Patent validation at the country level-The role of fees and translation costs

Research Policy

Volumn 38, Issue 9, 2009, Pages 1423-1437

  Harhoff, Dietmar ^a,b,c   Hoisl, Karin ^a   Reichl, Bettina ^d   van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno ^b,e,f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b CEPR   (United Kingdom)

^c CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN ECONOMIC RESEARCH ZEW   (Germany)

^d EUROPEAN PATENT OFFICE   (Germany)

^e SOLVAY BRUSSELS SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT   (Belgium)

^f BRUEGEL   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Gravity model; Patent fees; Renewal fees; Validation fees

Indexed keywords

EUROPEAN COUNTRIES; GRAVITY MODEL; PATENT FEES; PATENT SYSTEM; POLICY INTERVENTION; RENEWAL FEES; VALIDATION FEES;

COST REDUCTION;

PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

EID: 70349427014     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2009.06.014     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Abrams R.K. International trade flows under flexible exchange rates, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. Economic Review 65 3 (1980) 3-10
2. Archontopoulos E., Guellec D., Stevnsborg N., van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B., and van Zeebroeck N. When small is beautiful: measuring the evolution and consequences of the voluminosity of patent applications at the EPO. Information Economics and Policy 19 2 (2007) 103-132
3. Arundel A. The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation. Research Policy 30 (2001) 611-624
4. Bergstrand J.H. The Gravity Equation and the Factor Proportions Theory of International Trade: A Theoretical and Empirical Synthesis (1984), Federal Reserve Bank of Boston
5. Blind K., Edler J., Frietsch R., and Schmoch U. Motives to patent: empirical evidence from Germany. Research Policy 35 (2006) 655-672
6. Bosworth D.L. Foreign patent flows to and from the United Kingdom. Research Policy 13 (1984) 115-124
7. Bergstrand J.H. The gravity equation in international trade: some microeconomic foundations and empirical evidence. The Review of Economics and Statistics 67 3 (1985) 474-481
8. Cohen, W., Nelson, R.R., Walsh, J., 2000. Protecting their intellectual assets: appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent (or not). NBER Working Paper No. 7552, Cambridge, MA.
9. de Rassenfosse G., and van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B. Per un Pugno di Dollari: a first look at the price elasticity of patents. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 23 4 (2007) 588-604
10. de Rassenfosse, G., van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B., 2008. On the price elasticity of demand for patents. ECARES Working Paper, 2008-031.
11. Eaton J., and Kortum S. Trade in ideas patenting and productivity in the OECD. Journal of International Economics 40 3/4 (1996) 251-278
12. Eaton J., Kortum S., and Lerner J. International patenting and the European patent office: a quantitative assessment. Patents, Innovation and Economic Performance: OECD Conference Proceedings. Paris and Washington, DC: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2004 (2004) 27-52
13. Egger P. A note on the proper econometric specification of the gravity equation. Economics Letters 66 (2000) 25-31
14. Egger P. An econometric view on the estimation of gravity models and the calculation of trade potentials. The World Economy 25 2 (2002) 297-312
15. Geraci V.J., and Prewo W. Bilateral trade flows and transport costs. The Review of Economics and Statistics 64 (1977) 67-74
16. Greenwood M.J. Research on internal migration in the U.S.A. survey. Journal of Economic Literature 13 (1975) 397-435
17. Guellec D., and van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B. The internationalisation of technology analysed with patent data. Research Policy 30 8 (2001) 1253-1266
18. Harhoff D. Patent quantity and quality: trends and policy implications. In: Kahin B., and Foray D. (Eds). Advancing Knowledge and the Knowledge Economy (2006), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
19. Harhoff, D., Wagner, S., 2006. Modeling the duration of patent examination at the European patent office. CEPR Discussion Paper 5283.
20. Karemera D., Oguledo V.I., and Davis B. A gravity model analysis of international migration to North America. Applied Economics 32 13 (2000) 1745-1755
21. Lazaridis G., and van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B. The rigour of EPO's patentability criteria: an insight into the "induced withdrawals". World Patent Information 29 4 (2007) 317-326
22. Linnemann H. An Econometric Study of International Trade Flows (1966), North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam
23. Maskus K.E., and Penubarti M. How trade-related are intellectual property rights?. Journal of International Economics 39 3/4 (1995) 227-248
24. Matyas L. The gravity model: some econometric considerations. The World Economy 21 3 (1998) 397-401
25. OECD, 1994. Using patent data as science and technological indicators-patent manual 1994, Paris.
26. Park, W.G., 2003. Internal EPO report, February 28, 2003, Munich.
27. Peeters C., and van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B. Innovation strategy and the patenting behavior of firms. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 16 1/2 (2006) 109-135
28. Slama J. Analysis by means of a gravitation model of international flows of patent applications in the period 1967-1978. World Patent Information 3 1 (1981) 2-8
29. Stevnsborg N., and van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B. Patenting procedures and filing strategies at the EPO. In: Guellec D., and van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B. (Eds). The Economics of the European Patent System (2007), Oxford University Press, Oxford 155-183 (Chapter 6)
30. Tinbergen J. Shaping the World Economy: Suggestions for an International Economic Policy (1962), The Twentieth Century Fund, New York
31. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B., François, D., forthcoming. The cost factor in patent systems. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade.
32. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B., Mejer, M., 2008. The London agreement and the cost of patenting in Europe. Bruegel Working Paper, October 05, 2008.
33. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B., and van Zeebreock N. A brief history of space and time: the scope-year index as a patent value indicator based on families and renewals. Scientometrics 75 2 (2008) 319-338
34. van Zeebroeck, N., 2007. Patents only live twice: a patent survival analysis in Europe. Working Papers CEB 07-028.
35. van Zeebroeck, N., van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B., Guellec, D., 2006. Claiming more: the increased voluminosity of patent applications and its determinants. CEPR Discussion Paper, 5971.
36. von Graevenitz, Wagner, S., Harhoff, D., 2008. Patent thickets-do they exist, do they matter? Unpublished manuscript, University of Munich.