Beyond local search: Bridging platforms and inter-sectoral technological integration

Research Policy

Volumn 46, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 196-206

  Corradini, Carlo ^a   De Propris, Lisa ^b  

^a ASTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Basic science; Bridging platform; Distant search; Patent originality; Public research; Technological integration

Indexed keywords

INTEGRATION; LOCAL SEARCH (OPTIMIZATION);

BASIC SCIENCE; BRIDGING PLATFORM; DISTANT SEARCH; PATENT ORIGINALITY; PUBLIC RESEARCH;

PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

EID: 85001129898     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2016.09.017     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Agrawal, A., Henderson, R., Putting patents in context: exploring knowledgetransfer from MIT. Manage. Sci. 48 (2002), 44–60.
2. Ahuja, G., Morris Lampert, C., Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: a longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strateg. Manage. J. 22 (2001), 521–543.
3. Almeida, P., Kogut, B., The localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers in regional networks. Manage. Sci. 45 (1999), 905–917.
4. Altschuler, G., The Innovation Algorithm. 1998, Technical Innovation Center Inc., Worcester, MA.
5. Archibugi, D., Pianta, M., Measuring technological change through patents and innovation surveys. Technovation 16 (1996), 451–468.
6. Arrow, K., The economic implications of learning by doing. Rev. Econ. Stud. 29 (1962), 155–173.
7. Arthur, W.B., The structure of invention. Res. Policy 36 (2007), 274–287.
8. Breschi, S., Malerba, F., Orsenigo, L., Technological regimes and Schumpeterian patterns of innovation. Econ. J. 110 (2000), 388–410.
9. Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., Malerba, F., Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification. Res. Policy 32 (2003), 69–87.
10. Bresnahan, T.F., Trajtenberg, M., General purpose technologies, engines of growth. J. Econ. 65 (1995), 83–108.
11. Coffano M., Tarasconi G., 2014. CRIOS – Patstat Database: Sources, Contents and Access Rules. Center for Research on Innovation, Organization and Strategy, CRIOS Working Paper n.1.
12. Cohen, W.M., Levinthal, D.A., Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Adm. Sci. Q. 35 (1990), 128–152.
13. Cohen, W., Nelson, R., Walsh, J., Links and impacts: the influence of public research on industrial R&D. Manage. Sci. 48 (2002), 1–23.
14. Corradini, C., Demirel, P., Battisti, G., Technological diversification within UK's small serial innovators. Small Bus. Econ. 47 (2016), 163–177.
15. Criscuolo, P., Verspagen, B., Does it matter where patent citations come from? Inventor vs. examiner citations in European patents. Res. Policy 37 (2008), 1892–1908.
16. Cyert, R.M., March, J.G., A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. 1963, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
17. Datta, A., Jessup, L.M., Looking beyond the focal industry and existing technologies for radical innovations. Technovation 33 (2013), 355–367.
18. David, P., Clio and the economics of QWERTY. Am. Econ. Rev. 75 (1985), 332–337.
19. Dosi, G., Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Res. Policy 11 (1982), 147–162.
20. Du Plessis, M., Van Looy, B., Song, X., Magerman, T., 2010. Data production methods for harmonized patent statistics: Patentee sector allocation 2009. Eurostat Working Paper-Annual Report 2009.
21. European Commission, A European Strategy for Key Enabling Technologies – A Bridge to Growth and Jobs. 2012 Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0341:FIN:EN:PDF.
22. Fai, F., Von Tunzelmann, N., Industry-specific competencies and converging technological systems: evidence from patents. Struct. Change Econ. Dyn. 12 (2001), 141–170.
23. Fleming, L., Sorenson, O., Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data. Res. Policy 30 (2001), 1019–1039.
24. Fleming, L., Sorenson, O., Science as a map in technological search. Strateg. Manage. J. 25 (2004), 909–928.
25. Fleming, L., Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Manage. Sci. 47 (2001), 117–132.
26. Gavetti, G., Levinthal, D., Looking forward and looking backward: cognitive and experiential search. Adm. Sci. Q. 45 (2000), 113–137.
27. Granstrand, O., Patel, P., Pavitt, K., Multi-technology corporations: why they have ‘distributed' rather than ‘distinctive core' competencies. Calif. Manage. Rev. 39 (1997), 8–25.
28. Griliches, Z., Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey. J. Econ. Lit. 28 (1990), 1661–1707.
29. Griliches, Z., The search for R&D spillovers. Scand. J. Econ. 94 (1992), 29–47.
30. Guerzoni, M., Aldridge, T.T., Audretsch, D.B., Desai, S., A new industry creation and originality: insight from the funding sources of university patents. Res. Policy 43 (2014), 1697–1706.
31. Hall, B., Trajtenberg, M., Uncovering GPTs with Patent Data. NBER Working Paper No. 10901. 2004, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
32. Hall, B., Jaffe, A., Trajtenber, M., Market value and patent citations. RAND J. Econ. 36 (2005), 16–38.
33. Hall, B., A note on the bias in herfindahl-type measures based on count data: revue d'Economie industrielle. Prog. Natl. Persee 110 (2005), 149–156.
34. Helpman, E., General Purpose Technologies and Economic Growth. 1998, MIT press.
35. Henderson, R., Clark, K., Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and failure of established firms. Adm. Sci. Q. 35 (1990), 9–30.
36. Henderson, R., Of life cycles real and imaginary: the unexpectedly long old age of optical lithography. Res. Policy 24 (1995), 631–643.
