IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2111.11211.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Inequality in the use frequency of patent technology codes

Author

Listed:
  • Jos'e Alejandro Mendoza
  • Faustino Prieto
  • Jos'e Mar'ia Sarabia

Abstract

Technology codes are assigned to each patent for classification purposes and to identify the components of its novelty. Not all the technology codes are used with the same frequency - if we study the use frequency of codes in a year, we can find predominant technologies used in many patents and technology codes not so frequent as part of a patent. In this paper, we measure that inequality in the use frequency of patent technology codes. First, we analyze the total inequality in that use frequency considering the patent applications filed under the Patent Co-operation Treaty at international phase, with the European Patent Office as designated office, in the period 1977-2018, on a yearly basis. Then, we analyze the decomposition of that inequality by grouping the technology codes by productive economic activities. We show that total inequality had an initial period of growth followed by a phase of relative stabilization, and that it tends to be persistently high. We also show that total inequality was mainly driven by inequality within productive economic activities, with a low contribution of the between-activities component.

Suggested Citation

  • Jos'e Alejandro Mendoza & Faustino Prieto & Jos'e Mar'ia Sarabia, 2021. "Inequality in the use frequency of patent technology codes," Papers 2111.11211, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2111.11211
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2111.11211
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shorrocks, A F, 1980. "The Class of Additively Decomposable Inequality Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(3), pages 613-625, April.
    2. Orietta Marsili & Ammon Salter, 2005. "'Inequality' of innovation: skewed distributions and the returns to innovation in Dutch manufacturing," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1-2), pages 83-102.
    3. Chang, Shu-Hao, 2017. "The technology networks and development trends of university-industry collaborative patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 107-113.
    4. Breandan O Huallachain & Der-Shiuan Lee, 2011. "Technological Specialization and Variety in Urban Invention," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(1), pages 67-88.
    5. Cagetti, Marco & De Nardi, Mariacristina, 2008. "Wealth Inequality: Data And Models," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(S2), pages 285-313, September.
    6. Jordá, Vanesa & Alonso, José M., 2017. "New Estimates on Educational Attainment Using a Continuous Approach (1970–2010)," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 281-293.
    7. Thomas Piketty & Emmanuel Saez, 2003. "Income Inequality in the United States, 1913–1998," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(1), pages 1-41.
    8. Gabriel Zucman, 2019. "Global Wealth Inequality," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 109-138, August.
    9. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Yunzhe Fang, 2019. "Financial implications of technology-class code popularity and usage among industry competitors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 25-51, October.
    10. Wiston Adrián Risso & Edgar J. Sánchez Carrera, 2019. "On the impact of innovation and inequality in economic growth," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 64-81, January.
    11. Anthony Shorrocks & Guanghua Wan, 2005. "Spatial decomposition of inequality," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 59-81, January.
    12. Deborah Strumsky & José Lobo & Sander van der Leeuw, 2012. "Using patent technology codes to study technological change," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 267-286, April.
    13. Stéphane Maraut & Hélène Dernis & Colin Webb & Vincenzo Spiezia & Dominique Guellec, 2008. "The OECD REGPAT Database: A Presentation," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2008/2, OECD Publishing.
    14. Brown, Malcolm C., 1994. "Using gini-style indices to evaluate the spatial patterns of health practitioners: Theoretical considerations and an application based on Alberta data," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 1243-1256, May.
    15. Sen, Amartya, 1997. "On Economic Inequality," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198292975.
    16. Strumsky, Deborah & Lobo, José, 2015. "Identifying the sources of technological novelty in the process of invention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1445-1461.
    17. Giuseppe Coco & Raffaele Lagravinese & Giuliano Resce, 2020. "Beyond the weights: a multicriteria approach to evaluate inequality in education," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 18(4), pages 469-489, December.
    18. Nathan Goldschlag & Travis J. Lybbert & Nikolas J. Zolas, 2020. "Tracking the technological composition of industries with algorithmic patent concordances," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(6), pages 582-602, August.
    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. Chris Elbers & Peter Lanjouw & Johan Mistiaen & Berk Özler, 2008. "Reinterpreting between-group inequality," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 6(3), pages 231-245, September.
    2. Jing Yuan & Xiaomin Liu & Yinghui Wang & Zongwu Cai, 2024. "Impact of Minimum Wage Standard on Occupational Income Inequality and Common Prosperity in China," WORKING PAPERS SERIES IN THEORETICAL AND APPLIED ECONOMICS 202404, University of Kansas, Department of Economics, revised Feb 2024.
    3. Matteo Laffi & Ron Boschma, 2022. "Does a local knowledge base in Industry 3.0 foster diversification in Industry 4.0 technologies? Evidence from European regions," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 101(1), pages 5-35, February.
    4. Elbers, Chris & Lanjouw, Peter & Mistiaen, Johan A. & Ozler, Berk, 2005. "Re-interpreting sub-group inequality decompositions," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3687, The World Bank.
    5. Matteo Iacoviello, 2008. "Household Debt and Income Inequality, 1963–2003," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 40(5), pages 929-965, August.
    6. Andonie, Costel & Kuzmics, Christoph & Rogers, Brian W., 2019. "Efficiency-based measures of inequality," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 60-69.
    7. Juan Luis Londoño & Miguel Székely, 2000. "Persistent Poverty and Excess Inequality: Latin America, 1970-1995," Journal of Applied Economics, Universidad del CEMA, vol. 3, pages 93-134, May.
    8. Tugce, Cuhadaroglu, 2013. "My Group Beats Your Group: Evaluating Non-Income Inequalities," SIRE Discussion Papers 2013-49, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    9. Teixidó-Figueras, J. & Duro, J.A., 2014. "Spatial Polarization of the Ecological Footprint Distribution," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 93-106.
    10. Londoño, Juan Luis & Székely, Miguel, 1997. "Persistent Poverty and Excess Inequality: Latin America, 1970-1995," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 6092, Inter-American Development Bank.
    11. Magne Mogstad, 2007. "Measuring Income Inequality under Restricted Interpersonal Comparability," Discussion Papers 498, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    12. Stephen P. Jenkins & John Micklewright, 2007. "New Directions in the Analysis of Inequality and Poverty," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 700, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    13. Jess Benhabib & Alberto Bisin, 2018. "Skewed Wealth Distributions: Theory and Empirics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(4), pages 1261-1291, December.
    14. Einmahl, John & He, Y., 2020. "Unified Extreme Value Estimation for Heterogeneous Data," Other publications TiSEM dfe6c38c-823b-4394-b4fd-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Ji-Won Park & Chae Un Kim, 2021. "Getting to a feasible income equality," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-16, March.
    16. Atanu Ghoshray & Issam Malki & Javier Ordóñez, 2022. "On the long-run dynamics of income and wealth inequality," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 62(2), pages 375-408, February.
    17. José Lobo & Deborah Strumsky, 2019. "Sources of inventive novelty: two patent classification schemas, same story," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(1), pages 19-37, July.
    18. Maria Ana Lugo & Esfandiar Maasoumi, 2008. "Multidimensional Poverty Measures from an Information Theory Perspective," Working Papers 85, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    19. Aaberge, Rolf & Eika, Lasse & Langørgen, Audun & Mogstad, Magne, 2019. "Local governments, in-kind transfers, and economic inequality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    20. Lucas Chancel, 2019. "Ten facts about income inequality in advanced economies," Working Papers hal-02876982, HAL.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2111.11211. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.