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

Quantity or quality? Collaboration strategies in research and development and incentives to patent

  • Hottenrott, Hanna
  • Lopes-Bento, Cindy

This study shows for a large sample of R&D-active manufacturing firms that collaborative R&D has a positive effect on firms' patenting in terms of both quantity and quality. When distinguishing between alliances that aim at joint creation of new knowledge and alliances that aim at exchange of existing knowledge, the results suggest that the positive effect on patent quantity is driven by knowledge exchange rather than joint R&D. Firms engaged in joint R&D, on the other hand, receive more forward citations per patent indicating that joint R&D enhances patent quality. In light of literature on strategic patenting, our results further suggest that knowledge creation alliances lead to patents that are filed to protect valuable intellectual property, while exchange alliances drive portfolio patenting, resulting in fewer forward citations.

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://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/60480/1/720790735.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research in its series ZEW Discussion Papers with number 12-047.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2012
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:12047
Contact details of provider: Postal: L 7,1; D - 68161 Mannheim
Phone: +49/621/1235-01
Fax: +49/621/1235-224
Web page: http://www.zew.de/
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. Blundell, Richard & Griffith, Rachel & Van Reenen, John, 1995. "Dynamic Count Data Models of Technological Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(429), pages 333-44, March.
  2. Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 1999. "Distribution-free estimation of some nonlinear panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 77-97, May.
  3. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
  4. Vanhaverbeke, W. & Beerkens, B. & Duysters, G., 2001. "Technological capability building through networking strategies within high-tech industries," Working Papers 01.15, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
  5. Ariel Pakes & Zvi Griliches, 1982. "Estimating Distributed Lags in Short Panels with an Application to the Specification of Depreciation Patterns and Capital Stock Constructs," NBER Working Papers 0933, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1, May.
  7. Melissa A. Schilling & Corey C. Phelps, 2007. "Interfirm Collaboration Networks: The Impact of Large-Scale Network Structure on Firm Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(7), pages 1113-1126, July.
  8. Yannis Caloghirou & Stavros Ioannides & Nicholas S. Vonortas, 2003. "Research Joint Ventures," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(4), pages 541-570, 09.
  9. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
  10. Gourieroux Christian & Monfort Alain & Trognon A, 1982. "Pseudo maximum lilelihood methods : applications to poisson models," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Couverture Orange) 8203, CEPREMAP.
  11. Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Frank Windmeijer, 1999. "Individual effects and dynamics in count data models," IFS Working Papers W99/03, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  12. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1994. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," NBER Technical Working Papers 0151, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  13. Deeds, David L. & Hill, Charles W. L., 1996. "Strategic alliances and the rate of new product development: An empirical study of entrepreneurial biotechnology firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 41-55, January.
  14. Blind, Knut & Cremers, Katrin & Mueller, Elisabeth, 2009. "The influence of strategic patenting on companies' patent portfolios," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 428-436, March.
  15. 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.
  16. Gnyawali, Devi R. & Park, Byung-Jin (Robert), 2011. "Co-opetition between giants: Collaboration with competitors for technological innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 650-663, June.
  17. Noel, Michael D. & Schankerman, Mark, 2006. "Strategic Patenting and Software Innovation," CEPR Discussion Papers 5701, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  18. Frank Windmeijer & Joao Santos Silva, 1996. "Endogeneity in count data models; an application to demand for health care," IFS Working Papers W96/15, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  19. Loof, Hans & Heshmati, Almas, 2002. "Knowledge capital and performance heterogeneity: : A firm-level innovation study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 61-85, March.
  20. Edwin Mansfield, 1986. "Patents and Innovation: An Empirical Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 173-181, February.
  21. Brouwer, Erik & Kleinknecht, Alfred, 1999. "Innovative output, and a firm's propensity to patent.: An exploration of CIS micro data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 615-624, August.
  22. Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
  23. Albert, M. B. & Avery, D. & Narin, F. & McAllister, P., 1991. "Direct validation of citation counts as indicators of industrially important patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 251-259, June.
  24. Leahy, Dermot & Neary, J Peter, 1995. "Public Policy Towards R&D in Oligopolistic Industries," CEPR Discussion Papers 1243, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  25. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Introduction to "R & D, Patents, and Productivity"," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 1-20 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  26. Mody, Ashoka, 1993. "Learning through alliances," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 151-170, February.
  27. 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.
  28. Cohen, Wesley M. & Goto, Akira & Nagata, Akiya & Nelson, Richard R. & Walsh, John P., 2002. "R&D spillovers, patents and the incentives to innovate in Japan and the United States," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1349-1367, December.
  29. Hagedoorn, John & Link, Albert N. & Vonortas, Nicholas S., 2000. "Research partnerships1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 567-586, April.
  30. Peters, Bettina & Lööf, Hans & Janz, Norbert, 2003. "Firm Level Innovation and Productivity: Is there a Common Story Across Countries?," ZEW Discussion Papers 03-26, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  31. Fier, Andreas & Ebersberger, Bernd & Czarnitzki, Dirk, 2006. "The Relationship between R&D Collaboration, Subsidies and Patenting Activity: Empirical Evidence from Finland and Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 04-37 [rev.], ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  32. Carine Peeters & Bruno Van Pottelsberghe, 2006. "Innovation strategy and the patenting behavior of firms," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/167553, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  33. Luuk Klomp & George Van Leeuwen, 2001. "Linking Innovation and Firm Performance: A New Approach," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 343-364.
  34. Harabi, N., 1993. "Appropriabiblity of Technical Innovations: An Empirical Analysis," Papers 31a, Universitat Zurich - Wirtschaftswissenschaftliches Institut.
  35. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2004. "Patent Quality and Research Productivity: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 441-465, 04.
  36. Michael Noel & Mark Schankerman, 2006. "Strategic Patenting and Software Innovation," STICERD - Economics of Industry Papers 43, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
  37. 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.
  38. Michael Noel & Mark Schankerman, 2006. "Strategic Patenting and Software Innovation," CEP Discussion Papers dp0740, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  39. Hall, Bronwyn H & Ziedonis, Rosemarie Ham, 2001. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 101-28, Spring.
  40. Lee G. Branstetter & Mariko Sakakibara, 2002. "When Do Research Consortia Work Well and Why? Evidence from Japanese Panel Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 143-159, March.
  41. Corinne Autant-Bernard & Jacques Mairesse & Nadine Massard, 2007. "Spatial knowledge diffusion through collaborative networks," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 86(3), pages 341-350, 08.
  42. Gomes-Casseres, Benjamin & Hagedoorn, John & Jaffe, Adam B., 2006. "Do alliances promote knowledge flows?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 5-33, April.
  43. Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & F. M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1999. "Citation Frequency And The Value Of Patented Inventions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 511-515, August.
  44. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Fier, Andreas, 2003. "Publicly Funded R&D Collaborations and Patent Outcome in Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 03-24, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
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:zbw:zewdip:12047. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)

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.