|
on Intellectual Property Rights |
| By: | Stremersch, S.; Verniers, I.; Verhoef, P.C. (Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), RSM Erasmus University) |
| Abstract: | Why do some articles become building blocks for future scholars, while many others remain unnoticed? We aim to answer this question by contrasting, synthesizing and simultaneously testing three scientometric perspectives ? universalism, social constructivism and presentation ? on the influence of article and author characteristics on article citations. To do so, we study all articles published in a sample of five major journals in marketing from 1990 to 2002 that are central to the discipline. We count the number of citations each of these articles has received and regress this count on an extensive set of characteristics of the article (i.e. article quality, article domain, title length, the use of attention grabbers and expositional clarity), and the author (i.e. author visibility and author personal promotion). We find that the number of citations an article in the marketing discipline receives, depends upon ?what one says? (quality and domain), on ?who says it? (author visibility and personal promotion) and not so much on ?how one says it? (title length, the use of attention grabbers, and expositional clarity). Our insights contribute to the marketing literature and are relevant to scientific stakeholders, such as the management of scientific journals and individual academic scholars, as they strive to maximize citations. They are also relevant to marketing practitioners. They inform practitioners on characteristics of the academic journals in marketing and their relevance to decisions they face. On the other hand, they also raise challenges towards making our journals accessible and relevant to marketing practitioners: (1) authors visible to academics are not necessarily visible to practitioners; (2) the readability of an article may hurt academic credibility and impact, while it may be instrumental in influencing practitioners; (3) it remains questionable whether articles that academics assess to be of high quality are also managerially relevant. |
| Keywords: | Scientometrics;Citation Analysis;Cite;Referencing;Impact; |
| Date: | 2006–11–28 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:dgr:eureri:30009135&r=ipr |
| By: | Madeleine Akrich (CSI - Centre de sociologie de l'innovation - [CNRS : UMR7120] - [Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris]); Riel Miller (DTI - Danish Technology Institute - [Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation]) |
| Abstract: | This text is a draft version of the synthesis report based on the work of the High Level Expert Group on the Future of <br />Research Actors (RA) in the European Research Area (ERA). This group was set up by the Technology Foresight Group, DG Research, European Commision. Many of the conclusions of this synthesis report are fully consistent with the directions of <br />current research policies. The work of the group highlights the importance of <br />efforts, already well underway, to reinforce the functioning of the ERA as an integrated base <br />that overcomes a wide range of geographic, institutional and disciplinary barriers to the both <br />the competition and sharing of knowledge. Knitting together the different European research <br />actors into a more transparent and diversified whole would seem to be one of the best ways <br />to create a stronger platform for knowledge creation and diffusion. A less anticipated <br />conclusion, and less part of the existing consensus, is that simply pursuing the ambition of <br />multiplying the number of effective research platforms in Europe may miss a key part of <br />tomorrow's research agenda. The in-depth expert papers on the eight different research <br />actors of the ERA, the insights arising from the synthesis developed in this paper, and the <br />analytical results of a rare scenario pooling exercise, all point very clearly to the risk that <br />current policies are excessively technology centric and may miss crucial emerging attributes <br />of research and research actors in the knowledge society. Thus, over and above the value- <br />added for assessing the direction and implementation of current approaches to improving the <br />production and use of research in Europe, this report recommends new policies aimed at <br />accelerating the development of emergent forms and sources of research. The policy <br />message is that Europe must move beyond industrial-era challenges to embrace those of the <br />knowledge society. <br />Further opening, expanding and integrating the European Research Area requires: <br />1) Policies that put into practice expanded criteria for designing and funding research <br />programmes for the European Research Area to include user-centred technological, <br />organisational and social innovation. <br />2) Policies that initiate experiments that validate (quality/trust/transparency) new forms and <br />producers (including individual independent researchers) of knowledge. <br />3) Policies, both budgetary and regulatory, that create and facilitate both new collaborative <br />environments for research, including user-centred research, and new governance <br />processes.<br />4) Policies to enhance the capacity of policy makers (including at the regional level) to <br />recognise and facilitate new forms of research and particularly new approaches to the <br />governance of research processes. <br />5) Policies to abolish national borders for researchers and for students both within Europe <br />and outside Europe. <br />6) Policies to strengthen the autonomy of universities, including areas so far strictly <br />controlled by most governments such as a university's strategic profile and selection of <br />specialisations. <br />7) Further research is required regarding the relationship between the changing nature of <br />research and intellectual property rights (IPR). <br />8) Further research is required regarding the functional division of labour amongst different <br />research actors in the context of the emerging “open innovation model”. <br />9) Further research is required in order to describe and analyse the contribution of civil <br />society to research and innovation. <br />10) Further research is required on how to establish trust in highly complex and diversified <br />knowledge societies. <br />11) Further research is required to define and measure new forms of innovation, particularly <br />with respect to the innovation related research occurring in the service sector, SMEs and <br />the community (social innovation) that point towards new models of innovation. |
| Keywords: | RESEARCH ORGANIZATION; UNIVERSITIES; CIVIL SOCIETY; MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISES; SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISES; NATIONAL GOVERNMENTS; REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS; RESEARCH POLICIES; RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ORGANIZATIONS; FORESIGHT; EUROPE |
| Date: | 2006–11–27 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:papers:halshs-00116775_v1&r=ipr |
| By: | Francois, Didier; van Pottelsberghe, Bruno |
| Abstract: | The objective of this paper is to assess whether and to what extent the cost of patenting affects the demand for patents. The empirical analysis, which focuses on the patent systems of the USA, Japan, and Europe during the year 2003, leads to the following methodological and empirical observations: i) after the grant, the translation, validation and transaction costs induced by an effective protection in several European countries witness a highly fragmented and very expensive European market for intellectual property; ii) for a proper international comparison, the size of the market and the average number of claims must be accounted for; iii) when the cost per claim per capita (the 3C-index) is considered, a negative linear relationship appears between the cost of patenting and the number of claims that are filed; iv) for a patent designating 13 European countries, the 3C-index is about 10 (2) times higher than in the US (Japanese) system (for process and translation costs up to the grant); v) The European market being more than twice as large as the US market in terms of inhabitants, the 3C-index suggests that there would be a clear justification for higher nominal examination fees at the EPO, that would ensure a rigorous granting process. |
| Keywords: | cost elasticity; cost per claim per capita; patent systems; patents |
| JEL: | O34 P14 P51 |
| Date: | 2006–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:5944&r=ipr |
| By: | Maria Jesus Nieto; Lluis Santamaria |
| Abstract: | This paper analyses technological collaboration as an input to the innovation processes of SMEs. Technological collaboration may be a useful mechanism to offset some of the weaknesses in SMEs’ resource endowments and bring their innovation capabilities closer to that of their large counterparts. The results, based on a large longitudinal sample of Spanish manufacturing firms, show that technological collaboration is a critical factor in improving the capabilities and innovativeness of SMEs. While a general bridging of the gap between the innovativeness of SMEs and large firms was observed, the most significant advance was in product rather than process innovations. |
| Date: | 2006–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cte:wbrepe:wb066620&r=ipr |