[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/17404.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Communitywide Database Designs for Tracking Innovation Impact: COMETS, STARS and Nanobank

Author

Listed:
  • Lynne G. Zucker
  • Michael R. Darby
  • Jason Fong
Abstract
Data availability is arguably the greatest impediment to advancing the science of science and innovation policy and practice (SciSIPP). This paper describes the contents, methodology and use of the public online COMETS (Connecting Outcome Measures in Entrepreneurship Technology and Science) database spanning all sciences, technologies, and high-tech industries; its parent COMETSandSTARS database which adds more data at organization and individual scientist-inventor-entrepreneur level restricted by vendor licenses to onsite use at NBER and/or UCLA; and their prototype Nanobank covering only nano-scale sciences and technologies. Some or all of these databases include or will include: US patents (granted and applications); NIH, NSF, SBIR, STTR Grants; Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge; ISI Highly Cited; US doctoral dissertations; IPEDS/HEGIS universities; all firms and other organizations which ever publish in ISI listed journals beginning in 1981, are assigned US patents (from 1975), or are listed on a covered grant; additional nanotechnology firms based on web search. Ticker/CUSIP codes enable linking public firms to the major databases covering them. A major matching/disambiguation effort assigns unique identifiers for an organization or individual so that their appearances are linked within and across the constituent legacy databases. Extensive geographic coding enables analysis at country, region, state, county, or city levels. The databases provide very flexible sources of data for serious research on many issues in the study of organizations in innovation systems in the development and spread of knowledge, and the economics of science. Enabling the study of these topics, among others, COMETS contributes substantially to the science of science and technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Jason Fong, 2011. "Communitywide Database Designs for Tracking Innovation Impact: COMETS, STARS and Nanobank," NBER Working Papers 17404, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:17404
    Note: PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w17404.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeff S. Armstrong & Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2003. "Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture and firm performance in biotechnology," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 149-170.
    2. Michael L. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2010. "Grilichesian Breakthroughs: Inventions of Methods of Inventing and Firm Entry in Nanotechnology," NBER Chapters, in: Contributions in Memory of Zvi Griliches, pages 143-164, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. David B. Audretsch & Robert E. Litan & Robert Strom (ed.), 2009. "Entrepreneurship and Openness," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13052.
    4. Zucker, Lynne G. & Darby, Michael R., 1997. "Present at the biotechnological revolution: transformation of technological identity for a large incumbent pharmaceutical firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 429-446, December.
    5. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby, 2014. "Movement of Star Scientists and Engineers and High-Tech Firm Entry," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 115-116, pages 125-175.
    6. Zucker, Lynne G & Darby, Michael R & Armstrong, Jeff, 1998. "Geographically Localized Knowledge: Spillovers or Markets?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(1), pages 65-86, January.
    7. Naomi R. Lamoreaux & Kenneth L. Sokoloff (ed.), 2007. "Financing Innovation in the United States, 1870 to Present," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262122898, April.
    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. Munari, Federico & Toschi, Laura, 2014. "Running ahead in the nanotechnology gold rush. Strategic patenting in emerging technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 194-207.
    2. Yizhou Zhang & Geoffrey J. D. Hewings, 2019. "Nonlinear tax-induced migration: an overlooked tale," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 62(3), pages 425-438, June.
    3. Moretti, Enrico, 2019. "The Effect of High-Tech Clusters on the Productivity of Top Inventors," CEPR Discussion Papers 13992, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Enrico Moretti & Daniel J. Wilson, 2017. "The Effect of State Taxes on the Geographical Location of Top Earners: Evidence from Star Scientists," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(7), pages 1858-1903, July.
    5. Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry, 2019. "Collaboration or funding: lessons from a study of nanotechnology patenting in Canada and the United States," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 741-777, June.
    6. Ventura, Samuel L. & Nugent, Rebecca & Fuchs, Erica R.H., 2015. "Seeing the non-stars: (Some) sources of bias in past disambiguation approaches and a new public tool leveraging labeled records," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 1672-1701.
    7. Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry & Andrea Schiffauerova, 2015. "The role of public funding in nanotechnology scientific production: Where Canada stands in comparison to the United States," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 753-787, January.
    8. Jade Yu-Chieh Lo & Mark Thomas Kennedy, 2015. "Approval in Nanotechnology Patents: Micro and Macro Factors That Affect Reactions to Category Blending," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 119-139, February.

