IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v112y2017i3d10.1007_s11192-017-2443-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the effect of dual use on the value of military technology patents based on the renewal decision

Author

Listed:
  • Bo Kyeong Lee

    (Yonsei University)

  • So Young Sohn

    (Yonsei University)

Abstract

Concerns regarding the high level of research and development (R&D) expenditure on military technology have prompted many nations to pursue a dual-use regime in military R&D. However, the value of dual-use military technology has not yet been quantitatively investigated. We explore whether military technology with a higher level of duality has been more valuable than that with a lower level of duality. We assume that the patent of valuable military technology was renewed until its termination. We retrieve military patents from the United States Patent and Trademark Office during 1976–2014 based on their International Patent Classification (IPC) as F41 or F42. Then, we propose three indicators to assess the duality level of them. The first indicator is based on the determination of whether the patented technology is utilizable in both the military and the civilian sectors using its IPC. For the second indicator, we estimate the potential of convergence of a patented technology with various technological fields using the degree of centrality of the IPC’s co-occurrence network. The third indicator is based on ratio of forward citation by the civilian sector over the total number of forward citations as a measurement of technology diffusion toward the civilian sector. Using logistic regression, we found that the first two indicators are positively associated with patent renewal decision, while the last indicator is nonsignificant. The effects of the two significant indicators suggests that military technologies are more valuable when the technology itself can be used in various sectors, including the civilian sector, and can be converged with technologies in different fields. However, the nonsignificant influence of the third variable suggests that the relation between patent value and diffusion effects toward following inventions is not confined to the civilian sector. Our findings provide evidence of the impact of dual-use policies in military R&D.

