IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v48-49y2016ip87-98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new intellectual property metric for standardization activities

Author

Listed:
  • Tamura, Suguru

Abstract

This study formulates a method to measure the effects of standardization to assist in evaluating innovation and R&D policies. Its main purpose is to examine standardization activities within R&D organizations. This allows for a more appropriate policy evaluation framework than examining such activities within standard development organizations does. The study also redefines the conventional notion of intellectual property (IP) normatively and introduces the term “integrated IP” to reflect our new concept of joining IP and standardization activities. Our new concept captures the “fuzzy” impact of standardization on R&D to improve innovation management. The study presents a vector equation expressing the new IP definition and uses it to model revenues arising from a standard-essential patent for strategic IP management with standardization. The model indicates the importance of patents commercially required for product differentiation for the purpose of innovation with standards.

Suggested Citation

  • Tamura, Suguru, 2016. "A new intellectual property metric for standardization activities," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 87-98.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:48-49:y:2016:i::p:87-98
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2016.01.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497216000080
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.01.007?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. Stango Victor, 2004. "The Economics of Standards Wars," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-19, March.
    2. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1985. "Standardization, Compatibility, and Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(1), pages 70-83, Spring.
    3. Tassey, Gregory, 2000. "Standardization in technology-based markets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 587-602, April.
    4. Cefis, Elena & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2001. "The persistence of innovative activities: A cross-countries and cross-sectors comparative analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1139-1158, August.
    5. Manuel Trajtenberg, 1990. "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 172-187, Spring.
    6. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    7. Knut Blind, 2002. "Driving forces for standardization at standardization development organizations," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(16), pages 1985-1998.
    8. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 1989. "Patents as a Measure of Innovative Activity," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 171-180, August.
    9. Knut Blind, 2006. "Explanatory factors for participation in formal standardisation processes: Empirical evidence at firm level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 157-170.
    10. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    11. Knut Blind & Andre Jungmittag, 2008. "The impact of patents and standards on macroeconomic growth: a panel approach covering four countries and 12 sectors," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 51-60, February.
    12. Suguru Tamura, 2012. "Generic definition of standardization and the correlation between innovation and standardization in corporate intellectual property activities," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(2), pages 143-156, October.
    13. Aikaterini Zi & Knut Blind, 2015. "Researchers’ participation in standardisation: a case study from a public research institute in Germany," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 346-360, April.
    14. J. Edler & L. Georghiou & K. Blind & E. Uyarra, 2012. "Evaluating the demand side: New challenges for evaluation," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 33-47, February.
    15. repec:bla:kyklos:v:42:y:1989:i:2:p:171-80 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. TAMURA Suguru, 2019. "Results of a survey on standardization activities: Japanese institutions' standardization activities in 2017 (Implementation, knowledge source, organizational structure, and interest to artificial int," Policy Discussion Papers 19013, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).

    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. Raven, Michael & Blind, Knut, 2017. "The characteristics and impacts of scientific publications in biotechnology research referenced in standards," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 167-179.
    2. TAMURA Suguru & IWAMI Shino & SAKATA Ichiro, 2016. "Does Standardization Affect Science Linkage? Implications for society and organizational management: Evidence from artificial intelligence-related technology," Policy Discussion Papers 16007, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    3. Wiegmann, Paul Moritz & de Vries, Henk J. & Blind, Knut, 2017. "Multi-mode standardisation: A critical review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1370-1386.
    4. Christopher Spencer & Paul Temple, 2012. "Alternative Paths of Learning: Standardisation and Growth in Britain, 1901-2009," Discussion Paper Series 2012_10, Department of Economics, Loughborough University, revised Oct 2012.
    5. Brem, Alexander & Nylund, Petra A. & Schuster, Gerd, 2016. "Innovation and de facto standardization: The influence of dominant design on innovative performance, radical innovation, and process innovation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 50, pages 79-88.
    6. Papachristos, George, 2017. "Diversity in technology competition: The link between platforms and sociotechnical transitions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 291-306.
    7. Foucart, Renaud & Li, Qian Cher, 2021. "The role of technology standards in product innovation: Theory and evidence from UK manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    8. Christopher Spencer & Paul Temple, 2016. "Standards, learning, and growth in Britain, 1901–2009," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 69(2), pages 627-652, May.
    9. Felix B. Buesching & Dennis M. Steininger & Daniel J. Veit, 2023. "Governing digital crisis responses: platform standards and the dilemma of COVID-19 contact tracing," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(1), pages 267-323, January.
    10. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    11. Jullien, Bruno, 2001. "Competing with Network Externalities and Price Discrimination," CEPR Discussion Papers 2883, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Vialle, Pierre & Song, Junjie & Zhang, Jian, 2012. "Competing with dominant global standards in a catching-up context. The case of mobile standards in China," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 832-846.
    13. Zohal Hessami, 2016. "How Do Voters React to Complex Choices in a Direct Democracy? Evidence from Switzerland," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(2), pages 263-293, May.
    14. Vega-Redondo, Fernando, 1997. "Shaping long-run expectations in problems of coordination," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 783-806, December.
    15. den Hartigh, E. & Langerak, F. & Commandeur, H.R., 2002. "The Effects of Self-Reinforcing Mechanisms on Firm Performance," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2002-46-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    16. Jussi Heikkilä & Timo Ali-Vehmas & Julius Rissanen, 2021. "The Link Between Standardization and Economic Growth: A Bibliometric Analysis," International Journal of Standardization Research (IJSR), IGI Global, vol. 19(1), pages 1-25, January.
    17. Andrea Marchini & Chiara Riganelli & Francesco Diotallevi & Bianca Polenzani, 2021. "Label information and consumer behaviour: evidence on drinking milk sector," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, December.
    18. Nicholas Economides, 1997. "The Economics of Networks," Brazilian Electronic Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, vol. 1(0), December.
    19. Pekka S��skilahti, 2015. "Monopoly Pricing of Social Goods," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(3), pages 429-448, November.
    20. Pekka Sääskilahti, 2016. "Buying Decision Coordination and Monopoly Pricing of Network Goods," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 313-333, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Standardization; R&D; Standard-essential patent; Vector equation; Negative patent; SEP paradox; Redefinition of intellectual property; Integrated IP;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • 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
    • L15 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Information and Product Quality

    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:techno:v:48-49:y:2016:i::p:87-98. 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.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01664972 .

    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.