| Abstract: |
The goal of science is to advance knowledge, yet little is known about its
value for marketplace inventions. While important breakthrough technologies
could not have been developed without scientific background, skeptics argue
that this is the exception rather than the rule, questioning the usefulness of
basic research for private sector innovations and the effectiveness of the
knowledge transfer from university to industry. We analyze the universe of
U.S. patents to establish three new facts about the relationship between
science and the value of inventions. First, we show that a patent that
directly builds on science is on average 2.9 million U.S. dollars more
valuable than a patent in the same technology that is unrelated to science.
Based on the analysis of the patent text, we show second that the novelty of
patents predicts their value, and third that science-intensive patents are
more novel. This documents that science introduces new concepts that are
valuable for marketplace inventions. Our study informs the debate on the
merits of science for corporate innovation and the origins of breakthrough
inventions. |