IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v44y2019i3d10.1007_s10961-017-9615-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Collaboration or funding: lessons from a study of nanotechnology patenting in Canada and the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Leila Tahmooresnejad

    () (Polytechnique Montreal
    Center for Interuniversity Research on Science and Technology (CIRST))

  • Catherine Beaudry

    () (Polytechnique Montreal
    Center for Interuniversity Research on Science and Technology (CIRST))

Abstract

Abstract This paper is concerned with how government research funding and collaboration between researchers affect academic technological production in the context of nanotechnology in Canada and in the United States. We use the co-invention and co-authorship networks of scientists to build indicators of collaborative behaviour and investigate whether the nature of the network plays a role in the academic technological productivity and quality. Results suggest that technological output has the potential to offer governments useful guidance concerning the effectiveness of academic grants and collaboration in the United States and in Canada. This paper provides evidence that the position of researchers in both co-invention and co-publication networks does influence technological productivity and quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry, 2019. "Collaboration or funding: lessons from a study of nanotechnology patenting in Canada and the United States," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 741-777, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:44:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s10961-017-9615-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-017-9615-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10961-017-9615-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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. Justus Baron & Henry Delcamp, 2012. "Patent quality and value in discrete and cumulative innovation," Post-Print hal-00488275, HAL.
    2. Philippe Aghion & Mathias Dewatripont & Jeremy C. Stein, 2008. "Academic freedom, private‐sector focus, and the process of innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 617-635, September.
    3. Beaudry, Catherine & Allaoui, Sedki, 2012. "Impact of public and private research funding on scientific production: The case of nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1589-1606.
    4. Etzkowitz, Henry & Webster, Andrew & Gebhardt, Christiane & Terra, Branca Regina Cantisano, 2000. "The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 313-330, February.
    5. Manuel Trajtenberg, 1990. "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 172-187, Spring.
    6. Murray, Fiona, 2004. "The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 643-659, May.
    7. Muscio, Alessandro & Quaglione, Davide & Vallanti, Giovanna, 2013. "Does government funding complement or substitute private research funding to universities?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 63-75.
    8. Murray, Fiona, 2002. "Innovation as co-evolution of scientific and technological networks: exploring tissue engineering," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1389-1403, December.
    9. Poh Kam Wong & Yuen Ping Ho & Casey K. Chan, 2007. "Internationalization and evolution of application areas of an emerging technology: The case of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 715-737, March.
    10. H. Piekkola, 2007. "Public Funding of R&D and Growth: Firm-Level Evidence from Finland," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 195-210.
    11. Rebecca Henderson & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1998. "Universities As A Source Of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis Of University Patenting, 1965-1988," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 119-127, February.
    12. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Jaffee, Adam & Trajtenberg, Manuel, 2000. "Market Value and Patent Citations: A First Look," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt1rh8k6z2, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    13. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Jeremy Foltz & Bradford Barham & Kwansoo Kim, 2000. "Universities and agricultural biotechnology patent production," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 82-95.
    15. Cowan, Robin & Jonard, Nicolas, 2004. "Network structure and the diffusion of knowledge," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 28(8), pages 1557-1575, June.
    16. Roger Svensson, 2012. "Commercialization, renewal, and quality of patents," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 175-201, February.
    17. 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.
    18. Pakes, Ariel S, 1986. "Patents as Options: Some Estimates of the Value of Holding European Patent Stocks," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(4), pages 755-784, July.
    19. Baba, Yasunori & Shichijo, Naohiro & Sedita, Silvia Rita, 2009. "How do collaborations with universities affect firms' innovative performance? The role of "Pasteur scientists" in the advanced materials field," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 756-764, June.
    20. Carlos J. Serrano, 2010. "The dynamics of the transfer and renewal of patents," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 686-708, December.
    21. Van Looy, Bart & Ranga, Marina & Callaert, Julie & Debackere, Koenraad & Zimmermann, Edwin, 2004. "Combining entrepreneurial and scientific performance in academia: towards a compounded and reciprocal Matthew-effect?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 425-441, April.
    22. Crespi, Gustavo & D'Este, Pablo & Fontana, Roberto & Geuna, Aldo, 2011. "The impact of academic patenting on university research and its transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 55-68, February.
    23. Argyres, Nicholas S. & Liebeskind, Julia Porter, 1998. "Privatizing the intellectual commons: Universities and the commercialization of biotechnology," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 427-454, May.
    24. Mogoutov, Andrei & Kahane, Bernard, 2007. "Data search strategy for science and technology emergence: A scalable and evolutionary query for nanotechnology tracking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 893-903, July.
    25. Markus Perkmann & Kathryn Walsh, 2009. "The two faces of collaboration: impacts of university-industry relations on public research," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(6), pages 1033-1065, December.
