|
on Technology and Industrial Dynamics |
| By: | Francesco LISSONI; Ernest MIGUELEZ |
| Abstract: | In this paper we review 20 years of quantitative research in the geography of innovation, to whose advancement patent data have contributed in a decisive way. We know now that the importance attributed by the earliest studies to knowledge externalities as an agglomeration force was excessive. Localized knowledge flows exist, and explain agglomeration, but they are largely mediated by the labor market and markets for technologies. Besides, we know now that physical distance may affect knowledge diffusion, but so do social distance between inventors as well as inter- and intra-national borders. We also witness an ongoing widening of the research focus, from local/regional to international, with migration issues concerning inventors coming to the forefront. |
| Keywords: | economic geography, patents, intellectual property, innovation, inventors, spillovers, migration |
| JEL: | F22 J61 O31 R11 R12 |
| Date: | 2014 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:grt:wpegrt:2014-16&r=tid |
| By: | Pablo D’Este (INGENIO [CSIC-UPV], Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, Spain); Alberto Marzucchi (Dept. of International Economics, Institutions and Development (DISEIS), Catholic University of Milan, Italy; INGENIO [CSIC-UPV], Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, Spain); Francesco Rentocchini (Southampton Business School, University of Southampton, United Kingdom) |
| Keywords: | innovation failure, exploration, exploitation, human capital, learning |
| JEL: | O32 D83 D22 J24 |
| Date: | 2014–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sru:ssewps:2014-23&r=tid |
| By: | Havas, Attila |
| Abstract: | Against the backdrop of a strong plea for evidence-based policy, this paper juxtaposes how innovation is analyzed in mainstream economics and evolutionary economics of innovation, as well as their concomitant policy rationales. By discussing the indicators selected for the Innovation Union Scoreboard and another major EU report, it argues that the science-push model of innovation is still highly influential in the EU STI policy circles, despite a rich set of research insights stressing the importance of non-R&D types of knowledge in innovation processes. In conclusion, the chapter highlights the potential drawbacks of the persistent high-tech myth, considers possible reasons for its perseverance and discusses policy implications of the systemic view of innovation. Those include: i) STI policies should promote knowledge-intensive activities in all sectors, including low- and medium-technology industries and services; ii) it is a highly demanding set of tasks to identify systemic failures, devise appropriate policies to tackle those, and organize the required stakeholder dialogues; iii) several policies affect innovation processes and performance, perhaps even more strongly than STI policies, and hence policy goals and tools need to be orchestrated across several policy domains; iv) analysts and policy-makers need to be careful when interpreting their country’s ranking on ‘scoreboards’; v) the choice of an economics paradigm to guide policy evaluation is likely to be decisive. |
| Keywords: | Linear and networked models of innovation; Science-push; Market failure; Evolutionary economics of innovation; Systemic failures; STI policy; Opportunity costs |
| JEL: | B25 O31 O38 |
| Date: | 2014–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:58393&r=tid |
| By: | Mila Kashcheeva (Research Fellow, BB&T Center for Education and Economic Policy Studies, and Center for China Studies, Clemson University, USA.); Sacha Wunsch-Vincent (Economics and Statistics Division, WIPO); Hao Zhou (Economics and Statistics Division, WIPO) |
| Abstract: | In terms of the number of its patent applications, in 2012 China has emerged as the country with the largest IP office in the world. The performance of the Chinese IP system is thus increasingly in the spotlight. While significant economic studies have been devoted to the rise of domestic patenting in China, hardly any study has focused on Chinese patent filings in foreign countries. This paper analyzes Chinese patenting abroad by using WIPO’s foreign-oriented patent family dataset and a respective enterprise questionnaire. It finds that by the turn of the century China emerged as major actor in terms of international patenting. While this is changing rapidly, the share of Chinese patents which get filed abroad is still a fraction of total patents filed at home and most patents still also only target one foreign IP office. Chinese foreign-oriented patent families are concentrated in a few technology fields, notably those related to the ICT sector, “Digital communication”, followed by “Computer technology”, “Nanotechnology”, and similar fields. A few Chinese firms are responsible for a large share of total Chinese patents filed abroad. The paper however also highlights that some of these trends are changing rapidly towards more intensive and broad-based filing abroad. Initial results from a selective firm survey also show a shift from the desire to protect technologies abroad to more strategic motives: (i) the desire to build patent portfolios avoiding litigation, (ii) facilitating collaboration with other firms, but also to (iii) license and sell IP abroad, and to (iv) further the firm’s reputation as true innovator. |
| Keywords: | China, innovation, intellectual property, patents, patent families, information technology |
| JEL: | F20 F23 L86 O3 O31 O34 |
| Date: | 2014–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wip:wpaper:20&r=tid |