Domestic patents and developing countries: arguments for their study and data from Brazil (1980-1995)
This paper presents data from Brazilian Patent Office (Instituto Nacional de Propriedade Industrial, INPI) and compares them with data from the United States Patent Office (USPTO). Developing countries have technological activities that are important locally but not significant at international level (imitation, local learning, adaptation of foreign innovations). These activities might be patentable only at national level. Therefore, the study of domestic patents of developing countries provides a broader picture than USPTO patents. This paper compares 8,316 INPI patents with 475 USPTO patents (between 1980-1995). Domestic patent data show peculiarities in the Brazilian case, possibly shared with other countries in similar technological level: a) high share of individual patents; b) foreign-owned firms with important activities; c) low firm involvement in R&D activities. Some characteristics are shared with developed countries: a) domestic firms as the major patentees; b) according to firm size, there is a U-shaped distribution of patents; c) evidences of multi-technology large firms; d) a relatively small share of firms have more than one patent in the whole period. Putting together USPTO and national patenting shows different rankings according to ownership structure, leading firms, industrial sectors, and international patent classification. These differences highlight sources of international competitiveness and point to weaknesses in Brazilian innovative activities. This paper concludes evaluating the contributions (and weaknesses) of this database for the evaluation of the Brazilian National System of Innovation.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
- Patel, Parimal & Pavitt, Keith, 1994. "The continuing, widespread (and neglected) importance of improvements in mechanical technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 533-545, September.
- Griliches, Zvi, 1990.
"Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey,"
Journal of Economic Literature,
American Economic Association, vol. 28(4), pages 1661-1707, December.
- 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.
- Zvi Griliches, 1990. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Working Papers 3301, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Geroski, Paul A & Samiei, Hossein & Van Reenen, John, 1996.
"How Persistently do Firms Innovate?,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
1433, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
- John Bound & Clint Cummins & Zvi Griliches & Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe, 1982.
"Who Does R&D and Who Patents?,"
NBER Working Papers
0908, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:29:y:2000:i:9:p:1047-1060. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.