IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v16y2022i3s1751157722000657.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How public investment fuels innovation: Clues from government-subsidized USPTO patents

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Lin
  • Sun, Mengting
  • Peng, Yujie
  • Zhao, Wenjing
  • Chen, Lixin
  • Huang, Ying

Abstract

Considerably little effort has been devoted to systematically exploring the landscape of government-funded innovation schemes, leaving policymakers and academics little empirical evidence with which to grasp the overall situation of national R&D funding strategies. In the United States (US), patents with a government right or financial interest are flagged, offering a window through which we can examine the landscape of today's patterns of government support for innovation. We conduct the examination from the perspectives of the leading government agencies, the promotor-recipient relationship, and the common concerns of different participants. The results show that the R&D project funding by federal agencies has, among other factors, contributed to the growth in the number of patent records. The Departments of Defense (DoD), Energy (DoE), and Health and Human Services (HHS), and the National Science Foundation (NSF) have issued the most funding and hold rights to more patent records than any other agencies. Moreover, reforms to the US patent system made 40 years ago to afford more protection to non-government assignees appear to have significantly impacted patenting activity. Universities, companies, and individuals have become far more active in fulfilling government-funded projects, with remarkable innovations as a result. In recent years, funding priorities have shifted toward research in biomedicine, fields related to human life, and computer science. However, the four dominant agencies responsible for most government funding differ in their investment priorities and frequently adjust which areas of innovation they support. This study is among the first attempts to support the landscape of the public-invested innovation using the full government-subsidized patent dataset. The analyses in this paper are instructive in understanding the dynamics of US government funding for innovation and informing effective policymaking around innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Lin & Sun, Mengting & Peng, Yujie & Zhao, Wenjing & Chen, Lixin & Huang, Ying, 2022. "How public investment fuels innovation: Clues from government-subsidized USPTO patents," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:16:y:2022:i:3:s1751157722000657
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2022.101313
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157722000657
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2022.101313?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sjoerd Beugelsdijk & Maarten Cornet, 2002. "'A Far Friend is Worth More than a Good Neighbour': Proximity and Innovation in a Small Country," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 6(2), pages 169-188, May.
    2. Mansfield, Edwin, 1998. "Academic research and industrial innovation: An update of empirical findings1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 773-776, April.
    3. Loet Leydesdorff & Caroline S. Wagner & Lutz Bornmann, 2018. "Betweenness and diversity in journal citation networks as measures of interdisciplinarity—A tribute to Eugene Garfield," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 567-592, February.
    4. Romijn, Henny & Albaladejo, Manuel, 2002. "Determinants of innovation capability in small electronics and software firms in southeast England," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1053-1067, September.
    5. Leydesdorff, Loet & Rafols, Ismael, 2011. "Indicators of the interdisciplinarity of journals: Diversity, centrality, and citations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 87-100.
    6. Simmons, Edlyn S., 2009. ""Black sheep" in the patent family," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 11-18, March.
    7. Qiuju Zhou & Ronald Rousseau & Liying Yang & Ting Yue & Guoliang Yang, 2012. "A general framework for describing diversity within systems and similarity between systems with applications in informetrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 787-812, December.
    8. Yadong Luo, 2003. "Industrial dynamics and managerial networking in an emerging market: the case of China," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(13), pages 1315-1327, December.
    9. Lin Zhang & Ronald Rousseau & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2016. "Diversity of references as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of journals: Taking similarity between subject fields into account," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(5), pages 1257-1265, May.
    10. Furman, Jeffrey L. & Porter, Michael E. & Stern, Scott, 2002. "The determinants of national innovative capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 899-933, August.
    11. Mariana Mazzucato & Gregor Semieniuk, 2017. "Public financing of innovation: new questions," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(1), pages 24-48.
    12. Ben R. Martin, 2016. "Twenty challenges for innovation studies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(3), pages 432-450.
    13. Hu, Mei-Chih & Mathews, John A., 2005. "National innovative capacity in East Asia," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 1322-1349, November.
    14. Ismael Rafols & Alan L. Porter & Loet Leydesdorff, 2010. "Science overlay maps: A new tool for research policy and library management," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(9), pages 1871-1887, September.
    15. Burhan, Muqbil & Singh, Anil K. & Jain, Sudhir K., 2017. "Patents as proxy for measuring innovations: A case of changing patent filing behavior in Indian public funded research organizations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 181-190.
    16. Fang Pei Su & Kuei Kuei Lai & R.R.K. Sharma & Tsung Hsien Kuo, 2009. "Patent priority network: Linking patent portfolio to strategic goals," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(11), pages 2353-2361, November.
    17. Corredoira, Rafael A. & Goldfarb, Brent D. & Shi, Yuan, 2018. "Federal funding and the rate and direction of inventive activity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1777-1800.
    18. Loet Leydesdorff, 2015. "Can technology life-cycles be indicated by diversity in patent classifications? The crucial role of variety," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1441-1451, December.
    19. Huang, Ying & Chen, Lixin & Zhang, Lin, 2020. "Patent citation inflation: The phenomenon, its measurement, and relative indicators to temper its effects," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2).
    20. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline S. & Bornmann, Lutz, 2019. "Interdisciplinarity as diversity in citation patterns among journals: Rao-Stirling diversity, relative variety, and the Gini coefficient," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 255-269.
    21. We Shim & Oh-jin Kwon & Yeong-ho Moon & Keun-hwan Kim, 2016. "Understanding the Dynamic Convergence Phenomenon from the Perspective of Diversity and Persistence: A Cross-Sector Comparative Analysis between the United States and South Korea," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-29, July.
    22. Loet Leydesdorff & Dieter Franz Kogler & Bowen Yan, 2017. "Mapping patent classifications: portfolio and statistical analysis, and the comparison of strengths and weaknesses," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1573-1591, September.
    23. JinHyo Joseph Yun & Zheng Liu, 2019. "Micro- and Macro-Dynamics of Open Innovation with a Quadruple-Helix Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-17, June.
    24. Scott J. Wallsten, 2000. "The Effects of Government-Industry R&D Programs on Private R&D: The Case of the Small Business Innovation Research Program," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(1), pages 82-100, Spring.
    25. Sun, Yutao & Cao, Cong, 2018. "The evolving relations between government agencies of innovation policymaking in emerging economies: A policy network approach and its application to the Chinese case," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 592-605.
    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. Ke Mao & Junxin Huang, 2022. "How Does Climate Policy Uncertainty Affect Green Innovation? Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-14, November.
    2. Nast, Carolin & Broekel, Tom & Entner, Doris, 2024. "Fueling the fire? How government support drives technological progress and complexity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(6).
    3. Jaehyuk Park, 2024. "Analyzing the direct role of governmental organizations in artificial intelligence innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 437-465, April.

