IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v14y2021i8p358-d609474.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Applying Quantile Regression to Assess the Relationship between R&D, Technology Import and Patent Performance in Taiwan

Author

Listed:
  • Chung-Chu Chuang

    (Department of Management Sciences, Tamkang University, New Taipei City 251, Taiwan)

  • Chung-Min Tsai

    (Department of Banking and Finance, Chinese Culture University, Taipei 111, Taiwan)

  • Hsiao-Chen Chang

    (Department of Banking and Finance, Chinese Culture University, Taipei 111, Taiwan)

  • Yi-Hsien Wang

    (Department of Banking and Finance, Chinese Culture University, Taipei 111, Taiwan)

Abstract

Electronics companies are facing global economic and trade competition. As patents can form an endowment shield that protects the development of corporate capabilities, companies are actively increasing their number of patents and attaching importance to technological research and development and patent management to achieve differentiated strategic effects. As such, patent layout and research and development (R&D) investment have become important strategic weapons for Taiwanese manufacturers, with which to enter the international market or compete among enterprises. This study first utilized the principal components analysis method to define patents in terms of the number of patents and the times patents are cited, with R&D defined in terms of expenditure and intensity. Furthermore, this study used a quantile regression model to visualize the relationship between R&D, technological imports, and patent performance in Taiwanese listed electronics companies. The empirical results show that technological imports in the second time-lag period require patents, while the effect on patents varies alongside industry characteristics. In addition, the empirical results found that the total assets, number of employees, and number of patent inventors are also factors that significantly affect patents. This research proposes that Taiwan’s listed electronics companies should expand their scale, increase their economic efficiency, maximize their resources, increase their patents, enhance their corporate value, boost their investor confidence, and improve their industry competitiveness.

Suggested Citation

  • Chung-Chu Chuang & Chung-Min Tsai & Hsiao-Chen Chang & Yi-Hsien Wang, 2021. "Applying Quantile Regression to Assess the Relationship between R&D, Technology Import and Patent Performance in Taiwan," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-14, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:14:y:2021:i:8:p:358-:d:609474
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/14/8/358/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/14/8/358/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Suominen, Arho & Toivanen, Hannes & Seppänen, Marko, 2017. "Firms' knowledge profiles: Mapping patent data with unsupervised learning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 131-142.
    2. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 2008. "Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 1, pages 3-15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Fisher, Franklin M & Temin, Peter, 1979. "The Schumpeterian Hypothesis: Reply," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(2), pages 386-389, April.
    4. Donald S. Siegel, 2018. "Academic Entrepreneurship: Lessons Learned for Technology Transfer Personnel and University Administrators," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Dirk Libaers & Denise Dunlap (ed.), World Scientific Reference on Innovation Volume 1: University Technology Transfer and Academic Entrepreneurship, chapter 1, pages 1-21, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli & Gianluca Murgia, 2020. "University–Industry collaborations and international knowledge spillovers: a joint-patent investigation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 958-983, August.
    6. Campbell, Richard S., 1983. "Patent trends as a technological forecasting tool," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 137-143.
    7. Lieberman, Marvin B., 1987. "Patents, learning by doing, and market structure in the chemical processing industries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 257-276.
    8. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    9. Moshe Buchinsky, 1998. "Recent Advances in Quantile Regression Models: A Practical Guideline for Empirical Research," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(1), pages 88-126.
    10. Sanjai Bhagat & Roberta Romano, 2002. "Event Studies and the Law: Part I: Technique and Corporate Litigation," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 4(1), pages 141-168, January.
    11. Brouwer, Erik & Kleinknecht, Alfred, 1999. "Innovative output, and a firm's propensity to patent.: An exploration of CIS micro data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 615-624, August.
    12. Richard A. Wolfe, 1994. "Organizational Innovation: Review, Critique And Suggested Research Directions," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 405-431, May.
    13. Zoltan J. Acs & Luc Anselin & Attila Varga, 2008. "Patents and Innovation Counts as Measures of Regional Production of New Knowledge," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 11, pages 135-151, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2009. "Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(4), pages 611-635, December.
    15. Mariani, Myriam, 2004. "What determines technological hits?: Geography versus firm competencies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1565-1582, December.
    16. Sanjai Bhagat & Roberta Romano, 2001. "Event Studies and the Law - Part I: Technique and Corporate Litigation," Yale School of Management Working Papers amz2475, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Jan 2002.
    17. Cliff J. Huang & Tsu-Tan Fu & Hung-Pin Lai & Yung-Lieh Yang, 2017. "Semiparametric smooth coefficient quantile estimation of the production profile," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 373-392, February.
    18. Sun, Yifei, 2003. "Determinants of foreign patents in China," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 27-37, March.
    19. Myriam, Mariani, 2004. "What determines technological hits? Geography vs. firm competencies," Research Memorandum 003, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    20. Bernd Ebersberger & Sverre J. Herstad, 2013. "The relationship between international innovation collaboration, intramural R&D and SMEs’ innovation performance: a quantile regression approach," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 626-630, May.
    21. James Bessen & Michael J. Meurer, 2009. "Of Patents and Property," Working Papers 0901, Research on Innovation.
    22. Almeida, Heitor & Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Li, Dongmei & Tseng, Kevin, 2021. "More Cash, Less Innovation: The Effect of the American Jobs Creation Act on Patent Value," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 56(1), pages 1-28, February.
    23. Fenfen Wei & Nanping Feng & Kevin H. Zhang, 2017. "Innovation Capability and Innovation Talents: Evidence from China Based on a Quantile Regression Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-15, July.
    24. Derek Bosworth & Mark Rogers, 2001. "Market Value, R&D and Intellectual Property: An Empirical Analysis of Large Australian Firms," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 77(239), pages 323-337, December.
    25. repec:bla:ecorec:v:77:y:2001:i:239:p:323-37 is not listed on IDEAS
    26. Pakes, Ariel & Griliches, Zvi, 1980. "Patents and R&D at the firm level: A first report," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 377-381.
    27. Koku, Paul Sergius & Qureshi, Anique A. & Akhigbe, Aigbe, 2001. "The effects of news on initial corporate lawsuits," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 49-55, July.
    28. Sanjai Bhagat & Roberta Romano, "undated". "Event Studies and the Law: Part II--Empirical Studies and Corporate Law," Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy Working Paper Series yale_lepp-1019, Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy.
    29. Roberta Romano & Sanjai Bhagat, 2001. "Event Studies and the Law - Part I: Technique and Corporate Litigation," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm182, Yale School of Management.
    30. Sanjai Bhagat & Roberta Romano, "undated". "Event Studies and the Law--Part I: Technique and Corporate Litigation," Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy Working Paper Series yale_lepp-1021, Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy.
    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. Di Fan & Long Zhao, 2023. "The role of business locations in international patenting," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 139(1), pages 43-69, June.

