IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0218927.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The procurement of innovation by the U.S. government

Author

Listed:
  • Gaétan de Rassenfosse
  • Adam Jaffe
  • Emilio Raiteri

Abstract

The U.S. government invests more than $50 billion per year in R&D procurement but we know little about the outcomes of these investments. We have traced all the patents arising from government funding since the year 2000. About 1.5 percent of all R&D procurement contracts have led to at least one patent for a total of about 13,000 patents. However, contracts connected to patents account for 36 per cent of overall contract value. The gestation lag from the signing date of the contract to the patent filing is on average 33 months and does not depend on the type of R&D performed. Patents that are produced faster also seem to be more valuable. We find strong decreasing returns to contract size. Conditional on generating at least one patent, a 1-percent increase in the size of an R&D contract is associated with 0.12 percent more patents.

Suggested Citation

  • Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Adam Jaffe & Emilio Raiteri, 2019. "The procurement of innovation by the U.S. government," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-11, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0218927
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218927
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0218927
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0218927&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0218927?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sampat, Bhaven N., 2012. "Mission-oriented biomedical research at the NIH," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 1729-1741.
    2. Lichtenberg, Frank R, 1988. "The Private R&D Investment Response to Federal Design and Technical Competitions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(3), pages 550-559, June.
    3. Pierre Azoulay & Joshua S Graff Zivin & Danielle Li & Bhaven N Sampat, 2019. "Public R&D Investments and Private-sector Patenting: Evidence from NIH Funding Rules," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(1), pages 117-152.
    4. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    5. Albert N. Link & Christopher J. Ruhm, 2013. "Bringing science to market:commercializing from NIH SBIR awards," Chapters, in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 1, pages 3-24, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Jacob, Brian A. & Lefgren, Lars, 2011. "The impact of research grant funding on scientific productivity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9), pages 1168-1177.
    7. Andrew Toole & Dirk Czarnitzki, 2007. "Biomedical Academic Entrepreneurship through the SBIR Program," NBER Chapters, in: Academic Science and Entrepreneurship: Dual Engines of Growth, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Adam B. Jaffe & Gaétan de Rassenfosse, 2017. "Patent citation data in social science research: Overview and best practices," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(6), pages 1360-1374, June.
    9. Ashish Arora & Alfonso Gambardella, 2010. "The Impact of NSF Support for Basic Research in Economics," NBER Chapters, in: Contributions in Memory of Zvi Griliches, pages 91-115, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Jaffe, Adam B., 2018. "Econometric evidence on the depreciation of innovations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 625-642.
    11. David C. Mowery, 2011. "Federal Policy and the Development of Semiconductors, Computer Hardware, and Computer Software: A Policy Model for Climate Change R&D?," NBER Chapters, in: Accelerating Energy Innovation: Insights from Multiple Sectors, pages 159-188, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Raiteri, Emilio, 2018. "A time to nourish? Evaluating the impact of public procurement on technological generality through patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 936-952.
    13. repec:adr:anecst:y:2005:i:79-80:p:04 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. Iossa, Elisabetta & Decarolis, Francesco & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Giuffrida, Leonardo Maria & Mollisi, Vincenzo & Raiteri, Emilio & Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2019. "Buyers' Role in Innovation Procurement," CEPR Discussion Papers 13777, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Lanahan, Lauren & Joshi, Amol M. & Johnson, Evan, 2021. "Do public R&D subsidies produce jobs? Evidence from the SBIR/STTR program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    3. Cristelli, Gabriele & Lissoni, Francesco, 2020. "Free movement of inventors: open-border policy and innovation in Switzerland," MPRA Paper 107433, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Kok, Holmer & Faems, Dries & de Faria, Pedro, 2022. "Pork Barrel or Barrel of Gold? Examining the performance implications of earmarking in public R&D grants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    5. Verluise, Cyril & Cristelli, Gabriele & Higham, Kyle & de Rassenfosse, Gaetan, 2020. "The Missing 15 Percent of Patent Citations," SocArXiv x78ys, Center for Open Science.
