IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wzb/wzebiv/fsiv97-26.html

Citation Frequency and the Value of Patented Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Dietmar Harhoff
  • Francis Narin
  • Frederic M. Scherer
  • Katrin Vopel

Abstract

Through a survey, economic value estimates were obtained on 962 inventions made in the United States and Germany and on which German patent renewal fees were paid to full-term expiration in 1995. A search of subsequent U.S. and German patents yielded a count of citations to those patents. Patents renewed to full term were significantly more valuable than patents allowed to expire before their full term. The higher an invention's economic value estimate was, the more the relevant patent was subsequently cited. results from two wide-ranging surveys, one in Germany and one in the United States, support Trajtenberg's conclusion that patents with greater economic value are more heavily cited in subsequent patents. Our evidence suggests at least a two-stage escalation of economic values and citation counts. First, patents that are renewed to full term expiration in environments such as Germany with highly progressive annual maintenance fees are more valuable and more highly cited than run-of-the-mill patents allowed to expire before running to full term. Second, within the relatively exclusive cohort of fullterm patents, citation frequency rises with economic value, although with considerable noise in the relationship. The most cited patents turn out to be very valuable indeed, with a single U.S. citation implying on average more than $1 million of economic value. These findings provide new support for research seeking to overcome the limitations of simple patent counts as a measure of innovative contribution by acquiring data on citation frequencies and the number of nations in which patent protection is sought. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG - (Zitationenzahl und der Wert der Patent-Innovation) Durch eine Unternehmensbefragung wurde der Wert von 962 Patenten von US-amerikanischen und deutschen Anmeldern ermittelt, die den Patentschutz durch Zahlung der Verlängerungsgebühren von 1977 bis 1995 in Deutschland aufrechterhalten hatten. Außerdem wurde für diese Patente die Zahl der Zitationen (Bezugnahmen in späteren Patenten) ermittelt. Die bis zur gesetzlichen Laufzeit aufrechterhaltenen Patente wiesen eine signifikant höhere Zahl von Zitationen auf als Patente, die nicht verlängert worden waren. Zwischen der Zahl der Zitationen und dem Wert eines Patentes gibt es einen statistisch signifikanten Zusammenhang, der in dieser Studie näher beschrieben wird.

Suggested Citation

  • Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & Frederic M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1997. "Citation Frequency and the Value of Patented Innovation," CIG Working Papers FS IV 97-26, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    • Handle: RePEc:wzb:wzebiv:fsiv97-26
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://skylla.wz-berlin.de/pdf/1997/iv97-26.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    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. Jean O. Lanjouw & Ariel Pakes & Jonathan Putnam, 1998. "How to Count Patents and Value Intellectual Property: The Uses of Patent Renewal and Application Data," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 405-432, December.
    3. Scherer, Frederic M. & Harhoff, Dietmar & Vopel, Katrin, 1997. "Exploring the Tail of Patented Invention Value Distributions," ZEW Discussion Papers 97-30, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    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. Gilles Koléda, 2005. "La valeur de la protection des brevets français appréciée par leurs renouvellements," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 168(2), pages 97-114.
    2. William Kingston, 2004. "Nelson's Concerns About Intellectual Property," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000000461, David K. Levine.
    3. Dahlin, Kristina & Taylor, Margaret & Fichman, Mark, 2004. "Today's Edisons or weekend hobbyists: technical merit and success of inventions by independent inventors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1167-1183, October.
    4. Bulat Sanditov, 2005. "Patent Citations, the Value of Innovations and Path-Dependency," KITeS Working Papers 177, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Nov 2005.
    5. Guan-Can Yang & Gang Li & Chun-Ya Li & Yun-Hua Zhao & Jing Zhang & Tong Liu & Dar-Zen Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2015. "Using the comprehensive patent citation network (CPC) to evaluate patent value," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1319-1346, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Yi Deng, 2003. "A Dynamic Stochastic Analysis of International Patent Application and Renewal Processes," Computing in Economics and Finance 2003 189, Society for Computational Economics.
    8. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Adam B. Jaffe, 2018. "Are patent fees effective at weeding out low‐quality patents?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 134-148, March.
    9. Fischer, Timo & Henkel, Joachim, 2012. "Patent trolls on markets for technology – An empirical analysis of NPEs’ patent acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1519-1533.
    10. Dominique Guellec & Bruno Van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2002. "The Value of Patents and Patenting Strategies: Countries and Technology Areas Patterns," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 133-148.
    11. Yong-Gil Lee, 2010. "Sectoral strategic differences of technological development between electronics and chemistry: a historical view from analyses of Korean-invented US patents during the period of 1989–1992," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(1), pages 83-92, January.
    12. Daniel Johnson, 2002. ""Learning-by-Licensing": R&D and Technology Licensing in Brazilian Invention," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 163-177.
    13. Hegde, Deepak & Sampat, Bhaven, 2009. "Examiner citations, applicant citations, and the private value of patents," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(3), pages 287-289, December.
    14. Jonathan H. Ashtor, 2019. "Investigating Cohort Similarity as an Ex Ante Alternative to Patent Forward Citations," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 848-880, December.
    15. Austin, David H., 2000. "Patents, Spillovers, and Competition in Biotechnology," Discussion Papers 10808, Resources for the Future.
    16. Catherine Y. Co, 2004. "How Valuable are the Patents Behind Section 337 Cases?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 525-539, April.
    17. Laurie Ciaramella & Catalina Martínez & Yann Ménière, 2017. "Tracking patent transfers in different European countries: methods and a first application to medical technologies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(2), pages 817-850, August.
    18. Michele Boldrin & David K. Levine, 2005. "Intellectual property and market size," Staff Report 360, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    19. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    20. Ufuk Akcigit, 2009. "Firm Size, Innovation Dynamics and Growth," 2009 Meeting Papers 1267, Society for Economic Dynamics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • O47 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Empirical Studies of Economic Growth; Aggregate Productivity; Cross-Country Output Convergence

    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:wzb:wzebiv:fsiv97-26. 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: Jennifer Rontganger (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cicwzde.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.