Is Canadian intellectual property leaving Canada? A study of nanotechnology patenting

Journal of Technology Transfer

Volumn 36, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 665-679

  Beaudry, Catherine ^a,b   Schiffauerova, Andrea ^c  

^a ÉCOLE POLYTECHNIQUE DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b Ctr Interuniv Res Anal on Org   (Canada)

^c Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering   (Canada)

Author keywords

Canada; Cluster; Innovation; Nanotechnology; Patents; Star scientists

Indexed keywords

EID: 80255126000     PISSN: 08929912     EISSN: 15737047     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10961-011-9211-1     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1992). Real effects of academic research: Comment. The American Economic Review, 82(1), 363-367.
2. Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1994). R & D spillovers and recipient firm size. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 76(2), 336-340.
3. Agrawal, A., & Cockburn, I. (2003). The anchor tenant hypothesis: exploring the role of large, local, R & D-intensive firms in regional innovation systems. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 1227-1253.
4. Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1996). R & D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. The American Economic Review, 86(3), 630-640.
5. Baptista, R., & Swann, P. (1999). A comparison of clustering dynamics in the US and UK computer industries. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 9, 373-399.
6. Chabchoub, N., & Niosi, J. (2006). The Anchor Tenant Hypothesis Revisited: Computer software Clusters in North America. In: Applied Evolutionary Economics and the Knowledge-Based Economy; 89-99; Cheltenham, U. K.
7. Criscuolo, P., Narula, N., & Verspagen, B. (2005). Role of home and host country innovation systems in R & D internationalisation: a patent citation analysis. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 14(5), 417-433.
8. Dahl, M. S., & Pedersen, C. O. R. (2004). Knowledge flows through informal contacts in industrial clusters: myth or reality? Research Policy, 33, 1673-1686.
9. Darby, M. R., & Zucker, L. G. (2006). Grilichesian breakthroughs: Inventions of methods of inventing in nanotechnology and biotechnology. Annales d'economie et statistique.
10. Deng, Z., Lev, B., & Narin, F. (1999). Science & Technology as Predictors of Stock Performance. Financial Analysts Journal, 55, 20-32.
11. Edler, J. (2004). International research strategies of multinational corporations: A German perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 71, 599-621.
12. Feldman, M. (2003). The Locational Dynamics of the US Biotech Industry: Knowledge Externalities and the Anchor Hypothesis. Industry and Innovation, 10(3), 311-328.
13. Graham, S. G. H., Hall, B. H., Harhoff, D., & Mowery, D. C. (2003). Post-Issue Patent Quality Control: A Comparative Study of US Patent Re-Examinations and European Patent Oppositions. In W. M. Cohen, S. A. Merrill, et al. (Eds.), Patents in the knowledge-based economy (pp. 74-119). Washington: The National Academies Press.
14. Graham, S. G. H., & Harhoff, D. (2005). Can Post-Grant Reviews Improve Patent System Design? A Twin Study of US and European Patents, CEPR Discussion Paper No. 5680. London: Centre for Economic Policy Research.
15. Guellec, D., & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2001). The internationalisation of technology analysed with patent data. Research Policy, 30(8), 1253-1266.
16. Guimon, J. (2009). Government strategies to attract R & D-intensive FDI. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(4), 364-379.
17. Jaffe, A. B. (1989). Real effects of academic research. The American Economic Review, 79(5), 957-970.
18. Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, 577-598.
19. Kostoff, R. N., Koytcheff, R. G., & Lau, D. G. Y. (2007). Global nanotechnology research metrics. Scientometrics, 10(3), 565-601.
20. Lanjouw, J. O., & Schankerman, M. (2001). Characteristics of Patent Litigation: A Window on Competition. Rand Journal of Economics, 32(1), 129-151.
21. Lemley, M. A. (2005). Patenting Nanotechnology. Stanford Law Review, 58, 601-630.
22. Li, X., Chen, H., Huang, Z., & Rocco, M. C. (2007). Patent citation network in nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 9(3), 337-352.
23. McNiven, C. (2007). Overview and Discussion of the Results of the Pilot Survey on Nanotechnology in Canada, Statistics Canada, Catalogue no. 88F0006XIE, no. 005.
24. Miyazaki, K., & Islam, N. (2007). Nanotechnology systems of innovation-an analysis of industry and academia research activities. Technovation, 27(11), 661-675.
25. Narin, F., & Noma, E. (1987). Patents as indicators of corporate technological strength. Research Policy, 16, 143-155.
26. Patel, P., & Vega, M. (1999). Patterns of internationalisation of corporate technology: location vs. home country advantages. Research Policy, 28, 145-155.
27. Prevezer, M. (1997). The dynamics of industrial clustering in biotechnology. Small Business Economics, 8, 155-271.
28. Rama, R. (2008). Foreign investment innovation: a review of selected policies. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(4), 353-363.
29. Schiffauerova, A., & Beaudry, C. (2009). Canadian nanotechnology innovation networks: intra-cluster, inter-cluster and foreign collaboration. Journal of Innovation Economics, 2(2), 119-146.
30. Schiffauerova, A., & Beaudry, C. (2010), Star scientists and their positions in Canadian biotechnology network, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, forthcoming.
31. Shand, H., & Wetter, K. J. (2007). Trends in IP and nanotechnology: Implications for the global South. Journal of IP Rights, 2007, 111-117.
32. Swann, P., & Prevezer, M. (1996). A comparison of the dynamics of industrial clustering in computing and biotechnology. Research Policy, 25, 1139-1157.
33. Tong, X., & Frame, J. D. (1994). Measuring national technological performance with patent claims data. Research Policy, 23, 133-141.
34. van Zeebroeck, N., & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2006). Filing strategies and patent value. Solvay Business School, Working papers CEB.
35. Wolfe, D. A., & Gertler, M. S. (2004). Clusters from the inside and out: Local dynamics and global linkages. Urban Studies, 41(5/6), 1071-1093.
36. Wong, P. K., Ho, Y. P., & Chan, C. K. (2007). Internationalization and evolution of application areas of an emerging technology: The case of nanotechnology. Scientometrics, 70(3), 715-737.
37. Yegul, M. F., Yavuz, M., & Guild, P. (2008). Nanotechnology: Canada's position in scientific publications and patents. PICMET 2008 Proceedings, 27-31 July. South Africa: Cape Town.
38. Zucker, L. G., & Brewer, M. B. (1994) Intellectual capital and the birth of US biotechnology enterprises. NBER Working Papers, 4653.
39. Zucker, L. G., & Darby, M. R. (1996). Star scientists and institutional transformation: Patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 93, 12709-12716.
40. Zucker, L. G., Darby, M. R., & Brewer, M. B. (1998). Intellectual human capital and the birth of US biotechnology enterprises. American Economic Review, 88, 290-306.