IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v106y2016i5p193-97.html

Patent Quality and Examination in Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Dietmar Harhoff

Abstract

This paper reports on effects of recent administrative reforms at the European Patent Office (EPO). In EPO-granted patents, claims numbers started to decline in 2008 when new claims fees became effective, claims sections in patents became shorter, and independent claims longer and presumably more specific. The grant rate remained at relatively low levels, but the EPO was unable to stem the use of divisional filings. The developments at the EPO point to a high private value of delay options. Delay may be achieved either by making use of explicit statutory rules or by other means, such as filing divisional applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Dietmar Harhoff, 2016. "Patent Quality and Examination in Europe," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 193-197, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:106:y:2016:i:5:p:193-97
    Note: DOI: 10.1257/aer.p20161093
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.p20161093
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/aer/ds/10605/P2016_1093_ds.zip
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guellec, Dominique & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2007. "The Economics of the European Patent System: IP Policy for Innovation and Competition," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199216987.
    2. Deepak Hegde & David C. Mowery & Stuart J. H. Graham, 2009. "Pioneering Inventors or Thicket Builders: Which U.S. Firms Use Continuations in Patenting?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(7), pages 1214-1226, July.
    3. Koenen, Johannes & Peitz, Martin, 2015. "Firm reputation and incentives to “milk” pending patents," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 18-29.
    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. Cohle, Zachary & Ortega, Alberto, 2023. "The effect of the opioid crisis on patenting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 493-521.
    2. Fabian Gaessler & Dietmar Harhoff & Stefan Sorg & Georg von Graevenitz, 2025. "Patents, Freedom to Operate, and Follow-on Innovation: Evidence from Post-Grant Opposition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(2), pages 1315-1334, February.
    3. Yoshimi Okada & Yusuke Naito & Sadao Nagaoka, 2018. "Making the patent scope consistent with the invention: Evidence from Japan," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 607-625, September.
    4. Martinelli, Arianna & Mazzei, Julia, 2025. "Death squad or quality improvement? The impact of introducing post-grant review on U.S. patent legal quality," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(5).
    5. Righi, Cesare & Cannito, Davide & Vladasel, Theodor, 2023. "Continuing patent applications at the USPTO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(4).
    6. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    7. Cesare Righi & Timothy Simcoe, 2022. "Patenting inventions or inventing patents? Continuation practice at the USPTO," Economics Working Papers 1820, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    8. Billington, Stephen D. & Colvin, Christopher L. & Coyle, Christopher, 2025. "Financing Innovation: The Role of Patent Examination," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 767, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    9. Kishi, Keiichi, 2019. "Technology diffusion, innovation size, and patent policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 382-410.
    10. Hong-Hua Qiu & Jing Yang, 2018. "An Assessment of Technological Innovation Capabilities of Carbon Capture and Storage Technology Based on Patent Analysis: A Comparative Study between China and the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, March.
    11. Francesca Lotti & Claudia Nobile, 2025. "The geography of innovation: patent insights into Europe's green and digital transitions," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 945, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    12. Colombo, Massimo G. & Guerini, Massimiliano & Hoisl, Karin & Zeiner, Nico M., 2023. "The dark side of signals: Patents protecting radical inventions and venture capital investments," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(5).
    13. Signore, Simone & Torfs, Wouter, 2017. "The European venture capital landscape: an EIF perspective. Volume IV: The value of innovation for EIF-backed startups," EIF Working Paper Series 2017/45, European Investment Fund (EIF).
    14. Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry, 2018. "Do patents of academic funded researchers enjoy a longer life? A study of patent renewal decisions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-22, August.
    15. Timothy Simcoe & Cesare Righi, 2022. "Patenting Inventions or Inventing Patents? Continuation Practice at the USPTO," Working Papers 1320, Barcelona School of Economics.
    16. Cesare Righi & Timothy Simcoe, 2020. "Patenting Inventions or Inventing Patents? Continuation Practice at the USPTO," NBER Working Papers 27686, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Yoshimi OKADA & Yusuke NAITO & Sadao NAGAOKA, 2016. "Contribution of Patent Examination to Making the Patent Scope Consistent with the Invention: Evidence from Japan," Discussion papers 16092, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    18. Jia Lin & Howei Wu & Ho-Mou Wu, 2025. "How to characterize patent quality with multiple indicators? Evidence based on economic performance of Chinese companies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(8), pages 4249-4281, August.
    19. Gill, Andrej & Heller, David & Michel, Nina A., 2024. "Enabling or accelerating? The timing of innovation and the different roles of venture capitalists," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(8).
    20. Gill, Andrej & Heller, David, 2024. "Leveraging intellectual property: The value of harmonized enforcement regimes," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    21. Pfister, Curdin & Koomen, Miriam & Harhoff, Dietmar & Backes-Gellner, Uschi, 2021. "Regional innovation effects of applied research institutions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).

