IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/esm/wpaper/esmt-11-06.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Patent examination at the State Intellectual Property Office in China

Author

Listed:
  • Johannes Liegsalz

    (BMW AG)

  • Stefan Wagner

    (ESMT European School of Management and Technology)

Abstract

The number of patent applications filed at the Chinese State Intellectual Property Office SIPO grew tremendously over the last decades and the SIPO has become the world’s third largest patent office by 2009. In this paper, we provide an overview of the institutional background of patent examination in China. Moreover, we empirically analyze the determinants of the grant lags applicants have to expect at the SIPO. The multivariate duration analysis is based on the population of 443,533 patent applications filed at the SIPO between 1990 and 2002. The average grant lag is 4.71 years with considerable variation across 30 different technology areas. Interestingly, we find that Chinese applicants are able to achieve faster patent grants than their non-Chinese counterparts (even after controlling for various other determinants of grant lags). This might be an indication of a differential treatment of Chinese applicants which would be in violation of Art. 3 (National Treatment) and Art. 4 (Most-favored Nation Treatment) of TRIPS that has been signed by China in 2001.

Suggested Citation

  • Johannes Liegsalz & Stefan Wagner, 2011. "Patent examination at the State Intellectual Property Office in China," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-11-06, ESMT European School of Management and Technology.
  • Handle: RePEc:esm:wpaper:esmt-11-06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://static.esmt.org/publications/workingpapers/ESMT-11-06.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2011
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raffaele Paci & Stefano Usai, 2000. "Technological Enclaves and Industrial Districts: An Analysis of the Regional Distribution of Innovative Activity in Europe," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(2), pages 97-114.
    2. Harhoff, Dietmar & Wagner, Stefan, 2005. "Modelling the duration of patent examination at the European Patent Office," CEPR Discussion Papers 5283, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Régibeau, P & Rockett, K, 2003. "Are More Important Patents Approved More Slowly and Should They Be?," Economics Discussion Papers 2850, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    4. van Zeebroeck, Nicolas & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno & Guellec, Dominique, 2009. "Claiming more: the Increased Voluminosity of Patent Applications and its Determinants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 1006-1020, July.
    5. Wipo, 2009. "World Intellectual Property Indicators, 2009 edition," WIPO Economics & Statistics Series, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, number 2009:941, October.
    6. Lee Branstetter & Raymond Fisman & C. Fritz Foley & Kamal Saggi, 2007. "Intellectual Property Rights, Imitation, and Foreign Direct Investment: Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 13033, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Masaaki Kotabe, 1992. "A Comparative Study of U.S. and Japanese Patent Systems," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 23(1), pages 147-168, March.
    8. David Popp & Ted Juhl & Daniel K.N. Johnson, 2003. "Time in Purgatory: Determinants of the Grant Lag for U.S. Patent Applications," NBER Working Papers 9518, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Kortum, Samuel & Lerner, Josh, 1999. "What is behind the recent surge in patenting?1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-22, January.
    10. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2008. "The Impact of Uncertain Intellectual Property Rights on the Market for Ideas: Evidence from Patent Grant Delays," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 982-997, May.
    11. Smith, Pamela J., 1999. "Are weak patent rights a barrier to U.S. exports?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 151-177, June.
    12. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    13. Maskus, Keith E. & Penubarti, Mohan, 1995. "How trade-related are intellectual property rights?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 227-248, November.
    14. Patel, Pari & Pavitt, Keith, 1987. "Is Western Europe losing the technological race?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2-4), pages 59-85, August.
    15. Dietmar Harhoff & Stefan Wagner, 2009. "The Duration of Patent Examination at the European Patent Office," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1969-1984, December.
    16. Harhoff, Dietmar & Scherer, Frederic M. & Vopel, Katrin, 2003. "Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1343-1363, September.
    17. Yang, Deli, 2008. "Pendency and grant ratios of invention patents: A comparative study of the US and China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1035-1046, July.
    18. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2007. "Patents only live twice: a patent survival analysis in Europe," Working Papers CEB 07-028.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    19. Bosworth, Derek & Yang, Deli, 2000. "Intellectual property law, technology flow and licensing opportunities in the People's Republic of China," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 453-477, August.
    20. Harhoff, Dietmar & Reitzig, Markus, 2004. "Determinants of opposition against EPO patent grants--the case of biotechnology and pharmaceuticals," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 443-480, April.
    21. John Cantwell & Simona Iammarino, 2000. "Multinational Corporations and the Location of Technological Innovation in the UK Regions," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(4), pages 317-332.
    22. Braga, C.A.P. & Fink, C. & Sepulveda, C.P., 2000. "Intellectual Property Rights and Economic Development," World Bank - Discussion Papers 412, World Bank.
    23. Johnson, Daniel K N & Popp, David, 2003. " Forced Out of the Closet: The Impact of the American Inventors Protection Act on the Timing of Patent Disclosure," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(1), pages 96-112, Spring.
    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. Manish Srivastava & Tang Wang, 2015. "When does selling make you wiser? Impact of licensing on Chinese firms’ patenting propensity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 602-628, August.
    2. Lutao Ning & Martha Prevezer & Yuandi Wang, 2014. "Top Management Turnover and Corporate Governance in China: effects on innovation performance," Working Papers 53, Queen Mary, University of London, School of Business and Management, Centre for Globalisation Research.
    3. Mafini Dosso & Antonio Vezzani, 2015. "Top R&D investors and international knowledge seeking: the role of emerging technologies and technological proximity," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation 2015-09, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    4. Christian O. Fisch & Joern H. Block & Philipp G. Sandner, 2016. "Chinese university patents: quantity, quality, and the role of subsidy programs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 60-84, February.
    5. Liu, Li-jun & Cao, Cong & Song, Min, 2014. "China's agricultural patents: How has their value changed amid recent patent boom?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 106-121.
    6. Joseph Mai & Andrey Stoyanov, 2014. "Home Country Bias in the Legal System: Empirical Evidence from the Intellectual Property Rights Protection in Canada," Working Papers 2014_3, York University, Department of Economics.
    7. Keld Laursen, 2015. "Revealed comparative advantage and the alternatives as measures of international specialization," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 5(1), pages 99-115, June.
    8. Elizabeth Webster & Paul H. Jensen & Alfons Palangkaraya, 2014. "Patent examination outcomes and the national treatment principle," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(2), pages 449-469, June.
    9. Christian Fisch & Tobias Hassel & Philipp Sandner & Joern Block, 2015. "University patenting: a comparison of 300 leading universities worldwide," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 318-345, April.
    10. repec:eee:respol:v:47:y:2018:i:7:p:1295-1308 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Yamauchi, Isamu & Nagaoka, Sadao, 2013. "Does the outsourcing of prior art search increase the efficiency of patent examination?," IIR Working Paper 13-12, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    12. Li, Zhengyu, 2016. "Essays on knowledge sourcing and technological capability : A knowledge structure perspective," Other publications TiSEM b8ff31fc-c57b-4bc3-b5a4-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Palangkaraya, Alfons & Jensen, Paul H. & Webster, Elizabeth, 2017. "The effect of patents on trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 1-9.
    14. repec:eee:respol:v:47:y:2018:i:3:p:583-591 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. repec:eee:proeco:v:199:y:2018:i:c:p:107-124 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    patent system; patent examination; State Intellectual Property Office China; duration analysis;

    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:esm:wpaper:esmt-11-06. 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: (ESMT Faculty Publications). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/emstbde.html .

    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.