[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v175y2022ics0040162521007988.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Invented here but owned elsewhere: The widening gap between domestic and foreign patent ownership in Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Alam, Md Razib
  • Dalziel, Margaret
  • Cozzarin, Brian P.
Abstract
Using Canadian-invented patents granted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office during the period between 1995 and 2014, we investigate how ownership of Canadian inventions varies across time and by technology, geographic region, quality of invention, and the presence of superstar firms. Our findings show that the gap between Canadian-invented and Canadian-owned technologies has grown since 1995, and that an increasing number of Canadian-invented patents are owned by foreign, primarily US, firms. In terms of technical areas, Canadian-owned patents in biotechnology have declined and there has been sharp growth in both Canadian- and foreign-owned patents in information technology and telecom. Approximately 60% of Canadian-invented patents originate from Toronto, Ottawa-Gatineau, Montreal, Vancouver, Kitchener-Cambridge-Waterloo (KCW), and Calgary. The quality of Canadian-invented patents increases over time, in part because the number of unassigned patents declines. The quality of foreign-owned patents is higher than the quality of Canadian-owned patents in all CMAs except KCW. At the firm level, while Blackberry and Nortel are responsible for a disproportionate number of Canadian-owned patents, the ownership of foreign-owned patents is more widely distributed. Our findings point to where Canadian innovation vulnerabilities are most severe, where they are worsening, and where there is cause for hope.

Suggested Citation

  • Alam, Md Razib & Dalziel, Margaret & Cozzarin, Brian P., 2022. "Invented here but owned elsewhere: The widening gap between domestic and foreign patent ownership in Canada," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:175:y:2022:i:c:s0040162521007988
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121367
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162521007988
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121367?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adam B. Jaffe & Josh Lerner, 2006. "Innovation and its Discontents," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 6, pages 27-66, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Figueroa, Nicolás & Serrano, Carlos J., 2019. "Patent trading flows of small and large firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1601-1616.
    3. 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.
    4. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. David Autor & David Dorn & Lawrence F Katz & Christina Patterson & John Van Reenen, 2020. "The Fall of the Labor Share and the Rise of Superstar Firms [“Automation and New Tasks: How Technology Displaces and Reinstates Labor”]," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(2), pages 645-709.
    6. Puga, Diego & Trefler, Daniel, 2010. "Wake up and smell the ginseng: International trade and the rise of incremental innovation in low-wage countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 64-76, January.
    7. Schankerman, Mark & Pakes, Ariel, 1986. "Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in European Countries during the Post-1950 Period," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 96(384), pages 1052-1076, December.
    8. Hui-Yun Sung & Chun-Chieh Wang & Dar-Zen Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2014. "A comparative study of patent counts by the inventor country and the assignee country," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(2), pages 577-593, August.
    9. Carlos J. Serrano, 2010. "The dynamics of the transfer and renewal of patents," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 686-708, December.
    10. Nemet, Gregory F. & Johnson, Evan, 2012. "Do important inventions benefit from knowledge originating in other technological domains?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 190-200.
    11. Alcácer, Juan & Gittelman, Michelle & Sampat, Bhaven, 2009. "Applicant and examiner citations in U.S. patents: An overview and analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 415-427, March.
    12. Ardito, Lorenzo & D'Adda, Diego & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2018. "Mapping innovation dynamics in the Internet of Things domain: Evidence from patent analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 317-330.
    13. Michele Cincera & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie & Veugelers Reinhilde, 2006. "Assessing the foreign control of production of technology: The case of a small open economy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 66(3), pages 493-512, March.
    14. Trajtenberg, Manuel, 2001. "Innovation in Israel 1968-1997: a comparative analysis using patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 363-389, March.
    15. Agrawal, Ajay & Cockburn, Iain & Rosell, Carlos, 2010. "Not Invented Here? Innovation in company towns," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 78-89, January.
    16. 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.
    17. Tong, Xuesong & Frame, J. Davidson, 1994. "Measuring national technological performance with patent claims data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 133-141, March.
    18. 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.
    19. Jérôme Danguy, 2017. "Globalization of innovation production: A patent-based industry analysis," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(1), pages 75-94.
    20. Catherine Beaudry & Andrea Schiffauerova, 2011. "Is Canadian intellectual property leaving Canada? A study of nanotechnology patenting," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 665-679, December.
    21. Bessen, James, 2008. "The value of U.S. patents by owner and patent characteristics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 932-945, June.
    22. Leiponen, Aija & Delcamp, Henry, 2019. "The anatomy of a troll? Patent licensing business models in the light of patent reassignment data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 298-311.
    23. Ernest Miguelez & Carsten Fink, 2013. "Measuring the International Mobility of Inventors: A New Database," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 08, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, revised May 2013.
    24. Audretsch, David B., 1995. "Innovation, growth and survival," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 441-457, December.
    25. Popp David & Juhl Ted & Johnson Daniel K.N., 2004. "Time In Purgatory: Examining the Grant Lag for U.S. Patent Applications," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-45, November.
    26. Guellec, Dominique & Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno v., 2001. "The internationalisation of technology analysed with patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(8), pages 1253-1266, October.
    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. Patel, Parimal & Pavitt, Keith, 1994. "The continuing, widespread (and neglected) importance of improvements in mechanical technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 533-545, September.
    29. repec:bla:jindec:v:46:y:1998:i:4:p:405-32 is not listed on IDEAS
    30. Alan C. Marco & Richard D. Miller, 2019. "Patent Examination Quality and Litigation: Is There a Link?," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 65-91, January.
    31. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    32. 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 101-128, Spring.
    33. Furman, Jeffrey L. & Porter, Michael E. & Stern, Scott, 2002. "The determinants of national innovative capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 899-933, August.
    34. repec:wip:wpaper:8 is not listed on IDEAS
    35. Jeffrey Kuhn & Kenneth Younge & Alan Marco, 2020. "Patent citations reexamined," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(1), pages 109-132, March.
    36. Mahmood, Ishtiaq P. & Singh, Jasjit, 2003. "Technological dynamism in Asia," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1031-1054, June.
    37. Brian S. Silverman, 1999. "Technological Resources and the Direction of Corporate Diversification: Toward an Integration of the Resource-Based View and Transaction Cost Economics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(8), pages 1109-1124, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Redha Fares & Amélie Guillin, 2022. "R&D expenditures and firm survival," Erudite Working Paper 2022-04, Erudite.
    2. Redha Fares, 2022. "Bankruptcy, Performance and Market Selection: Evidence from Firms in France," Erudite Ph.D Dissertations, Erudite, number ph22-01 edited by Claude Mathieu.

