IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sru/ssewps/90.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Knowledge Bases of the World's Largest Pharmaceuticals Groups: what do Patent Citations to Non-Patent Literature Reveal?

Author

Listed:

Abstract

This paper examines the knowledge bases of the world's largest pharmaceuticals groups by sales. It puts forward the concepts of knowledge breadth and depth as the relevant dimensions along which knowledge bases can be mapped. Breadth is studied by analysing the evolution of specialisation by scientific field over time. It hints at the widening range of bodies of scientific and technological knowledge relevant to firms' innovative activities. Depth (or integration) is studied by analysing the evolution of specialisation across different typologies of research. It hints at the complex, non-linear interdependencies that link the scientific and technological domains. We develop the analyses on the strength of an original database of 33,127 EPO patents, and of 41,931 'non patent document' citations (of which 19,494 were identified as scientific articles included in the ISI databases). The groups studied seem to have incrementally increased the breadth of their knowledge bases, moving toward the fields proper of the new bio-pharmaceutical research trajectory. At the same time, some of the groups studied exhibit remarkable depth in knowledge specialisation in particular fields such as biotechnology, biochemical research and neurosciences. Finally, this paper also provides a first methodological test of possible problems deriving from the use of 'unidentified' patent citations (i.e. added by the examiners together with those proposed by the inventor). We compare a random sample of these citations with a sample of citations explicitly added by the original inventor, and compare the results in terms of scientific specialisations.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefano Brusoni & Paola Criscuolo & Aldo Geuna, 2003. "The Knowledge Bases of the World's Largest Pharmaceuticals Groups: what do Patent Citations to Non-Patent Literature Reveal?," SPRU Working Paper Series 90, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
  • Handle: RePEc:sru:ssewps:90
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Units/spru/publications/imprint/sewps/sewp90/sewp90.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meyer, Martin, 2000. "Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 409-434, March.
    2. Prencipe, Andrea, 2000. "Breadth and depth of technological capabilities in CoPS: the case of the aircraft engine control system," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 895-911, August.
    3. Stéphane Malo & Aldo Geuna, 2000. "Science-Technology Linkages in an Emerging Research Platform: The Case of Combinatorial Chemistry and Biology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 47(2), pages 303-321, February.
    4. Andrew Davies, 1997. "The Life Cycle of a Complex Product System," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 1(03), pages 229-256.
    5. Henderson, Rebecca., 1994. "The evolution of integrative capability : innovation in cardiovascular drug discovery," Working papers 3711-94., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    6. Nelson, Richard R., 2003. "On the uneven evolution of human know-how," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 909-922, June.
    7. Orsenigo, L. & Pammolli, F. & Riccaboni, Massimo, 2001. "Technological change and network dynamics: Lessons from the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 485-508, March.
    8. Narin, Francis & Olivastro, Dominic, 1992. "Status report: Linkage between technology and science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 237-249, June.
    9. Prencipe, Andrea, 1997. "Technological competencies and product's evolutionary dynamics a case study from the aero-engine industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 1261-1276, January.
    10. Soete, Luc, 1987. "The impact of technological innovation on international trade patterns: The evidence reconsidered," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2-4), pages 101-130, August.
    11. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 1994. "The changing technology of technological change: general and abstract knowledge and the division of innovative labour," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 523-532, September.
    12. Stefano Brusoni & Paola Criscuolo & Aldo Geuna, 2005. "The knowledge bases of the world's largest pharmaceutical groups: what do patent citations to non-patent literature reveal?," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 395-415.
    13. Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson & Adam Jaffe, 1997. "University Versus Corporate Patents: A Window On The Basicness Of Invention," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 19-50.
    14. Narin, Francis & Rozek, Richard P., 1988. "Bibliometric analysis of U.S. pharmaceutical industry research performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 139-154, June.
    15. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1994. "Measuring Competence? Exploring Firm Effects in Pharmaceutical Research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 63-84, December.
    16. Narin, Francis & Hamilton, Kimberly S. & Olivastro, Dominic, 1997. "The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-330, October.
    17. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1996. "Scale, Scope, and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 32-59, Spring.
    18. Tijssen, Robert J. W., 2002. "Science dependence of technologies: evidence from inventions and their inventors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 509-526, May.
    19. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    20. Wang, Q. & von Tunzelmann, N., 2000. "Complexity and the functions of the firm: breadth and depth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 805-818, August.
    21. Felicia M. Fai, 2003. "Corporate Technological Competence and the Evolution of Technological Diversification," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2065.