    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. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby, 2014. "Defacto and Deeded Intellectual Property: Knowledge-Driven Co-Evolution of Firm Collaboration Boundaries and IPR Stragtegy," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 115-116, pages 221-251.
    2. Zhifeng Yin & Qiang Zhi, 2017. "Dancing with the academic elite: a promotion or hindrance of research production?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 17-41, January.
    3. Frank T. Rothaermel & Andrew M. Hess, 2007. "Building Dynamic Capabilities: Innovation Driven by Individual-, Firm-, and Network-Level Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 898-921, December.
    4. Jinyoung Kim & Sangjoon John Lee & Gerald Marschke, 2010. "Inventor Mobility and Knowledge Transmission in Nanotechnology," Discussion Paper Series 1004, Institute of Economic Research, Korea University.
    5. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby, 2009. "Star Scientists, Innovation and Regional and National Immigration," Chapters, in: David B. Audretsch & Robert E. Litan & Robert Strom (ed.), Entrepreneurship and Openness, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Michaela Trippl & Gunther Maier, 2012. "Star Scientists and Regional Knowledge Transfer," Chapters, in: Knut Ingar Westeren (ed.), Foundations of the Knowledge Economy, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2009. "Diversity of science linkages and innovation performance: some empirical evidence from Flemish firms," Economics Discussion Papers 2009-30, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    8. Arho Suominen & Matthias Deschryvere, 2024. "Barriers to immaterial property rights development in research organizations: an explorative study from Finland," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(5), pages 1935-1958, October.
    9. Gianluca Fabiano & Andrea Marcellusi & Giampiero Favato, 2020. "Public–private contribution to biopharmaceutical discoveries: a bibliometric analysis of biomedical research in UK," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 153-168, July.
    10. Luisa Gagliardi, 2015. "Does skilled migration foster innovative performance? Evidence from British local areas," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(4), pages 773-794, November.
    11. Baba, Yasunori & Shichijo, Naohiro & Sedita, Silvia Rita, 2009. "How do collaborations with universities affect firms' innovative performance? The role of "Pasteur scientists" in the advanced materials field," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 756-764, June.
    12. Kafouros, Mario & Wang, Chengqi & Piperopoulos, Panagiotis & Zhang, Mingshen, 2015. "Academic collaborations and firm innovation performance in China: The role of region-specific institutions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 803-817.
    13. Michaela Trippl & Joshua von Gabain & Franz Tödtling, 2006. "Policy agents as catalysts of knowledge links in the biotechnology sector," SRE-Disc sre-disc-2006_01, Institute for Multilevel Governance and Development, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    14. Stefan Houweling & Sven Wolff, 2020. "The influence of scientific prestige and peer effects on the intention to create university spin-offs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 1432-1450, October.
    15. Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2002. "Going Public When You Can in Biotechnology," NBER Working Papers 8954, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Andrew A. Toole & Dirk Czarnitzki, 2009. "Exploring the Relationship Between Scientist Human Capital and Firm Performance: The Case of Biomedical Academic Entrepreneurs in the SBIR Program," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(1), pages 101-114, January.
    17. Robinson, Douglas K.R. & Rip, Arie & Mangematin, Vincent, 2007. "Technological agglomeration and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 871-879, July.
    18. Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2006. "Innovation, Competition and Welfare-Enhancing Monopoly," NBER Working Papers 12094, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Herrera, Liliana & Nieto, Mariano, 2015. "The determinants of firms' PhD recruitment to undertake R&D activities," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 132-142.
    20. Herrera, Liliana & Nieto, Mariano, 2016. "PhD careers in Spanish industry: Job determinants in manufacturing versus non-manufacturing firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 113(PB), pages 341-351.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access
    • J44 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Professional Labor Markets and Occupations
    • J61 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers - - - Geographic Labor Mobility; Immigrant Workers
    • J62 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers - - - Job, Occupational and Intergenerational Mobility; Promotion
    • M13 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - New Firms; Startups
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:nbr:nberwo:17404. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.