IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v47y2018i1p252-265.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inventing by combining pre-existing technologies: Patent evidence on learning and fishing out

Author

Listed:
  • Clancy, Matthew S.

Abstract

I develop a model of innovation where new technologies are combinations of pre-existing technological components. The model captures two opposing forces. The best ideas are used up (knowledge is exhaustible). However, as firms learn which technologies can be combined, new ideas become feasible (knowledge accumulates). I test the model with more than 80 years of US patent data. Technological components are proxied by 13,517 patent office technology classifications. These are reused and recycled in 10,000 distinct three-component sets. Consistent with a learning/fishing-out dynamic, I show patenting in one set of components is correlated with a subsequent increase in similar patents (sharing two of three components), but a subsequent decrease in identical patents (sharing all three components). I use patent renewal data to show my results are not driven by changes in demand for various technology bundles. My results suggest the positive impact of learning on subsequent patenting is larger than the negative impact of fishing out.

Suggested Citation

  • Clancy, Matthew S., 2018. "Inventing by combining pre-existing technologies: Patent evidence on learning and fishing out," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 252-265.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:47:y:2018:i:1:p:252-265
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2017.10.015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733317301853
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2017.10.015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert J. Gordon, 2016. "The Rise and Fall of American Growth: The U.S. Standard of Living since the Civil War," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10544.
    2. Marc Baudry & Béatrice Dumont, 2006. "Patent Renewals as Options: Improving the Mechanism for Weeding Out Lousy Patents," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 28(1), pages 41-62, February.
    3. Ghiglino, Christian, 2012. "Random walk to innovation: Why productivity follows a power law," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 713-737.
    4. Jonathan S. Feinstein, 2011. "Optimal Learning Patterns for Creativity Generation in a Field," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(3), pages 227-232, May.
    5. Martin L. Weitzman, 1998. "Recombinant Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 113(2), pages 331-360.
    6. Sarah Kaplan & Keyvan Vakili, 2015. "The double-edged sword of recombination in breakthrough innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(10), pages 1435-1457, October.
    7. Allen,Robert C., 2009. "The British Industrial Revolution in Global Perspective," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521868273.
    8. Carlos J. Serrano, 2010. "The dynamics of the transfer and renewal of patents," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 686-708, December.
    9. Ola Olsson, 2005. "Technological Opportunity and Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 31-53, January.
    10. Nemet, Gregory F. & Johnson, Evan, 2012. "Do important inventions benefit from knowledge originating in other technological domains?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 190-200.
    11. Auerswald, Philip & Kauffman, Stuart & Lobo, Jose & Shell, Karl, 2000. "The production recipes approach to modeling technological innovation: An application to learning by doing," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 389-450, March.
    12. Aharonson, Barak S. & Schilling, Melissa A., 2016. "Mapping the technological landscape: Measuring technology distance, technological footprints, and technology evolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 81-96.
    13. Nemet, Gregory F., 2012. "Inter-technology knowledge spillovers for energy technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1259-1270.
    14. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2001. "The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," NBER Working Papers 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Olsson, Ola & Frey, Bruno S, 2002. "Entrepreneurship as Recombinant Growth," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 69-80, September.
    16. Keijl, S. & Gilsing, V.A. & Knoben, J. & Duysters, G., 2016. "The two faces of inventions: The relationship between recombination and impact in pharmaceutical biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 1061-1074.
    17. Kauffman, Stuart & Lobo, Jose & Macready, William G., 2000. "Optimal search on a technology landscape," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 141-166, October.
    18. Bessen, James, 2008. "The value of U.S. patents by owner and patent characteristics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 932-945, June.
    19. Ariel Pakes & Mark Schankerman, 1984. "The Rate of Obsolescence of Patents, Research Gestation Lags, and the Private Rate of Return to Research Resources," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 73-88, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    21. Ralf Meisenzahl & Joel Mokyr, 2011. "The Rate and Direction of Invention in the British Industrial Revolution: Incentives and Institutions," NBER Working Papers 16993, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Jovanovic, Boyan & Rob, Rafael, 1990. "Long Waves and Short Waves: Growth through Intensive and Extensive Search," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(6), pages 1391-1409, November.
    23. repec:bla:jindec:v:46:y:1998:i:4:p:405-32 is not listed on IDEAS
    24. Ralf R. Meisenzahl & Joel Mokyr, 2011. "The Rate and Direction of Invention in the British Industrial Revolution: Incentives and Institutions," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity Revisited, pages 443-479, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    25. Schilling, Melissa A. & Green, Elad, 2011. "Recombinant search and breakthrough idea generation: An analysis of high impact papers in the social sciences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 1321-1331.
    26. William Greene, 2002. "The Behavior of the Fixed Effects Estimator in Nonlinear Models," Working Papers 02-05, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    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. Yan, Hong-Bin & Li, Ming, 2022. "Consumer demand based recombinant search for idea generation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    2. Igna, Ioana & Venturini, Francesco, 2023. "The determinants of AI innovation across European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    3. Serkan Altuntas & Zulfiye Erdogan & Turkay Dereli, 2020. "A clustering-based approach for the evaluation of candidate emerging technologies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1157-1177, August.
