IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v5y1995i3p183-187.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Linkage between agency-supported research and patented industrial technology

Author

Listed:
  • Francis Narin
  • Kimberly S Hamilton
  • Dominic Olivastro

Abstract

CHI Research's early work on the citation linkage between patented technology in the USA, and the underlying research science base using 1987/88 US patents has been massively expanded to include citations from 1993/94 US patents, and an analysis of the cited US papers and the agencies supporting them. There is a very strong within-country component to the linkage: inventors in the US system cite their own country's papers approximately three times as often as would be expected, when adjusted for the size of the country's science. The linkage is strongest in the highly scientific areas of technology, and is quite subject specific. Over the six years separating the studies, there has been a remarkable three-fold increase in linkage. A large fraction of these papers cited in patents originate in the US university system, and are supported by US research support agencies. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Francis Narin & Kimberly S Hamilton & Dominic Olivastro, 1995. "Linkage between agency-supported research and patented industrial technology," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(3), pages 183-187, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:5:y:1995:i:3:p:183-187
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/rev/5.3.183
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Acosta, Manuel & Coronado, Daniel, 2003. "Science-technology flows in Spanish regions: An analysis of scientific citations in patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1783-1803, December.
    2. Meyer, Martin, 2006. "Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1646-1662, December.
    3. Wolfgang Glänzel & Martin Meyer, 2003. "Patents cited in the scientific literature: An exploratory study of 'reverse' citation relations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 415-428, October.
    4. Tijssen, Robert J. W., 2001. "Global and domestic utilization of industrial relevant science: patent citation analysis of science-technology interactions and knowledge flows," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 35-54, January.
    5. Margriet C. N. Jansz, 2000. "Some Thoughts on the Interaction between Scientometrics and Science and Technology Policy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 47(2), pages 253-264, February.
    6. Wry, Tyler & Lounsbury, Michael, 2013. "Contextualizing the categorical imperative: Category linkages, technology focus, and resource acquisition in nanotechnology entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 117-133.
    7. Daniel Coronado & Manuel Acosta, 2003. "The effects of regional scientific opportunities in science-technology flows: Evidence from scientific literature cited in firms' patent data," ERSA conference papers ersa03p321, European Regional Science Association.
    8. Kerstin Hotte & Taheya Tarannum & Vilhelm Verendel & Lauren Bennett, 2022. "Measuring artificial intelligence: a systematic assessment and implications for governance," Papers 2204.10304, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2024.
    9. Martin Meyer & Tatiana Siniläinen & Jan Timm Utecht, 2003. "Towards hybrid Triple Helix indicators: A study of university-related patents and a survey of academic inventors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 321-350, October.
    10. Hötte, Kerstin & Pichler, Anton & Lafond, François, 2021. "The rise of science in low-carbon energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    11. Chen, Lixin, 2017. "Do patent citations indicate knowledge linkage? The evidence from text similarities between patents and their citations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 63-79.
    12. Meyer, Martin, 2000. "Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 409-434, March.
    13. Sung, Hui-Yun & Wang, Chun-Chieh & Huang, Mu-Hsuan & Chen, Dar-Zen, 2015. "Measuring science-based science linkage and non-science-based linkage of patents through non-patent references," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 488-498.
    14. C. Gay & C. Le Bas, 2005. "Uses without too many abuses of patent citations or the simple economics of patent citations as a measure of value and flows of knowledge," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 333-338.
    15. Nguyen, Ai Linh & Liu, Wenyuan & Khor, Khiam Aik & Nanetti, Andrea & Cheong, Siew Ann, 2020. "The golden eras of graphene science and technology: Bibliographic evidences from journal and patent publications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    16. Ugo Finardi, 2010. "Temporal and spatial relations between patents and scientific journal articles: the case of nanotechnologies," CERIS Working Paper 201007, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    17. Narin, Francis & Hamilton, Kimberly S. & Olivastro, Dominic, 1997. "The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-330, October.
    18. Ding, Cherng G. & Hung, Wen-Chi & Lee, Meng-Che & Wang, Hung-Jui, 2017. "Exploring paper characteristics that facilitate the knowledge flow from science to technology," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 244-256.
    19. M. Meyer & K. Debackere & W. Glänzel, 2010. "Can applied science be ‘good science’? Exploring the relationship between patent citations and citation impact in nanoscience," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(2), pages 527-539, November.
    20. Wolfgang Glänzel & Ping Zhou, 2011. "Publication activity, citation impact and bi-directional links between publications and patents in biotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 505-525, February.
    21. R. J. W. Tussen & R. K. Buter & Th. N. van Leeuwen, 2000. "Technological Relevance of Science: An Assessment of Citation Linkages between Patents and Research Papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 47(2), pages 389-412, February.

    More about this item

    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:oup:rseval:v:5:y:1995:i:3:p:183-187. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.