IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v46y2014i35p4370-4379.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

More is better: evidence that joint patenting leads to quality innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Kristie Briggs
  • Mary Wade

Abstract

Joint ownership of a patent is most often viewed by firms as a second-best option compared to single, monopoly ownership. However, the results of this article suggest that there may be reason for businesses and policymakers to incentivize joint patenting behaviour. This is because, joint patent ownership is found to positively impact the quality of an innovation (as measured by forward patent citations). In addition, the degree of quality increases with the number of patent owners. Since past research confirms the important links between patent quality and ongoing innovation, and between innovation and growth, those factors that impact patent quality are deserving of attention. Economic research on joint patenting is currently limited, but we hope to shed light on the importance of expanding dialogue on this topic.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristie Briggs & Mary Wade, 2014. "More is better: evidence that joint patenting leads to quality innovation," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(35), pages 4370-4379, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:46:y:2014:i:35:p:4370-4379
    DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2014.957446
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00036846.2014.957446
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00036846.2014.957446?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. 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.
    2. Edinaldo Tebaldi & Bruce Elmslie, 2013. "Does institutional quality impact innovation? Evidence from cross-country patent grant data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(7), pages 887-900, March.
    3. de Saint-Georges, Matthis & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2013. "A quality index for patent systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 704-719.
    4. Klette, Tor Jakob & Griliches, Zvi, 2000. "Empirical Patterns of Firm Growth and R&D Investment: A Quality Ladder Model Interpretation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 363-387, April.
    5. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1991. "Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(1), pages 43-61.
    6. Hagedoorn, John & Cloodt, Myriam, 2003. "Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1365-1379, September.
    7. Sterzi, Valerio, 2013. "Patent quality and ownership: An analysis of UK faculty patenting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 564-576.
    8. Mariani, Myriam & Romanelli, Marzia, 2007. ""Stacking" and "picking" inventions: The patenting behavior of European inventors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1128-1142, October.
    9. Schettino, Francesco & Sterlacchini, Alessandro & Venturini, Francesco, 2013. "Inventive productivity and patent quality: Evidence from Italian inventors," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 1043-1056.
    10. Wu, Ming-Cheng, 2011. "Antecedents of patent value using exchange option models: Evidence from a panel data analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 81-86, January.
    11. Singh, Jasjit, 2008. "Distributed R&D, cross-regional knowledge integration and quality of innovative output," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 77-96, February.
    12. John Hagedoorn & Geerte Hesen, 2007. "Contract Law and the Governance of Inter‐Firm Technology Partnerships – An Analysis of Different Modes of Partnering and Their Contractual Implications," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 342-366, May.
    13. 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.
    14. Belderbos, Rene & Carree, Martin & Diederen, Bert & Lokshin, Boris & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2004. "Heterogeneity in R&D cooperation strategies," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(8-9), pages 1237-1263, November.
    15. Florian Schuett, 2013. "Patent quality and incentives at the patent office," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 44(2), pages 313-336, June.
    16. Picard, Pierre M. & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2013. "Patent office governance and patent examination quality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 14-25.
    17. Diana Hicks, 2000. "360 degree linkage analysis," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 133-143, August.
    18. Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-333, March.
    19. Nagaoka, Sadao & Motohashi, Kazuyuki & Goto, Akira, 2010. "Patent Statistics as an Innovation Indicator," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1083-1127, Elsevier.
    20. Xu, Shichun & Fenik, Anton P. & Shaner, Matthew B., 2014. "Multilateral alliances and innovation output: The importance of equity and technological scope," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(11), pages 2403-2410.
    21. John Hagedoorn, 2003. "Sharing intellectual property rights--an exploratory study of joint patenting amongst companies," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 12(5), pages 1035-1050, October.
    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. Andrea Fosfuri & Christian Helmers & Catherine Roux, 2017. "Shared Ownership of Intangible Property Rights: The Case of Patent Coassignments," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 46(2), pages 339-369.
    2. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    3. Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli & Gianluca Murgia, 2020. "University–Industry collaborations and international knowledge spillovers: a joint-patent investigation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 958-983, August.
    4. Zafer Sonmez, 2018. "Interregional inventor collaboration and the commercial value of patented inventions: evidence from the US biotechnology industry," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 61(2), pages 399-438, September.
    5. Hugo Ernesto Martínez Ardila & Julián Eduardo Mora Moreno & Jaime Alberto Camacho Pico, 2020. "Networks of collaborative alliances: the second order interfirm technological distance and innovation performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1255-1282, August.
    6. Schmid, Jon & Kwon, Seokbeom, 2020. "Collaboration in innovation: An empirical test of Varieties of Capitalism," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    7. Thompson, Mark James & Woerter, Martin, 2020. "Competition and invention quality: Evidence from Swiss firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    8. Briggs, Kristie, 2015. "Co-owner relationships conducive to high quality joint patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1566-1573.
    9. Giovanni Abramo & Francesca Apponi & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo, 2022. "The geographic proximity effect on domestic cross-sector vis-a-vis intra-sector research collaborations," Papers 2202.10347, arXiv.org.
    10. Fernández, Ana María & Ferrándiz, Esther & Medina, Jennifer, 2022. "The diffusion of energy technologies. Evidence from renewable, fossil, and nuclear energy patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    11. Giovanni Abramo & Francesca Apponi & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2022. "The geographic proximity effect on domestic cross-sector vis-à-vis intra-sector research collaborations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 3505-3521, June.