    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. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    2. Appio, Francesco Paolo & Baglieri, Daniela & Cesaroni, Fabrizio & Spicuzza, Lucia & Donato, Alessia, 2022. "Patent design strategies: Empirical evidence from European patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    3. Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli & Daniele Rotolo & Vito Albino, 2014. "Determinants of Patent Citations in Biotechnology: An Analysis of Patent Influence Across the Industrial and Organizational Boundaries," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-05, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    4. Cesare Righi & Davide Cannito & Theodor Vladasel, 2023. "Continuing Patent Applications at the USPTO," Working Papers 1382, Barcelona School of Economics.
    5. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2009. "From patent renewals to applications survival: do portfolio management strategies play a role in patent length?," Working Papers CEB 09-028.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    6. Cesare Righi & Davide Cannito & Theodor Vladasel, 2023. "Continuing patent applications at the USPTO," Economics Working Papers 1855, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    7. Righi, Cesare & Cannito, Davide & Vladasel, Theodor, 2023. "Continuing patent applications at the USPTO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(4).
    8. Nicolas van Zeebroeck & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "Filing strategies and patent value," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 539-561, February.
    9. Hur, Wonchang & Oh, Junbyoung, 2021. "A man is known by the company he keeps?: A structural relationship between backward citation and forward citation of patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    10. Antoine Dechezleprêtre & Yann Ménière & Myra Mohnen, 2017. "International patent families: from application strategies to statistical indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 793-828, May.
    11. Caviggioli, Federico & De Marco, Antonio & Montobbio, Fabio & Ughetto, Elisa, 2020. "The licensing and selling of inventions by US universities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    12. Liu, Li-jun & Cao, Cong & Song, Min, 2014. "China's agricultural patents: How has their value changed amid recent patent boom?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 106-121.
    13. 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.
    14. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2021. "Identification of “Valuable” Technologies via Patent Statistics in India: An Analysis Based on Renewal Information," BASE University Working Papers 13/2021, BASE University, Bengaluru, India.
    15. Choi, Mincheol & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2021. "Technological diversification and R&D productivity: The moderating effects of knowledge spillovers and core-technology competence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    16. Marc Baudry & Adrien Hervouet, 2017. "The private value of plant variety protection and the impact of exemption rules," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 202-226, April.
    17. Barirani, Ahmad & Beaudry, Catherine & Agard, Bruno, 2017. "Can universities profit from general purpose inventions? The case of Canadian nanotechnology patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 271-283.
    18. Higham, Kyle & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Jaffe, Adam B., 2021. "Patent Quality: Towards a Systematic Framework for Analysis and Measurement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    19. Moaniba, Igam M. & Lee, Pei-Chun & Su, Hsin-Ning, 2020. "How does external knowledge sourcing enhance product development? Evidence from drug commercialization," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    20. Federico Munari & Maurizio Sobrero, 2011. "Economic and Management Perspectives on the Value of Patents," Chapters, in: Federico Munari & Raffaele Oriani (ed.), The Economic Valuation of Patents, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    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:eee:tefoso:v:175:y:2022:i:c:s0040162521007988. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.