IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v49y2024i2d10.1007_s10961-023-10048-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyzing the direct role of governmental organizations in artificial intelligence innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Jaehyuk Park

    (KDI School of Public Policy and Management)

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has rapidly emerged as a transformative technology with the potential to revolutionize numerous industries and applications. While government organizations actively support the AI innovation ecosystem through funding and policy making, their active and direct participation through patenting has not been well studied. Here, we analyzes the intramural patenting activity of government organizations and compares it to that of non-governmental organizations in the field of AI. By analyzing the representative terms in the AI patent abstracts and patent matching using machine-learning-based document embedding, we found that governmental organizations more focus on public benefit and national-level interests, rather than commercialization, which is a main focus of non-governmental organizations. Moreover, our regression results reveal that the AI patents by governmental organizations are cited by more diverse areas than non-governmental organizations, which shows their wider impacts on future innovation. Our findings contribute to the literature on the role of government in fostering innovation in the field of AI and have implications for policy makers and stakeholders involved in AI R&D funding and commercialization.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:49:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10961-023-10048-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-023-10048-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10961-023-10048-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-023-10048-4?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. Anu Swaminathan & Frank S David & Lauren N Geary & Jacqueline M Slavik, 2020. "Results of a portfolio approach to intramural research funding at an academic medical center," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-8, November.
    2. Wang, Jue, 2018. "Innovation and government intervention: A comparison of Singapore and Hong Kong," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 399-412.
    3. Bryan Kelly & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Matt Taddy, 2021. "Measuring Technological Innovation over the Long Run," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 303-320, September.
    4. Goldfarb, Avi & Taska, Bledi & Teodoridis, Florenta, 2023. "Could machine learning be a general purpose technology? A comparison of emerging technologies using data from online job postings," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    5. Song, Yang & Sahut, Jean-Michel & Zhang, Zhiyuan & Tian, Yifan & Hikkerova, Lubica, 2022. "The effects of government subsidies on the sustainable innovation of university-industry collaboration," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    6. Farhat Chowdhury & Albert N. Link & Martijn Hasselt, 2022. "Public support for research in artificial intelligence: a descriptive study of U.S. Department of Defense SBIR Projects," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 762-774, June.
    7. Yi Zhang & Yue Qian & Ying Huang & Ying Guo & Guangquan Zhang & Jie Lu, 2017. "An entropy-based indicator system for measuring the potential of patents in technological innovation: rejecting moderation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1925-1946, June.
    8. Arts, Sam & Hou, Jianan & Gomez, Juan Carlos, 2021. "Natural language processing to identify the creation and impact of new technologies in patent text: Code, data, and new measures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    9. Jaffe, Adam B., 2000. "The U.S. patent system in transition: policy innovation and the innovation process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 531-557, April.
    10. Monroe, Burt L. & Colaresi, Michael P. & Quinn, Kevin M., 2008. "Fightin' Words: Lexical Feature Selection and Evaluation for Identifying the Content of Political Conflict," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 372-403.
    11. 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).
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Fujii, Hidemichi & Managi, Shunsuke, 2018. "Trends and priority shifts in artificial intelligence technology invention: A global patent analysis," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 60-69.
    15. Stanislaw Kosecki & Robbin Shoemaker & Charlotte Kirk Baer, 2011. "Scope, characteristics, and use of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s intramural research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(3), pages 707-728, September.
    16. Nicholas Crafts, 2021. "Artificial intelligence as a general-purpose technology: an historical perspective," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 37(3), pages 521-536.
    17. Sarah Giest & Annemarie Samuels, 2020. "‘For good measure’: data gaps in a big data world," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(3), pages 559-569, September.
    18. Persoon, P.G.J. & Bekkers, R.N.A. & Alkemade, F., 2020. "The science base of renewables," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    19. 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).