    22. Gambardella,Alfonso, 1995. "Science and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521451185, October.
    23. Akira Takeishi, 2002. "Knowledge Partitioning in the Interfirm Division of Labor: The Case of Automotive Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 321-338, June.
    24. Pisano, Gary P., 1991. "The governance of innovation: Vertical integration and collaborative arrangements in the biotechnology industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 237-249, June.
    25. Stefano Brusoni & Aldo Geuna, 2006. "The Key Characteristics of Sectoral Knowledge Bases: An International Comparison," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli & Dominique Foray & Bronwyn H. Hall & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), New Frontiers in the Economics of Innovation and New Technology, chapter 13, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    26. Miller, Roger, et al, 1995. "Innovation in Complex Systems Industries: The Case of Flight Simulation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 363-400.
    27. Ulrich, Karl, 1995. "The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 419-440, May.
    28. Nightingale, Paul, 2000. "Economies of Scale in Experimentation: Knowledge and Technology in Pharmaceutical R&D," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 315-359, June.
    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. Maxim N. Kotsemir & Tatiana E. Kuznetsova & Elena G. Nasybulina & Anna G. Pikalova, 2015. "Empirical Analysis of Multinational S&T Collaboration Priorities –The Case of Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 53/STI/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    2. Ba, Zhichao & Mao, Jin & Ma, Yaxue & Liang, Zhentao, 2021. "Exploring the effect of city-level collaboration and knowledge networks on innovation: Evidence from energy conservation field," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    3. Johannes van Der Pol & Jean-Paul Rameshkoumar & Sarah Teulière & Thierry Bazerque, 2021. "Extending A Regional Innovation Network: A Technology Intelligence Approach," Working Papers hal-03287981, HAL.
    4. Stefano Brusoni & Paola Criscuolo & Aldo Geuna, 2005. "The knowledge bases of the world's largest pharmaceutical groups: what do patent citations to non-patent literature reveal?," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 395-415.
    5. Ferrucci, Edoardo, 2020. "Migration, innovation and technological diversion: German patenting after the collapse of the Soviet Union," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(9).
    6. Turanay Caner & Susan K. Cohen & Frits Pil, 2017. "Firm heterogeneity in complex problem solving: A knowledge-based look at invention," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(9), pages 1791-1811, September.
    7. Leten, Bart & Kelchtermans, Stijn & Belderbos, Ren, 2010. "Internal Basic Research, External Basic Research and the Technological Performance of Pharmaceutical Firms," Working Papers 2010/12, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    8. Maxim Kotsemir & Tatiana Kuznetsova & Elena Nasybulina & Anna Pikalova, 2015. "Identifying Directions for Russia’s Science and Technology Cooperation," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 9(4), pages 54-72.
      • Maxim Kotsemir & Tatiana Kuznetsova & Elena Nasybulina & Anna Pikalova, 2015. "Identifying Directions for Russia’s Science and Technology Cooperation," Foresight-Russia Форсайт, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 9(4 (eng)), pages 54-72.
    9. Anna Comacchio & Sara Bonesso & Claudio Pizzi, 2012. "Boundary spanning between industry and university: the role of Technology Transfer Centres," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(6), pages 943-966, December.
    10. Finn Valentin & Maria Theresa Norn & Lars Alkaersig, 2016. "Orientations and outcome of interdisciplinary research: the case of research behaviour in translational medical science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 67-90, January.
    11. Xia Fan & Wenjie Liu & Guilong Zhu, 2017. "Scientific linkage and technological innovation capabilities: international comparisons of patenting in the solar energy industry," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(1), pages 117-138, April.
    12. Anna Giunta & Filippo M. Pericoli & Eleonora Pierucci, 2016. "University–Industry collaboration in the biopharmaceuticals: the Italian case," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 818-840, August.
    13. Brusoni, Stefano & Geuna, Aldo, 2003. "An international comparison of sectoral knowledge bases: persistence and integration in the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1897-1912, December.
    14. Belderbos, René & Mohnen, Pierre, 2020. "Inter-sectoral and international R&D spillovers," MERIT Working Papers 2020-047, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    15. Larsen, Maria Theresa, 2011. "The implications of academic enterprise for public science: An overview of the empirical evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 6-19, February.
    16. Novelli, Elena, 2015. "An examination of the antecedents and implications of patent scope," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 493-507.
    17. Eleonora Pierucci, 2015. "University-industry linkages. Among italian regions: a supply-demand analysis," RIVISTA DI ECONOMIA E STATISTICA DEL TERRITORIO, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2015(2), pages 5-33.
    18. Clara Calero & Thed N. Leeuwen & Robert J. W. Tijssen, 2007. "Research cooperation within the bio-pharmaceutical industry: Network analyses of co-publications within and between firms," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(1), pages 87-99, April.
    19. Yi-Ching Liaw & Te-Yi Chan & Chin-Yuan Fan & Cheng-Hsin Chiang, 2014. "Can the technological impact of academic journals be evaluated? The practice of non-patent reference (NPR) analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 17-37, October.
    20. Chihmao Hsieh, 2011. "Explicitly searching for useful inventions: dynamic relatedness and the costs of connecting versus synthesizing," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 381-404, February.

