IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v27y2010i4p457-473.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

International Patent Strategies of Small and Large Firms: An Empirical Study of Nanotechnology

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea Fernández‐Ribas

Abstract

The aim of this article is to investigate to what extent small‐firm foreign patents differ from those of their larger counterparts. The research setting consists of the population of U.S.‐owned small and large businesses with patent applications at the World International Patent Organization during 1996–2006 in the emerging field of nanotechnology. Findings reveal a significant and growing contribution of small firms to the globalization of patents. The analysis also suggests that small‐firm patents tend to be more novel and embedded in domestic innovation networks than large‐firm patents. Policy implications are multiple, including putting international patenting on the policy agenda and helping highly innovative small companies to explore foreign commercial opportunities in new markets of capital and technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea Fernández‐Ribas, 2010. "International Patent Strategies of Small and Large Firms: An Empirical Study of Nanotechnology," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 27(4), pages 457-473, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:27:y:2010:i:4:p:457-473
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-1338.2010.00451.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2010.00451.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2010.00451.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bruno Pottelsberghe de la Potterie & Nicolas Zeebroeck, 2008. "A brief history of space and time: The scope-year index as a patent value indicator based on families and renewals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 75(2), pages 319-338, May.
    2. 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.
    3. Avenel, E. & Favier, A.V. & Ma, S. & Mangematin, V. & Rieu, C., 2007. "Diversification and hybridization in firm knowledge bases in nanotechnologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 864-870, July.
    4. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Michael L. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2010. "Grilichesian Breakthroughs: Inventions of Methods of Inventing and Firm Entry in Nanotechnology," NBER Chapters, in: Contributions in Memory of Zvi Griliches, pages 143-164, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Mowery, David C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Sampat, Bhaven N. & Ziedonis, Arvids A., 2001. "The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole act of 1980," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 99-119, January.
    7. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers & Pluvia Zuniga, 2008. "In search of performance effects of (in)direct industry science links," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 17(4), pages 611-646, August.
    8. Josh Lerner, 2002. "150 Years of Patent Protection," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 221-225, May.
    9. Minyuan Zhao, 2006. "Conducting R& D in Countries with Weak Intellectual Property Rights Protection," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(8), pages 1185-1199, August.
    10. Carine Peeters & Bruno Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2007. "Innovation strategy and the patenting behavior of firms," Springer Books, in: Uwe Cantner & Franco Malerba (ed.), Innovation, Industrial Dynamics and Structural Transformation, pages 345-371, Springer.
    11. 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.
    12. Ginarte, Juan C. & Park, Walter G., 1997. "Determinants of patent rights: A cross-national study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 283-301, October.
    13. Ulrich Schmoch, 1999. "Impact of international patent applications on patent indicators," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 119-131, August.
    14. Josh Lerner, 2002. "Patent Protection and Innovation Over 150 Years," NBER Working Papers 8977, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Lee G. Branstetter & Raymond Fisman & C. Fritz Foley, 2006. "Do Stronger Intellectual Property Rights Increase International Technology Transfer? Empirical Evidence from U. S. Firm-Level Panel Data," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(1), pages 321-349.
    16. Zoltan Acs & David Audretsch, 1990. "Innovation and Small Firms," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011131, December.
    17. Cantwell, John, 1995. "The Globalisation of Technology: What Remains of the Product Cycle Model?," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 155-174, February.
    18. Carine Peeters & Bruno Van Pottelsberghe, 2006. "Complex innovation strategies and patenting behaviour," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9051, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    19. Hall, Bronwyn H & Ziedonis, Rosemarie Ham, 2001. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 101-128, Spring.
    20. Florida, Richard, 1997. "The globalization of R&D: Results of a survey of foreign-affiliated R&D laboratories in the USA," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 85-103, March.
    21. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby, 2005. "Socio-economic Impact of Nanoscale Science: Initial Results and NanoBank," NBER Working Papers 11181, 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. Ernest Miguélez, 2018. "Inventor Diasporas and the Internationalization of Technology," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 32(1), pages 41-63.
    2. Grüning, Patrick, 2018. "Heterogeneity in the internationalization of R&D: Implications for anomalies in finance and macroeconomics," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 132-138.
    3. Suma S. Athreye & Claudio Fassio & Stephen Roper, 2021. "Small firms and patenting revisited," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 57(1), pages 513-530, June.
    4. Wipo, 2015. "World Intellectual Property Report 2015 - Breakthrough Innovation and Economic Growth," WIPO Economics & Statistics Series, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, number 2015:944, June.
    5. Pereira, Cristiano Gonçalves & Lavoie, Joao Ricardo & Garces, Edwin & Basso, Fernanda & Dabić, Marina & Porto, Geciane Silveira & Daim, Tugrul, 2019. "Forecasting of emerging therapeutic monoclonal antibodies patents based on a decision model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 185-199.
    6. Lee, Changyong & Kwon, Ohjin & Kim, Myeongjung & Kwon, Daeil, 2018. "Early identification of emerging technologies: A machine learning approach using multiple patent indicators," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 291-303.
    7. Birgit Aschhoff & Georg Licht & Paula Schliessler, 2013. "Who Drives Smart Growth? The Contribution of Small and Young Firms to Inventions in Sustainable Technologies. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 47," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47072, February.