    20. 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.
    21. Na Liu & Philip Shapira & Xiaoxu Yue & Jiancheng Guan, 2021. "Mapping technological innovation dynamics in artificial intelligence domains: Evidence from a global patent analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-20, December.
    22. Iain M. Cockburn & Rebecca Henderson & Scott Stern, 2018. "The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Innovation," NBER Working Papers 24449, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. Alexander V. Giczy & Nicholas A. Pairolero & Andrew A. Toole, 2022. "Identifying artificial intelligence (AI) invention: a novel AI patent dataset," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 476-505, April.
    24. Iain M. Cockburn & Rebecca Henderson & Scott Stern, 2018. "The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Innovation: An Exploratory Analysis," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, pages 115-146, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Venturini, Francesco, 2022. "Intelligent technologies and productivity spillovers: Evidence from the Fourth Industrial Revolution," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 220-243.
    2. Rathi, Sawan & Majumdar, Adrija & Chatterjee, Chirantan, 2024. "Did the COVID-19 pandemic propel usage of AI in pharmaceutical innovation? New evidence from patenting data," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    3. 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).
    4. Matheus E. Leusin & Bjoern Jindra & Daniel S. Hain, 2021. "An evolutionary view on the emergence of Artificial Intelligence," Papers 2102.00233, arXiv.org.
    5. Alexander Kopka & Dirk Fornahl, 2024. "Artificial intelligence and firm growth — catch-up processes of SMEs through integrating AI into their knowledge bases," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 63-85, January.
    6. Behrens, Vanessa & Viete, Steffen, 2020. "A note on Germany's role in the fourth industrial revolution," Working Papers 09/2020, German Council of Economic Experts / Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung.
    7. Matheus Eduardo Leusin, 2022. "The Development of Al in Multinational Enterprises - Effects upon Technological Trajectories and Innovation Performance," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2201, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    8. Matthias Niggli & Christian Rutzer, 2023. "Digital technologies, technological improvement rates, and innovations “Made in Switzerland”," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Springer;Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, vol. 159(1), pages 1-31, December.
    9. Babina, Tania & Fedyk, Anastassia & He, Alex & Hodson, James, 2024. "Artificial intelligence, firm growth, and product innovation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    10. Christian Rammer & Gastón P Fernández & Dirk Czarnitzki, 2021. "Artificial Intelligence and Industrial Innovation: Evidence from Firm-Level Data," Working Papers of Department of Economics, Leuven 674605, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Economics, Leuven.
    11. Tamay Besiroglu & Nicholas Emery-Xu & Neil Thompson, 2022. "Economic impacts of AI-augmented R&D," Papers 2212.08198, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2023.
    12. Zhou, Yixiao & Tyers, Rod, 2019. "Automation and inequality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    13. Charles Ayoubi & Boris Thurm, 2023. "Knowledge diffusion and morality: Why do we freely share valuable information with Strangers?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 75-99, January.
    14. Montobbio, Fabio & Staccioli, Jacopo & Virgillito, Maria Enrica & Vivarelli, Marco, 2022. "Robots and the origin of their labour-saving impact," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    15. Jiang, Cuiqing & Zhou, Yiru & Chen, Bo, 2023. "Mining semantic features in patent text for financial distress prediction," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    16. Ajay Agrawal & Joshua Gans & Avi Goldfarb, 2019. "Economic Policy for Artificial Intelligence," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(1), pages 139-159.
    17. Max Nathan & Anna Rosso, 2017. "Innovative events," Development Working Papers 429, Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano, University of Milano, revised 08 Apr 2019.
    18. Mucha, Tomasz & Seppälä, Timo, 2020. "Artificial Intelligence Platforms – A New Research Agenda for Digital Platform Economy," ETLA Working Papers 76, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    19. Albert Bravo-Biosca, 2020. "Experimental Innovation Policy," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(1), pages 191-232.
    20. Basmann, Robert L. & McAleer, Michael & Slottje, Daniel, 2007. "Patent activity and technical change," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 139(2), pages 355-375, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Artificial intelligence; Innovation; Governmental organizations; Natural language processing;
    All these keywords.

    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
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • 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:kap:jtecht:v:49:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10961-023-10048-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.