    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. repec:osf:socarx:49qxk_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Higham, Kyle & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Jaffe, Adam B., 2021. "Patent Quality: Towards a Systematic Framework for Analysis and Measurement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    3. de Saint-Georges, Matthis & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2013. "A quality index for patent systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 704-719.
    4. Mathias Dewatripont & Patrick Legros, 2013. "‘Essential’ Patents, FRAND Royalties and Technological Standards," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(4), pages 913-937, December.
    5. Andreas Reinstaller & Gerhard Schwarz, 2012. "Die wirtschafts- und forschungspolitische Bedeutung der Umsetzung der Biopatentrichtlinie im österreichischen Patentgesetz," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 44635.
    6. Crass, Dirk & Garcia Valero, Francisco & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2016. "Protecting innovation through patents and trade secrets: Determinants and performance impacts for firms with a single innovation," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Dr Chiara Rosazza Bondibene, 2012. "A Study of Patent Thickets," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 401, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    8. Masood Ahmed & Muhammad Atif Khan & Anam Attique & Muhammad Asif Khan & Hossam Haddad & Nidal Mahmoud Al-Ramahi, 2024. "Democracy’s limited impact on innovation: Panel data evidence from developing countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(3), pages 1-19, March.
    9. Benjamin Barber & Luis Diestre, 2022. "Can firms avoid tough patent examiners through examiner‐shopping? Strategic timing of citations in USPTO patent applications," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(9), pages 1854-1871, September.
    10. Kenneth Zahringer & Christos Kolympiris & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, 2018. "Time to patent at the USPTO: the case of emerging entrepreneurial firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 923-952, August.
    11. Chiara Pederzoli & Grid Thoma & Costanza Torricelli, 2013. "Modelling Credit Risk for Innovative SMEs: the Role of Innovation Measures," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 44(1), pages 111-129, August.
    12. Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "The quality factor in patent systems," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 20(6), pages 1755-1793, December.
    13. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    14. repec:sol:wpaper:08-041 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Petit, Elise & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno & Gimeno-Fabra, Lluis, 2023. "Are patent offices substitutes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(8).
    16. Berger, Florian & Blind, Knut & Thumm, Nikolaus, 2012. "Filing behaviour regarding essential patents in industry standards," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 216-225.
    17. Dante I. Leyva-de la Hiz & J. Alberto Aragon-Correa & Andrew G. Earle, 2022. "Innovating for Good in Opportunistic Contexts: The Case for Firms’ Environmental Divergence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 176(4), pages 705-721, April.
    18. van Zeebroeck, Nicolas & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno & Guellec, Dominique, 2009. "Claiming more: the Increased Voluminosity of Patent Applications and its Determinants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 1006-1020, July.
    19. Arjan van Rooij, 2012. "Claim and control: The functions of patents in the example of Berkel , 1898--1948," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(7), pages 1118-1141, October.
    20. David S. Abrams & Ufuk Akcigit & Jillian Grennan, 2013. "Patent Value and Citations: Creative Destruction or Strategic Disruption?," NBER Working Papers 19647, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Righi, Cesare & Cannito, Davide & Vladasel, Theodor, 2023. "Continuing patent applications at the USPTO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(4).
    22. repec:hal:cepnwp:hal-03059466 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Johannes Koenen & Martin Peitz, 2012. "The Economics of Pending Patents," Chapters, in: Joseph E. Harrington Jr & Yannis Katsoulacos (ed.), Recent Advances in the Analysis of Competition Policy and Regulation, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law
    • K23 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Regulated Industries and Administrative Law
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:aea:aecrev:v:106:y:2016:i:5:p:193-97. 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: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.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.