    26. 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.
    27. Thursby, Jerry G. & Thursby, Marie C., 2011. "Has the Bayh-Dole act compromised basic research?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1077-1083, October.
    28. Peter Weingart, 2005. "Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(1), pages 117-131, January.
    29. Jerry Thursby & Marie Thursby, 2011. "University-industry linkages in nanotechnology and biotechnology: evidence on collaborative patterns for new methods of inventing," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 605-623, December.
    30. M. Meyer & K. Debackere & W. Glänzel, 2010. "Can applied science be ‘good science’? Exploring the relationship between patent citations and citation impact in nanoscience," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(2), pages 527-539, November.
    31. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Jason Fong, 2014. "Communitywide Database Designs for Tracking Innovation Impact: Comets, Stars and Nanobank," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 115-116, pages 277-311.
    32. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 1999. "The Quality of Ideas: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators," NBER Working Papers 7345, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    33. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Antanas Cenys & George Chorafakis & Phil Cooke & Dominique Foray & Anastasios Giannitsis & Mark Harrison & Dimitrios Kyriakou & Keith Smith, 2009. "The Question of R&D Specialisation: Perspectives and Policy Implications," JRC Working Papers JRC51665, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    34. Deng, Yi, 2007. "Private value of European patents," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(7), pages 1785-1812, October.
    35. Tong, Xuesong & Frame, J. Davidson, 1994. "Measuring national technological performance with patent claims data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 133-141, March.
    36. Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & F. M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1999. "Citation Frequency And The Value Of Patented Inventions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 511-515, August.
    37. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2007. "University licensing," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 620-639, Winter.
    38. Breschi, Stefano & Catalini, Christian, 2010. "Tracing the links between science and technology: An exploratory analysis of scientists' and inventors' networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 14-26, February.
    39. Pierre Azoulay & Waverly Ding & Toby Stuart, 2009. "The Impact Of Academic Patenting On The Rate, Quality And Direction Of (Public) Research Output," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 637-676, December.
    40. Stefano Breschi & Francesco Lissoni, 2009. "Mobility of skilled workers and co-invention networks: an anatomy of localized knowledge flows," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(4), pages 439-468, July.
    41. David C. Mowery & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2005. "The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and University--Industry Technology Transfer: A Model for Other OECD Governments?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 115-127, January.
    42. Van Looy, Bart & Callaert, Julie & Debackere, Koenraad, 2006. "Publication and patent behavior of academic researchers: Conflicting, reinforcing or merely co-existing?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 596-608, May.
    43. Grimaldi, Rosa & Kenney, Martin & Siegel, Donald S. & Wright, Mike, 2011. "30 years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1045-1057, October.
    44. Mariana Mazzucato & Massimiliano Tancioni, 2012. "R&D, patents and stock return volatility," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 811-832, September.
    45. Aldridge, T. Taylor & Audretsch, David, 2011. "The Bayh-Dole Act and scientist entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1058-1067, October.
    46. Melissa A. Schilling & Corey C. Phelps, 2007. "Interfirm Collaboration Networks: The Impact of Large-Scale Network Structure on Firm Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(7), pages 1113-1126, July.
    47. Catherine Beaudry & Andrea Schiffauerova, 2011. "Is Canadian intellectual property leaving Canada? A study of nanotechnology patenting," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 665-679, December.
    48. Loet Leydesdorff, 2007. "Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of scientific journals," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(9), pages 1303-1319, July.
    49. Cornelia Lawson, 2013. "Academic patenting: the importance of industry support," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 509-535, August.
    50. Geuna, Aldo & Nesta, Lionel J.J., 2006. "University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 790-807, July.
    51. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2004. "Patent Quality and Research Productivity: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 441-465, April.
    52. Narin, Francis & Hamilton, Kimberly S. & Olivastro, Dominic, 1997. "The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-330, October.
    53. Catherine Lecocq & Bart Looy, 2009. "The impact of collaboration on the technological performance of regions: time invariant or driven by life cycle dynamics?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(3), pages 845-865, September.
    54. Per Botolf Maurseth, 2005. "Lovely but dangerous: The impact of patent citations on patent renewal," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 351-374.
    55. Balconi, Margherita & Breschi, Stefano & Lissoni, Francesco, 2004. "Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 127-145, January.
    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. Petra Maresova & Ruzena Stemberkova & Oluwaseun Fadeyi, 2019. "Models, Processes, and Roles of Universities in Technology Transfer Management: A Systematic Review," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 9(3), pages 1-36, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Research funding; Academic patents; Collaboration; Nanotechnology;

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:kap:jtecht:v:44:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s10961-017-9615-7. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.