[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/11018.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Standards as a Knowledge Source for R&D: A first look at their incidence and impacts based on the inventor survey and patent bibliographic data

Author

Listed:
  • TSUKADA Naotoshi
  • NAGAOKA Sadao
Abstract
This paper analyzes how standards as a knowledge source are important for R&D, how significantly the (backward) citations by a patent of standard-related documents measure such knowledge flow, and how significantly they affect the performance of downstream R&D. Using both the RIETI inventor survey in Japan and the bibliographic information of triadic patents families, we show that standard information-that embodied in the standards and related documents-has become very important as a knowledge source for the conception of R&D projects in the information and telecommunication area (ICT), and that the frequency of the patents citing standard documents has been increasing. The citation information in US patent documents can be effectively used to measure the knowledge flows from standards to inventions, although it covers only a limited portion of the knowledge flow. The R&D projects intensively using standard information tend to generate valuable patents and also a large number of patents, controlling for research labor input, the use of scientific literature, as well as that of patent literature. A patent that uses private international forum standards as a knowledge source is significantly more cited than a patent that uses national or international public standards as a knowledge source.

Suggested Citation

  • TSUKADA Naotoshi & NAGAOKA Sadao, 2011. "Standards as a Knowledge Source for R&D: A first look at their incidence and impacts based on the inventor survey and patent bibliographic data," Discussion papers 11018, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:11018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/11e018.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juan Alcácer & Michelle Gittelman, 2006. "Patent Citations as a Measure of Knowledge Flows: The Influence of Examiner Citations," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 774-779, November.
    2. Uwe Cantner & Jean-Luc Gaffard & Lionel Nesta, 2008. "Schumpeterian perspectives on innovation, competition and growth," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 291-293, August.
    3. Bekkers, Rudi & Duysters, Geert & Verspagen, Bart, 2002. "Intellectual property rights, strategic technology agreements and market structure: The case of GSM," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1141-1161, September.
    4. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2000. "Market Value and Patent Citations: A First Look," NBER Working Papers 7741, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Carl Shapiro, 2001. "Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard Setting," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 1, pages 119-150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2004. "Efficient Patent Pools," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(3), pages 691-711, June.
    9. Giuri, Paola & Mariani, Myriam, 2007. "Inventors and invention processes in Europe: Results from the PatVal-EU survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1105-1106, October.
    10. Uwe Cantner & Jean-Luc Gaffard & Lionel Nesta (ed.), 2009. "Schumpeterian Perspectives on Innovation, Competition and Growth," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-540-93777-7, December.
    11. repec:bla:jindec:v:46:y:1998:i:4:p:405-32 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Nagaoka, Sadao & 長岡, 貞男 & Shimbo, Tomoyuki & 真保, 智行 & Tsukada, Naotoshi & 塚田, 尚稔, 2006. "The structure and the evolution of essential patents for standards: Lessons from three IT standards," IIR Working Paper 06-08, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    13. Genesove, David & Gandal, Neil & Gantman, Nataly, 2004. "Intellectual Property and Standardization Committee Participation in the US Modem Industry," CEPR Discussion Papers 4658, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Nagaoka, Sadao & Motohashi, Kazuyuki & Goto, Akira, 2010. "Patent Statistics as an Innovation Indicator," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1083-1127, Elsevier.
    15. Sadao Nagaoka & Naotoshi Tsukada & Tomoyuki Shimbo, 2009. "The structure and the emergence of essential patents for standards: Lessons from three IT standards," Springer Books, in: Uwe Cantner & Jean-Luc Gaffard & Lionel Nesta (ed.), Schumpeterian Perspectives on Innovation, Competition and Growth, pages 435-450, Springer.
    16. Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole & Marcin Strojwas, 2003. "Cooperative Marketing Agreements Between Competitors: Evidence from Patent Pools," NBER Working Papers 9680, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Nagaoka, Sadao & Motohashi, Kazuyuki & Goto, Akira, 2010. "Patent Statistics as an Innovation Indicator," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1083-1127, Elsevier.
    2. Cesare Righi & Timothy Simcoe, 2022. "Patenting inventions or inventing patents? Continuation practice at the USPTO," Economics Working Papers 1820, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    3. Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2015. "Standard-Essential Patents," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 123(3), pages 547-586.
    4. 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.
    5. Federica Bianco & Marica Venezia, 2019. "Features of R&D Teams and Innovation Performances of Sustainable Firms: Evidence from the “Sustainability Pioneers” in the IT Hardware Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-19, August.
    6. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    7. Justus Baron & Tim Pohlmann, 2018. "Mapping standards to patents using declarations of standard‐essential patents," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 504-534, September.
    8. Damien Geradin & Anne Layne-Farrar & A. Jorge Padilla, 2007. "Royalty Stacking in High Tech Industries: Separating Myth from Reality," Working Papers wp2007_0701, CEMFI.
    9. Cesare Righi & Davide Cannito & Theodor Vladasel, 2023. "Continuing Patent Applications at the USPTO," Working Papers 1382, Barcelona School of Economics.
    10. He, Zi-Lin & Lim, Kwanghui & Wong, Poh-Kam, 2006. "Entry and competitive dynamics in the mobile telecommunications market," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1147-1165, October.
    11. Bruno Van Pottelsberghe & Eleftherios Sapsalis & Ran Navon, 2006. "Academic vs. industry patenting: an in-depth analysis of what determines patent value," Working Papers CEB 05-008.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    12. von Wartburg, Iwan & Teichert, Thorsten & Rost, Katja, 2005. "Inventive progress measured by multi-stage patent citation analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1591-1607, December.
    13. Tomoyuki Shimbo & Sadao Nagaoka & Naotoshi Tsukada, 2024. "Dynamic Effects of Patent Pools: Evidence from Inter-Generational Competition in the Optical Disc Industry," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 64(3), pages 383-419, May.
    14. Satoshi Yasukawa & Shingo Kano, 2014. "Validating the usefulness of examiners’ forward citations from the viewpoint of applicants’ self-selection during the patent application procedure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 895-909, June.
    15. 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.
    16. Kwon, Seokbeom & Marco, Alan C., 2021. "Can antitrust law enforcement spur innovation? Antitrust regulation of patent consolidation and its impact on follow-on innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    17. Righi, Cesare & Cannito, Davide & Vladasel, Theodor, 2023. "Continuing patent applications at the USPTO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(4).
    18. Francesca Michelino & Antonello Cammarano & Andrea Celone & Mauro Caputo, 2019. "The Linkage between Sustainability and Innovation Performance in IT Hardware Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-15, August.
    19. Sapsalis, Eleftherios & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno & Navon, Ran, 2006. "Academic versus industry patenting: An in-depth analysis of what determines patent value," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1631-1645, December.
    20. Guan-Can Yang & Gang Li & Chun-Ya Li & Yun-Hua Zhao & Jing Zhang & Tong Liu & Dar-Zen Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2015. "Using the comprehensive patent citation network (CPC) to evaluate patent value," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1319-1346, December.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:eti:dpaper:11018. 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: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.html .

    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.