IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v76y2024ics0160791x23002579.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patent priority examination under mission orientation: can speed and quality coexist?

Author

Listed:
  • Yang, Haodong
  • Zhang, Yumei
  • Liu, Li

Abstract

Under the backdrop of mission-oriented innovation, the rapid implementation of innovative achievements depends not only on research and development activities, but also on the patent examination process. Striking a balance between improving examination speed and ensuring the quality of granted patents poses a challenge. This paper delineates two pivotal mission categories—grand challenge (climate change) and major emergency (COVID-19), utilizing the conceptual framework of “urgency” that has been constructed. We primarily focus on the impact of the patent priority examination institution on examination period and patent quality under the two missions. Based on data from over 300,000 patents belonging to the fields of vehicle manufacturing and medicine in China, difference-in-differences and survival analysis are used to conduct empirical tests. The research results indicate that under certain missions, both climate change and COVID-19, the “green channel” could shorten the examination period without compromising the quality of authorized patents. Through further analysis, we also find that, patent examination acceleration is mainly manifested by alleviating the authorization lag (rather than publication lag). Additionally, the prioritization institution has changed the impact of applicant characteristics (organizational and country attributes) on the patent examination period.

Suggested Citation

  • Yang, Haodong & Zhang, Yumei & Liu, Li, 2024. "Patent priority examination under mission orientation: can speed and quality coexist?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:76:y:2024:i:c:s0160791x23002579
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102452
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X23002579
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102452?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. Yang, Deli, 2008. "Pendency and grant ratios of invention patents: A comparative study of the US and China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1035-1046, July.
    2. Morris A. Cohen & Jehoshua Eliasberg & Teck-Hua Ho, 1996. "New Product Development: The Performance and Time-to-Market Tradeoff," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(2), pages 173-186, February.
    3. Akimoto, Kiyoka & Morimoto, Takaaki, 2020. "Examination and Approval of New Patents in an Endogenous Growth Model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 100-109.
    4. Robinson, Douglas K.R. & Mazzucato, Mariana, 2019. "The evolution of mission-oriented policies: Exploring changing market creating policies in the US and European space sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 936-948.
    5. Mariana Mazzucato, 2018. "Mission-oriented innovation policies: challenges and opportunities," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(5), pages 803-815.
    6. Popp David & Juhl Ted & Johnson Daniel K.N., 2004. "Time In Purgatory: Examining the Grant Lag for U.S. Patent Applications," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-45, November.
    7. Hou, Qingsong & Chen, Zhihao & Teng, Min, 2022. "Today’s baton and tomorrow’s vision: The effect of strengthening patent examination system on corporate innovation strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 614-626.
    8. Marco, Alan C. & Sarnoff, Joshua D. & deGrazia, Charles A.W., 2019. "Patent claims and patent scope," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    9. Antoine Dechezleprêtre, 2013. "Fast-Tracking 'Green' Patent Applications: An Empirical Analysis," CEP Discussion Papers dp1197, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    10. Scherer, F M, 1972. "Nordhaus' Theory of Optimal Patent Life: A Geometric Reinterpretation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(3), pages 422-427, June.
    11. Deepak Hegde & Kyle Herkenhoff & Chenqi Zhu, 2023. "Patent Publication and Innovation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 131(7), pages 1845-1903.
    12. Kenneth Zahringer & Christos Kolympiris & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, 2018. "Erratum to: Time to patent at the USPTO: the case of emerging entrepreneurial firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 1107-1119, August.
    13. Wu, Howei & Lin, Jia & Wu, Ho-Mou, 2022. "Investigating the real effect of China’s patent surge: New evidence from firm-level patent quality data," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 422-442.
    14. Ying Xie & David Giles, 2011. "A survival analysis of the approval of US patent applications," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(11), pages 1375-1384.
    15. Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "The quality factor in patent systems," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 20(6), pages 1755-1793, December.
    16. Yuri Mishina & Timothy G. Pollock & Joseph F. Porac, 2004. "Are more resources always better for growth? Resource stickiness in market and product expansion," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(12), pages 1179-1197, December.
    17. Mark A. Lemley & Bhaven Sampat, 2012. "Examiner Characteristics and Patent Office Outcomes," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(3), pages 817-827, August.
    18. Picard, Pierre M. & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2013. "Patent office governance and patent examination quality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 14-25.
    19. Ting Meng & Richard Carew & Wojciech J. Florkowski, 2020. "Determinants of the grant lag and the surrender lag of horticultural crop plant breeders’ rights applications: Survival analysis with competing risks," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(4), pages 489-512, December.
    20. Fan Duan & Yifei Li & Tenglong Zhong, 2023. "International Patent Cooperation, Patent Prosecution Highway Agreements, and Export Product Quality," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 31(6), pages 111-133, November.
    21. Guijie Zhang & Guang Yu & Yuqiang Feng & Luning Liu & Zhenhua Yang, 2017. "Improving the publication delay model to characterize the patent granting process," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 621-637, May.
    22. Kiel Katherine A. & McClain Katherine T., 1995. "House Prices during Siting Decision Stages: The Case of an Incinerator from Rumor through Operation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 241-255, March.
    23. Hong Hwang & Jollene Z. Wu & Eden S. H. Yu, 2016. "Innovation, Imitation and Intellectual Property Rights in Developing Countries," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 138-151, February.
