IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

On the Origins of the Worldwide Surge in Patenting: An Industry Perspective on the R&D-Patent Relationship

  • Jérôme Danguy

    (Solvay Brussels School of Economics and Management, iCite and ECARES, Université libre de Bruxelles)

  • Gaétan de Rassenfosse

    ()

    (Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne; Intellectual Property Research Institute of Australia, The University of Melbourne)

  • Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie

    (Solvay Brussels School of Economics and Management, iCite and ECARES, Université libre de Bruxelles)

This paper decomposes the R&D-patent relationship at the industry level to shed light on the sources of the worldwide surge in patent applications. The empirical analysis is based on a unique dataset that includes 5 patent indicators computed for 18 industries in 19 countries covering the period from 1987 to 2005. The analysis shows that variations in patent applications reflect not only variations in research productivity but also variations in the appropriability and filing strategies adopted by firms. The results also suggest that the patent explosion observed in several patent offices can be attributed to the greater globalization of intellectual property rights rather than to a surge in research productivity.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.melbourneinstitute.com/downloads/working_paper_series/wp2013n15.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne in its series Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series with number wp2013n15.

as
in new window

Length: 46 pages
Date of creation: Apr 2013
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:iae:iaewps:wp2013n15
Contact details of provider: Postal: Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010 Australia
Phone: +61 3 8344 2100
Fax: +61 3 8344 2111
Web page: http://www.melbourneinstitute.com/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Levin, Andrew & Lin, Chien-Fu & James Chu, Chia-Shang, 2002. "Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 1-24, May.
  2. Gaétan de Rassenfosse, 2010. "How SMEs Exploit Their Intellectual Property Assets: Evidence from Survey Data," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2010n20, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
  3. Bruno Crepon & Emmanuel Duguet & Jacques Mairesse, 1998. "Research, Innovation, and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level," NBER Working Papers 6696, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi & Hausman, Jerry A, 1986. "Patents and R and D: Is There a Lag?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(2), pages 265-83, June.
  5. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Hélène Dernis & Dominique Guellec & Picci Lucio & Bruno Van Pottelsberghe, 2012. "The worldwide count of priority patents: A new indicator of inventive activity," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2012-019, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  6. Blundell, Richard & Griffith, Rachel & Windmeijer, Frank, 2002. "Individual effects and dynamics in count data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 113-131, May.
  7. Teece, David J., 1993. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 112-113, April.
  8. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2007. "Per un Pugno di Dollari: A first Look at the Price Elasticity of Patents," CEPR Discussion Papers 6499, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  9. Masaaki Kotabe, 1992. "A Comparative Study of U.S. and Japanese Patent Systems," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(1), pages 147-168, March.
  10. von Graevenitz, Georg & Wagner, Stefan & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2011. "How to measure patent thickets--A novel approach," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 6-9, April.
  11. de Saint-Georges, Matthis & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2011. "A quality index for patent systems," CEPR Discussion Papers 8440, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  12. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Bruno Van Pottelsberghe, 2008. "A Policy Insight into the R&D-Patent Relationship," Working Papers ECARES 2008_007, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  13. Emmanuel DUGUET & Isabelle KABLA, 1998. "Appropriation Strategy and the Motivations to Use the Patent System: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level in French Manufacturing," Annales d'Economie et de Statistique, ENSAE, issue 49-50, pages 289-327.
  14. Bruno van Pottelsberghe, 2010. "The quality factor in patent systems," Working Papers 422, Bruegel.
  15. Laura Bottazzi & Giovanni Peri, 2007. "The International Dynamics of R&D and Innovation in the Long Run and in The Short Run," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(518), pages 486-511, 03.
  16. Gerald Marschke & Jinyoung Kim, 2002. "Accounting for the recent surge in U.S. patenting: Changes in R&D expenditures, patent yields, and the high tech sector," Discussion Papers 02-10, University at Albany, SUNY, Department of Economics.
  17. 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.
  18. Bruno Van Pottelsberghe & Herman Denis & Dominique Guellec, 2001. "Using patent counts for cross-country comparisons of technology output," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/6227, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  19. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Anja Schoen & Annelies Wastyn, 2013. "Selection Bias in Innovation Studies. A Simple Test," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2013n08, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
  20. Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B, 1988. "Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(4), pages 678-90, September.
  21. Sirilli, Giorgio & Evangelista, Rinaldo, 1998. "Technological innovation in services and manufacturing: results from Italian surveys," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(9), pages 881-899, December.
  22. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  23. 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.
  24. repec:fth:inseep:9833 is not listed on IDEAS
  25. Harabi, Najib, 1994. "Appropriability of Technical Innovations: An Empirical Analysis," MPRA Paper 26267, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  26. Ginarte, Juan C. & Park, Walter G., 1997. "Determinants of patent rights: A cross-national study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 283-301, October.
  27. Archontopoulos, Eugenio & Guellec, Dominique & Stevnsborg, Niels & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno & van Zeebroeck, Nicolas, 2006. "When Small is Beautiful: Measuring the Evolution and Consequences of the Voluminosity of Patent Applications at the EPO," CEPR Discussion Papers 5970, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  28. Arundel, Anthony & Kabla, Isabelle, 1998. "What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 127-141, June.
  29. Scherer, F. M., 1983. "The propensity to patent," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 107-128, March.
  30. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2005. "Exploring the Patent Explosion," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 35-48, 01.
  31. Laura Bottazzi & Giovanni Peri, . "Innovation and Spillovers in Regions: Evidence from European Patent Data," Working Papers 215, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
  32. Westerlund, Joakim, 2005. "Testing for Error Correction in Panel Data," Working Papers 2005:11, Lund University, Department of Economics.
  33. Valentina Meliciani, 2000. "The relationship between R&D, investment and patents: a panel data analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(11), pages 1429-1437.
  34. Kortum, Samuel & Lerner, Josh, 1999. "What is behind the recent surge in patenting?1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-22, January.
  35. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2009. "The knowledge production of 'R' and 'D'," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 141-143, October.
  36. Cincera, Michele, 1997. "Patents, R&D, and Technological Spillovers at the Firm Level: Some Evidence from Econometric Count Models for Panel Data," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(3), pages 265-80, May-June.
  37. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3), pages 783-832.
  38. Blind, Knut & Edler, Jakob & Frietsch, Rainer & Schmoch, Ulrich, 2006. "Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 655-672, June.
  39. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
  40. Alogoskoufis, George & Smith, Ron, 1991. " On Error Correction Models: Specification, Interpretation, Estimation," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(1), pages 97-128.
  41. Choi, In, 2001. "Unit root tests for panel data," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 249-272, April.
  42. Pasaran, M.H. & Im, K.S. & Shin, Y., 1995. "Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 9526, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
  43. Park, Walter G., 2008. "International patent protection: 1960-2005," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 761-766, May.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iae:iaewps:wp2013n15. 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: (Abbey Treloar)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.