    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. Kuang-Hsun Shih & Fu-Ju Yang & Jhih-Ta Shih & Yi-Hsien Wang, 2020. "Patent Litigation, Competitive Dynamics, and Stock Market Volatility," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-17, May.
    2. Omer Unsal & M. Kabir Hassan, 2020. "Employee lawsuits and capital structure," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 663-704, June.
    3. T. S. Raghu & Wonseok Woo & S. B. Mohan & H. Raghav Rao, 2008. "Market reaction to patent infringement litigations in the information technology industry," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 61-75, March.
    4. Gokhale, Jayendra & Brooks, Raymond M. & Tremblay, Victor J., 2014. "The effect on stockholder wealth of product recalls and government action: The case of Toyota's accelerator pedal recall," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 521-528.
    5. Carlino, Gerald & Kerr, William R., 2015. "Agglomeration and Innovation," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 349-404, Elsevier.
    6. Atanasov, Vladimir & Black, Bernard & Ciccotello, Conrad & Gyoshev, Stanley, 2010. "How does law affect finance? An examination of equity tunneling in Bulgaria," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 155-173, April.
    7. John Jackson & Audrey Kline & Sarah Skinner, 2006. "The Impact of Non-Normality and Misspecification on Merger Event Studies," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 247-264.
    8. Su-Chen Yu & Kuang-Hsun Shih, 2021. "Financial Market Reaction to Patent Lawsuits against Integrated Circuit Design Companies," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, September.
    9. Unsal, Omer & Kabir Hassan, M. & Zirek, Duygu, 2017. "Corporate lobbying and labor relations: Evidence from employee-level litigations," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 411-441.
    10. repec:bof:bofrdp:urn:nbn:fi:bof-201512111472 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Michael Bradley & James D. Cox & Mitu Gulati, 2010. "The Market Reaction to Legal Shocks and Their Antidotes: Lessons from the Sovereign Debt Market," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(1), pages 289-324, January.
    12. Armour, John & Mayer, Colin & Polo, Andrea, 2017. "Regulatory Sanctions and Reputational Damage in Financial Markets," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(4), pages 1429-1448, August.
    13. Kimmel, Randall K. & Antenucci, Robert & Hasan, Shahriar, 2017. "Investor perception and business method patents: A natural experiment," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 26-48.
    14. Bergek, Anna & Bruzelius, Maria, 2010. "Are patents with multiple inventors from different countries a good indicator of international R&D collaboration? The case of ABB," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1321-1334, December.
    15. Lin, Chien-Chung & Wu, Huan-Ting, 2019. "How to test an insider trading law and its effectiveness: Price movements and comparative empirical data from Taiwan," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 22-36.
    16. Li Fang, 2019. "Manufacturing Clusters and Firm Innovation," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 33(1), pages 6-18, February.
    17. Ian Keay & Cherie Metcalf, 2011. "Property Rights, Resource Access, and Long‐Run Growth," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), pages 792-829, December.
    18. Carlino, Gerald & Kerr, William R., 2015. "Agglomeration and Innovation," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 349-404, Elsevier.
    19. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2015_027 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Michael Firth & Oliver M. Rui & Wenfeng Wu, 2011. "The Effects of Political Connections and State Ownership on Corporate Litigation in China," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(3), pages 573-607.
    21. Utpal Bhattacharya & Neal Galpin & Bruce Haslem, 2007. "The Home Court Advantage in International Corporate Litigation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(4), pages 625-660.
    22. Cremers, K. J. Martijn & Litov, Lubomir P. & Sepe, Simone M., 2013. "Staggered Boards and Firm Value, Revisited," Working Papers 13-36, University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School, Weiss Center.

    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:gam:jjrfmx:v:14:y:2021:i:8:p:358-:d:609474. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.