (Stichprobe, Rücklauf, Fragebogen) dar. Im Zentrum steht die Präsentation wesentlicher Muster zu Innovationspartnern und zum Schutz intellektuellen Eigentums nach Branchengruppen und Größenklassen. Analytische Untersuchungen zu diesen Fragestellungen sind künftigen Arbeiten vorbehalten.

Suggested Citation

  • Rammer, Christian & Bethmann, Nicola, 2009. "Schwerpunktbericht zur Innovationserhebung 2008: Innovationspartnerschaften - Schutz und Verletzung von intellektuellem Eigentum," ZEW Dokumentationen 09-01, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdok:0901
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/39161/1/632292555.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. d'Aspremont, Claude & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1988. "Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1133-1137, December.
    2. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    3. Heinz Hollenstein, 2005. "Determinants of International Activities: Are SMEs Different?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 431-450, June.
    4. Luc Anselin & Attila Varga & Zoltan Acs, 2008. "Local Geographic Spillovers Between University Research and High Technology Innovations," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 9, pages 95-121, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Carl Shapiro, 2001. "Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard Setting," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 1, pages 119-150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Hagedoorn, John & van Kranenburg, Hans, 2003. "Growth patterns in R&D partnerships: an exploratory statistical study," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 517-531, April.
    7. Belderbos, Rene & Carree, Martin & Diederen, Bert & Lokshin, Boris & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2004. "Heterogeneity in R&D cooperation strategies," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(8-9), pages 1237-1263, November.
    8. Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2004. "Efficient Patent Pools," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(3), pages 691-711, June.
    9. Harabi, Najib, 1995. "Appropriability of technical innovations an empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 981-992, November.
    10. 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.
    11. Arundel, Anthony & Kabla, Isabelle, 1998. "What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 127-141, June.
    12. Christian Rammer & Anja Schmiele, 2008. "Globalisation of Innovation in SMEs: Why They Go Abroad and What They Bring Back Home," Applied Economics Quarterly (formerly: Konjunkturpolitik), Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 59(Supplemen), pages 173-212.
    13. Verworn, Birgit & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2000. "Modelle des Innovationsprozesses," Working Papers 6, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    14. Licht, Georg & Harhoff, Dietmar, 1993. "Das Mannheimer Innovationspanel," ZEW Discussion Papers 93-21, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    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. Stoetzer, Matthias-Wolfgang & Pfeil, Silko & Kaps, Katharina & Sauer, Thomas, 2011. "Regional dispersion of cooperation activities as success factor of innovation oriented SME," Jena Contributions to Economic Research 2011,4, Ernst-Abbe-Hochschule Jena – University of Applied Sciences, Department of Business Administration.
    2. Maaß, Frank & Führmann, Bettina, 2012. "Innovationstätigkeit im Mittelstand: Messung und Bewertung," IfM-Materialien 212, Institut für Mittelstandsforschung (IfM) Bonn.

    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. Kaiser, Ulrich, 2002. "Measuring knowledge spillovers in manufacturing and services: an empirical assessment of alternative approaches," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 125-144, January.
    2. Ralph Siebert, 2013. "Are Ex Ante and Ex Post Licensing Agreements Useful Instruments to Lessen Uncertainty in R&D?," CESifo Working Paper Series 4535, CESifo.
    3. 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).
    4. Thomas Doring & Jan Schnellenbach, 2006. "What do we know about geographical knowledge spillovers and regional growth?: A survey of the literature," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 375-395.
    5. Gersbach, Hans & Schneider, Maik & Schetter, Ulrich, 2015. "How Much Science? The 5 Ws (and 1 H) of Investing in Basic Research," CEPR Discussion Papers 10482, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Wang, Heli & Chen, Wei-Ru, 2010. "Is firm-specific innovation associated with greater value appropriation? The roles of environmental dynamism and technological diversity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 141-154, February.
    7. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    8. 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.
    9. Lawrence A. Plummer & Zoltán J. Ács, 2015. "Localized competition in the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 8, pages 145-160, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Sanghoon Ahn & Bronwyn H. Hall & Keun Lee (ed.), 2014. "Intellectual Property for Economic Development," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15464.
    11. 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.
    12. Hassine, Haithem Ben & Mathieu, Claude, 2020. "R&D crowding out or R&D leverage effects: An evaluation of the french cluster-oriented technology policy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    13. Lhuillery, Stéphane & Pfister, Etienne, 2009. "R&D cooperation and failures in innovation projects: Empirical evidence from French CIS data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 45-57, February.
    14. Danguy, Jérôme & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2010. "The R&D-patent relationship: An industry perspective," EIB Papers 7/2009, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
    15. Tomasz Kijek, 2016. "Intellectual Property Rights And Appropriability Of Innovation Capital: Evidence From Polish Manufacturing Firms," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 11(2), pages 387-399, June.
    16. MAULEON, Ana & SEMPERE-MONERRIS, José & VANNETELBOSCH, Vincent J., 2004. "R&D networks among unionized firms," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2004071, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    17. Leiponen, Aija & Byma, Justin, 2009. "If you cannot block, you better run: Small firms, cooperative innovation, and appropriation strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 1478-1488, November.
    18. Pénin, Julien & Wack, Jean-Pierre, 2008. "Research tool patents and free-libre biotechnology: A suggested unified framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1909-1921, December.
    19. Ientile, Damien & Mairesse, Jacques, 2009. "A policy to boost R&D: Does the R&D tax credit work?," EIB Papers 6/2009, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
    20. Maietta, Ornella Wanda, 2015. "Determinants of R&D University-Frim Collaboration and Its Impact on Innovation: a Perspective from the Italian Food and Drink Industry," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 225668, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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:zbw:zewdok:0901. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zemande.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.