    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. Ugo Rizzo & Nicolò Barbieri & Laura Ramaciotti & Demian Iannantuono, 2020. "The division of labour between academia and industry for the generation of radical inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 393-413, April.
    2. Bruce Rasmussen, 2010. "Innovation and Commercialisation in the Biopharmaceutical Industry," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13680.
    3. Brusoni, Stefano & Geuna, Aldo, 2003. "An international comparison of sectoral knowledge bases: persistence and integration in the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1897-1912, December.
    4. Kenneth Zahringer & Christos Kolympiris & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, 2017. "Academic knowledge quality differentials and the quality of firm innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(5), pages 821-844.
    5. Turanay Caner & Susan K. Cohen & Frits Pil, 2017. "Firm heterogeneity in complex problem solving: A knowledge-based look at invention," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(9), pages 1791-1811, September.
    6. Leten, Bart & Kelchtermans, Stijn & Belderbos, Ren, 2010. "Internal Basic Research, External Basic Research and the Technological Performance of Pharmaceutical Firms," Working Papers 2010/12, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    7. Bastian Rake, 2017. "Determinants of pharmaceutical innovation: the role of technological opportunities revisited," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 691-727, September.
    8. Zhang, Jing & Baden-Fuller, Charles & Mangematin, Vincent, 2007. "Technological knowledge base, R&D organization structure and alliance formation: Evidence from the biopharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 515-528, May.
    9. Clara Calero & Thed N. Leeuwen & Robert J. W. Tijssen, 2007. "Research cooperation within the bio-pharmaceutical industry: Network analyses of co-publications within and between firms," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(1), pages 87-99, April.
    10. Jaegul Lee & Nicholas Berente, 2012. "Digital Innovation and the Division of Innovative Labor: Digital Controls in the Automotive Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1428-1447, October.
    11. Franco Malerba & Luigi Orsenigo, 2000. "Towards a History Friendly Model of Innovation, Market Structure and Regulation in the Dynamics of the Pharmaceutical Industry: the Age of Random Screening," KITeS Working Papers 124, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Jan 2001.
    12. Anna Cabigiosu, 2018. "When do modular dominant designs emerge? A theoretical framework," Working Papers 05, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    13. Jing Zhang & Charles Baden‐Fuller, 2010. "The Influence of Technological Knowledge Base and Organizational Structure on Technology Collaboration," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 679-704, June.
    14. Sai Yayavaram & Manish K. Srivastava & MB Sarkar, 2018. "Role of search for domain knowledge and architectural knowledge in alliance partner selection," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(8), pages 2277-2302, August.
    15. Battke, Benedikt & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Stollenwerk, Stephan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Internal or external spillovers—Which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-41.
    16. Lee Branstetter & Kwon Hyeog Ug, 2004. "The Restructuring Of Japanese Research And Development: The Increasing Impact Of Science On Japanese R&D," Discussion papers 04021, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    17. Billette de Villemeur, Etienne & Versaevel, Bruno, 2019. "One lab, two firms, many possibilities: On R&D outsourcing in the biopharmaceutical industry," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 260-283.
    18. Malo, Stéphane, 2009. "The contribution of (not so) public research to commercial innovations in the field of combinatorial chemistry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 957-970, July.
    19. Rahul Kapoor & Ron Adner, 2012. "What Firms Make vs. What They Know: How Firms' Production and Knowledge Boundaries Affect Competitive Advantage in the Face of Technological Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1227-1248, October.
    20. Dibiaggio, Ludovic & Nasiriyar, Maryam & Nesta, Lionel, 2014. "Substitutability and complementarity of technological knowledge and the inventive performance of semiconductor companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1582-1593.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Knowledge Breadth; Depth; Integration; Patent Citations; Scientific Publications; Pharmaceuticals;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights
    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • L65 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Chemicals; Rubber; Drugs; Biotechnology; Plastics

    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:sru:ssewps:90. 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: University of Sussex Business School Communications Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/spessuk.html .

    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.