Suggested Citation

  • Bo Kyeong Lee & So Young Sohn, 2017. "Exploring the effect of dual use on the value of military technology patents based on the renewal decision," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1203-1227, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:112:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2443-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2443-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-017-2443-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-017-2443-6?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. Marco, Alan C., 2007. "The dynamics of patent citations," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 290-296, February.
    2. Joshua Lerner, 1994. "The Importance of Patent Scope: An Empirical Analysis," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 319-333, Summer.
    3. Angus C. Chu & Ching-Chong Lai, 2012. "On the Growth and Welfare Effects of Defense R&D," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 14(3), pages 473-492, June.
    4. Lu, Wen-Min & Kweh, Qian Long & Nourani, Mohammad & Huang, Feng-Wen, 2016. "Evaluating the efficiency of dual-use technology development programs from the R&D and socio-economic perspectives," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 82-92.
    5. Marc Baudry & Béatrice Dumont, 2006. "Patent Renewals as Options: Improving the Mechanism for Weeding Out Lousy Patents," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 28(1), pages 41-62, February.
    6. Cowan, Robin & Foray, Dominique, 1995. "Quandaries in the economics of dual technologies and spillovers from military to civilian research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 851-868, November.
    7. Yong-Gil Lee, 2009. "What affects a patent’s value? An analysis of variables that affect technological, direct economic, and indirect economic value: An exploratory conceptual approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 79(3), pages 623-633, June.
    8. Grimaldi, Michele & Cricelli, Livio & Di Giovanni, Martina & Rogo, Francesco, 2015. "The patent portfolio value analysis: A new framework to leverage patent information for strategic technology planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 286-302.
    9. Gautam Ahuja & Curba Morris Lampert, 2001. "Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: a longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 521-543, June.
    10. Hyunseok Park & Janghyeok Yoon, 2014. "Assessing coreness and intermediarity of technology sectors using patent co-classification analysis: the case of Korean national R&D," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 853-890, February.
    11. Bessen, James, 2008. "The value of U.S. patents by owner and patent characteristics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 932-945, June.
    12. Jean O. Lanjouw & Ariel Pakes & Jonathan Putnam, 1998. "How to Count Patents and Value Intellectual Property: The Uses of Patent Renewal and Application Data," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 405-432, December.
    13. Yonghan Ju & So Young Sohn, 2015. "Identifying patterns in rare earth element patents based on text and data mining," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 389-410, January.
    14. Goel, Rajeev K. & Payne, James E. & Ram, Rati, 2008. "R&D expenditures and U.S. economic growth: A disaggregated approach," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 237-250.
    15. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
    16. Luca Pieroni, 2009. "Military Expenditure And Economic Growth," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(4), pages 327-339.
    17. Quintana-Garci­a, Cristina & Benavides-Velasco, Carlos A., 2008. "Innovative competence, exploration and exploitation: The influence of technological diversification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 492-507, April.
    18. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Rosario Marín & Pedro Prats, 2013. "Factors affecting the diffusion of patented military technology in the field of weapons and ammunition," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 1-22, January.
    19. Lichtenberg, Frank R., 1995. "Economics of defense R&D," Handbook of Defense Economics, in: Keith Hartley & Todd Sandler (ed.), Handbook of Defense Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 15, pages 431-457, Elsevier.
    20. Han, Eun Jin & Sohn, So Young, 2016. "Technological convergence in standards for information and communication technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-10.
    21. Su Jin Seo & Eun Jin Han & So Young Sohn, 2015. "Trend analysis of academic research and technical development pertaining to gas hydrates," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 905-920, November.
    22. Ruttan, Vernon W., 2006. "Is War Necessary for Economic Growth?: Military Procurement and Technology Development," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195188042.
    23. Harhoff, Dietmar & Scherer, Frederic M. & Vopel, Katrin, 2003. "Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1343-1363, September.
    24. Bruno Van Pottelsberghe & Eleftherios Sapsalis & Ran Navon, 2006. "Academic vs. industry patenting: an in-depth analysis of what determines patent value," Working Papers CEB 05-008.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    25. Kulve, Haico te & Smit, Wim A., 2003. "Civilian-military co-operation strategies in developing new technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 955-970, June.
    26. Liu, Kun & Arthurs, Jonathan & Cullen, John & Alexander, Roger, 2008. "Internal sequential innovations: How does interrelatedness affect patent renewal?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 946-953, June.
    27. Alptekin, Aynur & Levine, Paul, 2012. "Military expenditure and economic growth: A meta-analysis," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 636-650.
    28. repec:bla:jindec:v:46:y:1998:i:4:p:405-32 is not listed on IDEAS
    29. J. Paul Dunne & Nan Tian, 2015. "Military Expenditure, Economic Growth and Heterogeneity," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 15-31, February.
    30. Woo Jin Lee & Won Kyung Lee & So Young Sohn, 2016. "Patent Network Analysis and Quadratic Assignment Procedures to Identify the Convergence of Robot Technologies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, October.
    31. Lee, Won Sang & Han, Eun Jin & Sohn, So Young, 2015. "Predicting the pattern of technology convergence using big-data technology on large-scale triadic patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 317-329.
    32. Bojnec, Štefan, 2016. "Dual-use products export multipliers with the indirect effects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 287-296.
    33. Sterzi, Valerio, 2013. "Patent quality and ownership: An analysis of UK faculty patenting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 564-576.
    34. Stowsky, Jay, 2004. "Secrets to shield or share? new dilemmas for military R&D policy in the digital age," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 257-269, March.
    35. Reitzig, Markus, 2004. "Improving patent valuations for management purposes--validating new indicators by analyzing application rationales," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 939-957, September.
    36. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 1997. "Stylized Facts of Patent Litigation: Value, Scope and Ownership," NBER Working Papers 6297, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    37. Nicky J. Welton & Howard H. Z. Thom, 2015. "Value of Information," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(5), pages 564-566, July.
    38. Molas-Gallart, Jordi, 1997. "Which way to go? Defence technology and the diversity of 'dual-use' technology transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 367-385, October.
    39. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2004. "Patent Quality and Research Productivity: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 441-465, April.
    40. Burke, Paul F. & Reitzig, Markus, 2007. "Measuring patent assessment quality--Analyzing the degree and kind of (in)consistency in patent offices' decision making," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1404-1430, November.
    41. Sapsalis, Eleftherios & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno & Navon, Ran, 2006. "Academic versus industry patenting: An in-depth analysis of what determines patent value," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1631-1645, December.
    42. Fischer, Timo & Leidinger, Jan, 2014. "Testing patent value indicators on directly observed patent value—An empirical analysis of Ocean Tomo patent auctions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 519-529.
    43. Mowery, David C., 2010. "Military R&D and Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1219-1256, Elsevier.
    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. Jungpyo Lee & So Young Sohn, 2017. "What makes the first forward citation of a patent occur earlier?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 279-298, October.
    2. Eun Han & So Sohn, 2015. "Patent valuation based on text mining and survival analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 821-839, October.
    3. 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.
    4. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2007. "Patents only live twice: a patent survival analysis in Europe," Working Papers CEB 07-028.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    5. 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).
    6. Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry, 2019. "Capturing the economic value of triadic patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 127-157, January.
    7. Grimaldi, Michele & Cricelli, Livio & Di Giovanni, Martina & Rogo, Francesco, 2015. "The patent portfolio value analysis: A new framework to leverage patent information for strategic technology planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 286-302.
    8. Yi Zhang & Yue Qian & Ying Huang & Ying Guo & Guangquan Zhang & Jie Lu, 2017. "An entropy-based indicator system for measuring the potential of patents in technological innovation: rejecting moderation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1925-1946, June.
    9. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2021. "Identification of “Valuable” Technologies via Patent Statistics in India: An Analysis Based on Renewal Information," BASE University Working Papers 13/2021, BASE University, Bengaluru, India.
    10. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2011. "The puzzle of patent value indicators," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 33-62.
    11. Song, Haoyang & Hou, Jianhua & Zhang, Yang, 2023. "The measurements and determinants of patent technological value: Lifetime, strength, breadth, and dispersion from the technology diffusion perspective," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1).
    12. Huang, Kenneth Guang-Lih & Huang, Can & Shen, Huijun & Mao, Hao, 2021. "Assessing the value of China's patented inventions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    13. Noh, Heeyong & Lee, Sungjoo, 2020. "What constitutes a promising technology in the era of open innovation? An investigation of patent potential from multiple perspectives," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    14. Federico Munari & Maurizio Sobrero, 2011. "Economic and Management Perspectives on the Value of Patents," Chapters, in: Federico Munari & Raffaele Oriani (ed.), The Economic Valuation of Patents, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Chandra, Praveena & Dong, Andy, 2018. "The relation between knowledge accumulation and technical value in interdisciplinary technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 235-244.
    16. 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.
    17. Ugo Rizzo & Nicolò Barbieri & Laura Ramaciotti & Demian Iannantuono, 2020. "The division of labour between academia and industry for the generation of radical inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 393-413, April.
    18. Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli & Daniele Rotolo & Vito Albino, 2014. "Determinants of Patent Citations in Biotechnology: An Analysis of Patent Influence Across the Industrial and Organizational Boundaries," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-05, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    19. Barbieri, Nicolò & Marzucchi, Alberto & Rizzo, Ugo, 2020. "Knowledge sources and impacts on subsequent inventions: Do green technologies differ from non-green ones?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    20. Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry, 2018. "Do patents of academic funded researchers enjoy a longer life? A study of patent renewal decisions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-22, August.

    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:spr:scient:v:112:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2443-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.