37. Henderson, R., Jaffe, A.B., Trajtenberg, M., Universities as a source of commercial technology: a detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965–1988. Rev. Econ. Stat. 80 (1998), 119–127.
38. Jaffe, A.B., Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quart. J. Econ. 108 (1993), 577–598.
39. Jaffe, A., Trajtenberg, M., Romer, P., Patents, Citations and Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy. 2005, MIT Press.
40. Katila, R., Ahuja, G., Something old, something new: a longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Acad. Manage. J. 45 (2002), 1183–1194.
41. Kim, D.J., Kogut, B., Technological platforms and diversification. Org. Sci. 7 (1996), 283–301.
42. Klevorick, A.K., Levin, R.C., Nelson, R.R., Winter, S.G., On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities. Res. Policy 24 (1995), 185–205.
43. Kodama, F., Technology fusion and the new R&D. Harv. Bus. Rev., 1992, 70–78.
44. Kogut, B., Zander, U., Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Org. Sci. 3 (1992), 393–397.
45. Lanjouw, J.O., Schankerman, M., Patent quality and research productivity: measuring innovation with multiple indicators. Econ. J. 114 (2004), 441–465.
46. Lissoni, F., Montobbio, F., 2012. The ownership of academic patents and their impact. Evidence from five European countries. No. 2012-24. Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée.
47. Lissoni, F., Sanditov, B., Tarasconi, G., The KEINS Database on Academic Inventors: Methodology and Contents CESPRI Working Paper no. 181. 2006, Università Cocconi, Milano.
48. Malerba, F., Mancusi, M., Montobbio, F., Innovation, international R&D spillovers and the sectoral heterogeneity of knowledge flows. Rev. World Econ., 2013, 1–26, 10.1007/s10290-013-0167-0.
49. March, J., Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Org. Sci. 2 (1991), 71–87.
50. Martin, S., Scott, J., The nature of innovation market failure and the design of public support for private innovation. Res. Policy 29 (2000), 437–447.
51. Michel, J., Bettels, B., Patent citation analysis: a closer look at the basic input data from patent search reports. Scientometrics 51 (2001), 795–816.
52. Mowery, D., Rosenberg, N., Paths to Innovation. 1998, Cambridge University Press UK, Cambridge.
53. Nadiri, M.I., 1993. Innovations and Technological Spillovers. NBER Working Paper 4423. Cambridge, MA.
54. Nelson, R.R., Winter, S., An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. 1982, Belknap Press.
55. Nelson, R., The simple economics of basic scientific research. J. Political Econ. 67 (1959), 297–306.
56. Nooteboom, B., Van Haverbeke, W., Duysters, G., Gilsing, V., Van den Oord, A., Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Res. Policy 36 (2007), 1016–1034.
57. Papke, L.E., Wooldridge, J.M., Econometric methods for fractional response variables with an application to 401(k) plan participation rates. J. Appl. Econ. 11 (1996), 619–632.
58. Patel, P., Pavitt, K., The technological competencies of the world's largest firms: complex and path-dependent, but not much variety. Res. Policy 26 (1997), 141–156.
59. Pavitt, K., Sectoral patterns of technical change: towards a taxonomy and a theory. Res. Policy 13 (1984), 343–375.
60. Petruzelli, A.M., The impact of technological relatedness, prior ties, and geographical distance on university–industry collaborations: a joint-patent analysis. Technovation 31 (2011), 309–319.
61. Rivera-Batiz, L.A., Romer, P.M., Economic integration and endogenous growth. Quart. J. Econ. 106 (1991), 531–555.
62. Rosenkopf, L., Almeida, P., Overcoming local search through alliances and mobility. Manage. Sci. 49 (2003), 751–766.
63. Sampat, B.N., Mowery, D.C., Ziedonis, A.A., Changes in university patent quality after the Bayh-Dole act: a re-examination. Int. J. Ind Organiz 21 (2003), 1371–1390.
64. Scherer, F.M., Interindustry technology flows and productivity growth. Rev. Econ. Stat. 64 (1982), 627–634.
65. Schmoch, U., Laville, F., Patel, P., Frietsch, R., 2003. Linking technology areas to industrial sectors. Final Report to the European Commission, DG Research, 1.
66. Schoenmakers, W., Duysters, G., The technological origins of radical inventions. Res. Policy 39 (2010), 1051–1059.
67. Schumpeter, J.A., The Theory of Economic Development. 1934, Transaction Publishers.
68. Schumpeter, J.A., The creative response in economic history. J. Econ. History 7 (1947), 149–159.
69. Suzuki, J., Kodama, F., Technological diversity of persistent innovators in Japan: two case studies of large japanese firms. Res. Policy 33 (2004), 531–549.
70. TSB, 2011. Concept to Commercialisation: A strategy for business innovation, 2011–2015. Technology Strategy Board, May 2011.
71. Thompson, P., Fox-Kean, M., Patent citations and the geography of knowledge spillovers: a reassessment. Am. Econ. Rev. 95 (2005), 450–460.
72. Thursby, J., Fuller, A., Thursby, M., US faculty patenting: inside and outside theuniversity. Res. Policy 38 (2009), 14–25.
73. Torrisi, S., Granstrand, O., Technology and business diversification. Cantwell, J., Gambardella, A., Granstrand, O., (eds.) The Economics and Management of Technological Diversification, 2004, Routledge, London.
74. Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., Jaffe, A., University versus corporate patents: a window on the basicness of invention. Econ. Innov. New Technol. 5 (1997), 19–50.
75. Verspagen, B., Measuring intersectoral technology spillovers: estimates from the european and US patent office databases. Econ. Syst. Res. 9 (1997), 47–65.
76. Wooldridge, J.M., Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. second edition, 2010, MIT Press.