    4. Robin Cowan & Nicolas Jonard & Ruth Samson, 2024. "Strategies of search and patenting under different IPR regimes," Working Papers of BETA 2024-20, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    5. Agrawal, Ajay & McHale, John & Oettl, Alexander, 2024. "Artificial intelligence and scientific discovery: a model of prioritized search," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(5).
    6. Zhang, Dongyang & Guo, Rui & He, Xiaodan, 2022. "How does the exclusive license stimulate firm’s subsequent innovation? The role of innovation financial input," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    7. Yeganegi, Sepideh & Laplume, André O. & Dass, Parshotam, 2021. "The role of information availability: A longitudinal analysis of technology entrepreneurship," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    8. Deyu Li & Floor Alkemade & Koen Frenken & Gaston Heimeriks, 2023. "Catching up in clean energy technologies: a patent analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 693-715, April.
    9. Klüppel, Leonardo & Knott, Anne Marie, 2023. "Are ideas being fished out?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    10. Matte Hartog & Andres Gomez-Lievano & Ricardo Hausmann & Frank Neffke, 2024. "Inventing modern invention: the professionalization of technological progress in the US," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2408, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Apr 2024.
    11. Yun, Siyeong & Song, Kisik & Kim, Chulhyun & Lee, Sungjoo, 2021. "From stones to jewellery: Investigating technology opportunities from expired patents," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    12. Clancy, Matthew S., 2018. "How deep are the roots of agricultural innovation? Evidence from patents," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274377, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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. Clancy, Matthew, 2015. "Combinatorial Innovation and Research Strategies: Theoretical Framework and Empirical Evidence from Two Centuries of Patent Data," Staff General Research Papers Archive 38400, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Stephan, Annegret & Bening, Catharina R. & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Schwarz, Marius & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2019. "The role of inter-sectoral knowledge spillovers in technological innovations: The case of lithium-ion batteries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    3. Yan, Hong-Bin & Li, Ming, 2022. "Consumer demand based recombinant search for idea generation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    4. Madeline K. Kneeland & Melissa A. Schilling & Barak S. Aharonson, 2020. "Exploring Uncharted Territory: Knowledge Search Processes in the Origination of Outlier Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 535-557, May.
    5. Ren, Haiying & Zhao, Yuhui, 2021. "Technology opportunity discovery based on constructing, evaluating, and searching knowledge networks," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    6. Wang, Fang, 2024. "Does the recombination of distant scientific knowledge generate valuable inventions? An analysis of pharmaceutical patents," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    7. Stephan, Annegret & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Bening, Catharina R. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2017. "The sectoral configuration of technological innovation systems: Patterns of knowledge development and diffusion in the lithium-ion battery technology in Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 709-723.
    8. Jie Liu & Arnulf Grubler & Tieju Ma & Dieter F. Kogler, 2021. "Identifying the technological knowledge depreciation rate using patent citation data: a case study of the solar photovoltaic industry," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 93-115, January.
    9. Ivan Lugovoi & Dimitrios A. Andritsos & Claire Senot, 2022. "Novelty and scope of process innovation: The role of related and unrelated manufacturing experience," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(10), pages 3877-3895, October.
    10. Maria Chiara Di Guardo & Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Elona Marku, 2019. "M&A and diversification strategies: what effect on quality of inventive activity?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 23(3), pages 669-692, September.
    11. Battke, Benedikt & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Stollenwerk, Stephan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Internal or external spillovers—Which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-41.
    12. Lee, Changyong & Jeon, Daeseong & Ahn, Joon Mo & Kwon, Ohjin, 2020. "Navigating a product landscape for technology opportunity analysis: A word2vec approach using an integrated patent-product database," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 96.
    13. Barirani, Ahmad & Beaudry, Catherine & Agard, Bruno, 2017. "Can universities profit from general purpose inventions? The case of Canadian nanotechnology patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 271-283.
    14. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    15. Corredoira, Rafael A. & Banerjee, Preeta M., 2015. "Measuring patent's influence on technological evolution: A study of knowledge spanning and subsequent inventive activity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 508-521.
    16. Wadhwa, Anu & Phelps, Corey & Kotha, Suresh, 2016. "Corporate venture capital portfolios and firm innovation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 95-112.
    17. Apa, Roberta & De Noni, Ivan & Orsi, Luigi & Sedita, Silvia Rita, 2018. "Knowledge space oddity: How to increase the intensity and relevance of the technological progress of European regions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1700-1712.
    18. Clancy, Matthew S., 2018. "How deep are the roots of agricultural innovation? Evidence from patents," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274377, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Strumsky, Deborah & Lobo, José, 2015. "Identifying the sources of technological novelty in the process of invention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1445-1461.
    20. Qu, Guannan & Chen, Jin & Zhang, Ruhao & Wang, Luyao & Yang, Yayu, 2023. "Technological search strategy and breakthrough innovation: An integrated approach based on main-path analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation; Patents; Combinatorial growth; Spillovers; R&D;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:eee:respol:v:47:y:2018:i:1:p:252-265. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.