    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. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline S. & Bornmann, Lutz, 2019. "Interdisciplinarity as diversity in citation patterns among journals: Rao-Stirling diversity, relative variety, and the Gini coefficient," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 255-269.
    2. Hong, Jin & Feng, Bing & Wu, Yanrui & Wang, Liangbing, 2016. "Do government grants promote innovation efficiency in China's high-tech industries?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 57, pages 4-13.
    3. Kim, Hyeyoung & Park, Hyelin & Song, Min, 2022. "Developing a topic-driven method for interdisciplinarity analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    4. Alfonso Ávila-Robinson & Cristian Mejia & Shintaro Sengoku, 2021. "Are bibliometric measures consistent with scientists’ perceptions? The case of interdisciplinarity in research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7477-7502, September.
    5. Keungoui Kim & Dieter F. Kogler & Sira Maliphol, 2024. "Identifying interdisciplinary emergence in the science of science: combination of network analysis and BERTopic," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
    6. Ronald Rousseau, 2018. "The repeat rate: from Hirschman to Stirling," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 645-653, July.
    7. Loet Leydesdorff, 2018. "Diversity and interdisciplinarity: how can one distinguish and recombine disparity, variety, and balance?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2113-2121, September.
    8. Giulio Giacomo Cantone, 2024. "How to measure interdisciplinary research? A systemic design for the model of measurement," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(8), pages 4937-4982, August.
    9. Jingjing Ren & Fang Wang & Minglu Li, 2023. "Dynamics and characteristics of interdisciplinary research in scientific breakthroughs: case studies of Nobel-winning research in the past 120 years," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4383-4419, August.
    10. Azagra-Caro,Joaquín M. & Consoli,Davide, 2013. "Knowledge Flows and Public-Private Cooperation across National Contexts," INGENIO (CSIC-UPV) Working Paper Series 201304, INGENIO (CSIC-UPV), revised 17 Dec 2014.
    11. Dengsheng Wu & Xiaoli Lu & Jianping Li & Jing Li, 2020. "Does the institutional diversity of editorial boards increase journal quality? The case economics field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1579-1597, August.
    12. Xuefeng Wang & Zhinan Wang & Ying Huang & Yun Chen & Yi Zhang & Huichao Ren & Rongrong Li & Jinhui Pang, 2017. "Measuring interdisciplinarity of a research system: detecting distinction between publication categories and citation categories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 2023-2039, June.
    13. Lin Zhang & Beibei Sun & Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Lixin Chen & Ying Huang, 2018. "Interdisciplinarity and collaboration: on the relationship between disciplinary diversity in departmental affiliations and reference lists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 271-291, October.
    14. Liang Hu & Win-bin Huang & Yi Bu, 2024. "Interdisciplinary research attracts greater attention from policy documents: evidence from COVID-19," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, December.
    15. Jaehyuk Park, 2024. "Analyzing the direct role of governmental organizations in artificial intelligence innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 437-465, April.
    16. Deleidi, Matteo & Mazzucato, Mariana, 2021. "Directed innovation policies and the supermultiplier: An empirical assessment of mission-oriented policies in the US economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    17. Loet Leydesdorff & Inga Ivanova, 2021. "The measurement of “interdisciplinarity” and “synergy” in scientific and extra‐scientific collaborations," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(4), pages 387-402, April.
    18. Yi Bu & Mengyang Li & Weiye Gu & Win‐bin Huang, 2021. "Topic diversity: A discipline scheme‐free diversity measurement for journals," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(5), pages 523-539, May.
    19. Jielan Ding & Zhesi Shen & Per Ahlgren & Tobias Jeppsson & David Minguillo & Johan Lyhagen, 2021. "The link between ethnic diversity and scientific impact: the mediating effect of novelty and audience diversity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7759-7810, September.
    20. Gangan Prathap, 2019. "Balance: a thermodynamic perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 247-255, April.

    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:eee:infome:v:16:y:2022:i:3:s1751157722000657. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    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.