    24. Reale, Filippo, 2021. "Mission-oriented innovation policy and the challenge of urgency: Lessons from Covid-19 and beyond," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    25. Justin Tan & Mike W. Peng, 2003. "Organizational slack and firm performance during economic transitions: two studies from an emerging economy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(13), pages 1249-1263, December.
    26. Thorsten Beck & Ross Levine & Alexey Levkov, 2010. "Big Bad Banks? The Winners and Losers from Bank Deregulation in the United States," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 65(5), pages 1637-1667, October.
    27. Dietmar Harhoff & Stefan Wagner, 2009. "The Duration of Patent Examination at the European Patent Office," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1969-1984, December.
    28. Zhu, Kejia & Malhotra, Shavin & Li, Yaohan, 2022. "Technological diversity of patent applications and decision pendency," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    29. Carlos Cinelli & Chad Hazlett, 2020. "Making sense of sensitivity: extending omitted variable bias," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 82(1), pages 39-67, February.
    30. Hu, Albert G.Z. & Zhang, Peng & Zhao, Lijing, 2017. "China as number one? Evidence from China's most recent patenting surge," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 107-119.
    31. Liegsalz, Johannes & Wagner, Stefan, 2013. "Patent examination at the State Intellectual Property Office in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 552-563.
    32. Tong, Tony W. & Zhang, Kun & He, Zi-Lin & Zhang, Yuchen, 2018. "What determines the duration of patent examination in China? An outcome-specific duration analysis of invention patent applications at SIPO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 583-591.
    33. Kenneth Zahringer & Christos Kolympiris & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, 2018. "Time to patent at the USPTO: the case of emerging entrepreneurial firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 923-952, August.
    34. Kim, Jinhwan & Valentine, Kristen, 2021. "The innovation consequences of mandatory patent disclosures," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2).
    35. Baruffaldi, Stefano H. & Simeth, Markus, 2020. "Patents and knowledge diffusion: The effect of early disclosure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Zhang, Gupeng & Xiong, Libin & Duan, Hongbo & Huang, Dujuan, 2020. "Obtaining certainty vs. creating uncertainty: Does firms’ patent filing strategy work as expected?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    2. Li Yao & He Ni, 2023. "Prediction of patent grant and interpreting the key determinants: an application of interpretable machine learning approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 4933-4969, September.
    3. Ting Meng & Richard Carew & Wojciech J. Florkowski, 2020. "Determinants of the grant lag and the surrender lag of horticultural crop plant breeders’ rights applications: Survival analysis with competing risks," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(4), pages 489-512, December.
    4. Andrew Eckert & Corinne Langinier, 2014. "A Survey Of The Economics Of Patent Systems And Procedures," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 996-1015, December.
    5. Tong, Tony W. & Zhang, Kun & He, Zi-Lin & Zhang, Yuchen, 2018. "What determines the duration of patent examination in China? An outcome-specific duration analysis of invention patent applications at SIPO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 583-591.
    6. Zhu, Kejia & Malhotra, Shavin & Li, Yaohan, 2022. "Technological diversity of patent applications and decision pendency," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    7. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Reza Hosseini, 2020. "Discrimination against foreigners in the U.S. patent system," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(4), pages 349-366, December.
    8. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Emilio Raiteri, 2022. "Technology Protectionism and the Patent System: Evidence from China," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(1), pages 1-43, March.
    9. Higham, Kyle & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Jaffe, Adam B., 2021. "Patent Quality: Towards a Systematic Framework for Analysis and Measurement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    10. Dyer, Travis A. & Glaeser, Stephen & Lang, Mark H. & Sprecher, Caroline, 2024. "The effect of patent disclosure quality on innovation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(2).
    11. Kenneth Zahringer & Christos Kolympiris & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, 2018. "Time to patent at the USPTO: the case of emerging entrepreneurial firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 923-952, August.
    12. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Reza Hosseini, 0. "Discrimination against foreigners in the U.S. patent system," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 0, pages 1-18.
    13. Jussi Heikkilä & Michael Verba, 2018. "The role of utility models in patent filing strategies: evidence from European countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 689-719, August.
    14. Odeh Al-Jayyousi & Hira Amin & Hiba Ali Al-Saudi & Amjaad Aljassas & Evren Tok, 2023. "Mission-Oriented Innovation Policy for Sustainable Development: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-21, August.
    15. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    16. Johannes Koenen & Martin Peitz, 2012. "The Economics of Pending Patents," Chapters, in: Joseph E. Harrington Jr & Yannis Katsoulacos (ed.), Recent Advances in the Analysis of Competition Policy and Regulation, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Cesare Righi & Davide Cannito & Theodor Vladasel, 2023. "Continuing Patent Applications at the USPTO," Working Papers 1382, Barcelona School of Economics.
    18. Lei, Zhen & Wright, Brian D., 2017. "Why weak patents? Testing the examiner ignorance hypothesis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 43-56.
    19. Liegsalz, Johannes & Wagner, Stefan, 2013. "Patent examination at the State Intellectual Property Office in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 552-563.
    20. Armin Mertens & Marc Scheufen, 2024. "Intellectual property and fourth industrial revolution technologies: how the patent system is shaping the future in the data-driven economy," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 57(1), pages 275-310, April.

    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:teinso:v:76:y:2024:i:c:s0160791x23002579. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    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.