    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. Briggs, Kristie, 2015. "Co-owner relationships conducive to high quality joint patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1566-1573.
    2. Zafer Sonmez, 2018. "Interregional inventor collaboration and the commercial value of patented inventions: evidence from the US biotechnology industry," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 61(2), pages 399-438, September.
    3. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    4. Blomkvist, Katarina & Kappen, Philip & Zander, Ivo, 2014. "Superstar inventors—Towards a people-centric perspective on the geography of technological renewal in the multinational corporation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 669-682.
    5. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & William E. Griffiths & Adam B. Jaffe & Elizabeth Webster, 2021. "Low-Quality Patents in the Eye of the Beholder: Evidence from Multiple Examiners," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(3), pages 607-636.
    6. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2011. "The puzzle of patent value indicators," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 33-62.
    7. Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli & Daniele Rotolo & Vito Albino, 2014. "Determinants of Patent Citations in Biotechnology: An Analysis of Patent Influence Across the Industrial and Organizational Boundaries," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-05, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    8. Albino, Vito & Ardito, Lorenzo & Dangelico, Rosa Maria & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2014. "Understanding the development trends of low-carbon energy technologies: A patent analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 836-854.
    9. Laursen, Keld & Leten, Bart & Nguyen, Ngoc Han & Vancauteren, Mark, 2020. "Mounting corporate innovation performance: The effects of high-skilled migrant hires and integration capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(9).
    10. Zwick, Thomas & Frosch, Katharina & Hoisl, Karin & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2017. "The power of individual-level drivers of inventive performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 121-137.
    11. Giuri, Paola & Mariani, Myriam, 2007. "Inventors and invention processes in Europe: Results from the PatVal-EU survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1105-1106, October.
    12. Alessandra Scandura, 2013. "The role of scientific and market knowledge in the inventive process: evidence from a survey of industrial inventors," ERSA conference papers ersa13p128, European Regional Science Association.
    13. 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).
    14. Alessandra Scandura, 2019. "The role of scientific and market knowledge in the inventive process: evidence from a survey of industrial inventors," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1029-1069, August.
    15. Carlino, Gerald & Kerr, William R., 2015. "Agglomeration and Innovation," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 349-404, Elsevier.
    16. 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.
    17. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Cédric Schneider, 2015. "R&D Collaboration with Uncertain Intellectual Property Rights," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 46(2), pages 183-204, March.
    18. Marco Da Rin & María Fabiana Penas, 2017. "Venture capital and innovation strategies," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(5), pages 781-800.
    19. Eun Han & So Sohn, 2015. "Patent valuation based on text mining and survival analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 821-839, October.
    20. Raffaele Conti & Alfonso Gambardella & Myriam Mariani, 2014. "Learning to Be Edison: Inventors, Organizations, and Breakthrough Inventions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 833-849, June.

    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:taf:applec:v:46:y:2014:i:35:p:4370-4379. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

    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.