    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. Nicolas van Zeebroeck & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "Filing strategies and patent value," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 539-561, February.
    2. de Rassenfosse, Gaetan & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2009. "A policy insight into the R&D-patent relationship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 779-792, June.
    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. Giovanni Dosi & Luigi Marengo & Corrado Pasquali, 2010. "How Much Should Society Fuel the Greed of Innovators? On the Relations between Appropriability, Opportunities and Rates of Innovation," Chapters, in: Riccardo Viale & Henry Etzkowitz (ed.), The Capitalization of Knowledge, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Philippe Aghion & Peter Howitt & Susanne Prantl, 2015. "Patent rights, product market reforms, and innovation," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 223-262, September.
    6. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2014. "Does patent protection help or hinder technology transfer?," Chapters, in: Sanghoon Ahn & Bronwyn H. Hall & Keun Lee (ed.), Intellectual Property for Economic Development, chapter 2, pages 11-32, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    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. 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.
    9. Anja, Breitwieser & Neil, Foster, 2012. "Intellectual property rights, innovation and technology transfer: a survey," MPRA Paper 36094, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Sunil Kanwar & Stefan Sperlich, 2020. "Innovation, productivity and intellectual property reform in an emerging market economy: evidence from India," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 933-950, August.
    11. Giovanni Dosi & Joseph Stiglitz, 2013. "The Role of Intellectual Property Rights in the Development Process, with Some Lessons from Developed Countries: An Introduction," LEM Papers Series 2013/23, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    12. Noailly, Joëlle & Ryfisch, David, 2015. "Multinational firms and the internationalization of green R&D: A review of the evidence and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 218-228.
    13. de Faria, Pedro & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2010. "Knowledge protection strategies of multinational firms--A cross-country comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 956-968, September.
    14. Brown, James R. & Martinsson, Gustav & Petersen, Bruce C., 2017. "What promotes R&D? Comparative evidence from around the world," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 447-462.
    15. Minyuan Zhao, 2006. "Conducting R& D in Countries with Weak Intellectual Property Rights Protection," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(8), pages 1185-1199, August.
    16. Kamal Saggi, 2016. "Trade, Intellectual Property Rights, and the World Trade Organization," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 16-00014, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    17. Kenneth Guang-Lih Huang & Xuesong Geng & Heli Wang, 2017. "Institutional Regime Shift in Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation Strategies of Firms in China," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 355-377, April.
    18. Dosi, Giovanni & Marengo, Luigi & Staccioli, Jacopo & Virgillito, Maria Enrica, 2023. "Big Pharma and monopoly capitalism: A long-term view," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 15-35.
    19. Arza, Valeria & López, Andrés & Montes-Rojas, Gabriel & Pascuini, Paulo, 2023. "In the name of TRIPS: The impact of IPR harmonisation on patent activity in Latin America," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    20. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie, 2011. "Entry and Patenting in the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 915-933, May.

    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:bla:revpol:v:27:y:2010:i:4:p:457-473. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.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.