    6. Kevin A. Bryan & Heidi L. Williams, 2021. "Innovation: Market Failures and Public Policies," NBER Working Papers 29173, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Iossa, Elisabetta & De Chiara, Alessandro, 2019. "Public Procurement as a Demand-side Policy: Project Competition and Innovation Incentives," CEPR Discussion Papers 13664, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Giuffrida, Leonardo M. & Raiteri, Emilio, 2021. "Buyers' workload and R&D procurement outcomes: Evidence from the US Air Force Research Lab," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-059, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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. Annita Nugent & Ho Fai Chan & Uwe Dulleck, 2022. "Government funding of university-industry collaboration: exploring the impact of targeted funding on university patent activity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 29-73, January.
    2. RAITERI Emilio, 2015. "A time to nourish? Evaluating the impact of innovative public procurement on technological generality through patent data," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2015-05, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    3. Kok, Holmer & Faems, Dries & de Faria, Pedro, 2022. "Pork Barrel or Barrel of Gold? Examining the performance implications of earmarking in public R&D grants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    4. Anckaert, Paul-Emmanuel & Cassiman, David & Cassiman, Bruno, 2020. "Fostering practice-oriented and use-inspired science in biomedical research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    5. Ayoubi, Charles & Pezzoni, Michele & Visentin, Fabiana, 2019. "The important thing is not to win, it is to take part: What if scientists benefit from participating in research grant competitions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 84-97.
    6. Charles Ayoubi & Michele Pezzoni & Fabiana Visentin, 2017. "The Important Thing is not to Win, it is to Take Part: What If Scientists Benefit from Participating in Competitive Grant Races?," GREDEG Working Papers 2017-27, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    7. Serenella Caravella & Francesco Crespi, 2021. "The role of public procurement as innovation lever: evidence from Italian manufacturing firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(7), pages 663-684, October.
    8. Sarah Guillou & Basheer Kalash & Lionel Nesta & Michele Pezzoni & Evens Salies & Marc-Antoine Faure, 2023. "Impact de la nature du financement de la recherche sur ses résultats," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-04026916, HAL.
    9. Feld, Lars P. & Schmidt, Christoph M. & Schnabel, Isabel & Truger, Achim & Wieland, Volker, 2019. "Den Strukturwandel meistern. Jahresgutachten 2019/20 [Dealing with Structural Change. Annual Report 2019/20]," Annual Economic Reports / Jahresgutachten, German Council of Economic Experts / Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung, volume 127, number 201920.
    10. Corsini, Alberto & Pezzoni, Michele, 2023. "Does grant funding foster research impact? Evidence from France," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    11. Christopher Hayter, 2015. "Public or private entrepreneurship? Revisiting motivations and definitions of success among academic entrepreneurs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1003-1015, December.
    12. Amol M. Joshi & Todd M. Inouye & Jeffrey A. Robinson, 2018. "How does agency workforce diversity influence Federal R&D funding of minority and women technology entrepreneurs? An analysis of the SBIR and STTR programs, 2001–2011," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 499-519, March.
    13. Stuart D. Allen & Stephen K. Layson & Albert N. Link, 2013. "Public gains from entrepreneurial research: Inferences about the economic value of public support of the Small Business Innovation Research program," Chapters, in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 6, pages 105-112, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Fini, Riccardo & Perkmann, Markus & Kenney, Martin & Maki, Kanetaka M., 2023. "Are public subsidies effective for university spinoffs? Evidence from SBIR awards in the University of California system," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    15. John Van Reenen, 2022. "Innovation and Human Capital Policy," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation and Public Policy, pages 61-83, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Adam B. Jaffe, 2018. "Are patent fees effective at weeding out low‐quality patents?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 134-148, March.
    17. Miriam Bruhn & David McKenzie, 2019. "Can Grants to Consortia Spur Innovation and Science-Industry Collaboration? Regression- Discontinuity Evidence from Poland," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 33(3), pages 690-716.
    18. Christopher S. Hayter, 2016. "A trajectory of early-stage spinoff success: the role of knowledge intermediaries within an entrepreneurial university ecosystem," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 633-656, October.
    19. Joern H. Block & Christian O. Fisch & Mirjam van Praag, 2017. "The Schumpeterian entrepreneur: a review of the empirical evidence on the antecedents, behaviour and consequences of innovative entrepreneurship," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 61-95, January.
    20. Marco Cozzi, 2020. "Public Funding of Research and Grant Proposals in the Social Sciences: Empirical Evidence from Canada," Department Discussion Papers 1809, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.

    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:plo:pone00:0218927. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.