IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ecinnt/v11y2002i3p211-231.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining Observed Licensing Agreements: Toward a Broader Understanding of Technology Flows

Author

Listed:
  • Albert Link
  • John Scott

Abstract

A lack of quantitative information on cross-firm licensing agreements constrains policy makers in their overall understanding of the innovation process and the innovative environment of firms. This paper develops a methodology for understanding the patterns of technology flows that result through licensing agreements from readily available patent data. In addition, hypotheses about firms that share technology through licensing are tested; in particular, we find that diversified firms have a higher probability of licensing their technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Albert Link & John Scott, 2002. "Explaining Observed Licensing Agreements: Toward a Broader Understanding of Technology Flows," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 211-231.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:ecinnt:v:11:y:2002:i:3:p:211-231
    DOI: 10.1080/10438590210905
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10438590210905
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10438590210905?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. Hagedoorn, John & Link, Albert N. & Vonortas, Nicholas S., 2000. "Research partnerships1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 567-586, April.
    2. Link, Albert N. & Scott, John T., 2001. "Public/private partnerships: stimulating competition in a dynamic market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 763-794, April.
    3. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    4. Scott, John T & Pascoe, George, 1987. "Purposive Diversification of R and D in Manufacturing," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 193-205, December.
    5. Donald S. Siegel, 1999. "Skill-Biased Technological Change: Evidence from a Firm-Level Survey," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number sbtc, December.
    6. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Scott,John T., 2005. "Purposive Diversification and Economic Performance," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521022583, September.
    8. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2003. "Universities as Research Partners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 485-491, May.
    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. TAKECHI Kazutaka, 2008. "International Strategic Alliances for Local Market Entry: Direct Launches versus Marketing Alliances in Pharmaceuticals," Discussion papers 08022, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    2. John T. Scott, 2016. "Creativity for invention insights: corporate strategies and opportunities for public entrepreneurship," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 43(4), pages 409-448, December.
    3. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius, 2005. "License Expenditures of Incumbents and Potential Entrants: An Empirical Analysis of Firm Behavior," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-35, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Lichtenthaler, Ulrich, 2010. "Determinants of proactive and reactive technology licensing: A contingency perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 55-66, February.
    5. Manish Srivastava & Tang Wang, 2015. "When does selling make you wiser? Impact of licensing on Chinese firms’ patenting propensity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 602-628, August.
    6. Catalina Martinez & Pluvia Zuniga, 2017. "Contracting for technology transfer: patent licensing and know-how in Brazil," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(6), pages 659-689, August.
    7. Link, Albert N. & Scott, John T., 2011. "The Theory and Practice of Public-Sector R&D Economic Impact Analysis: The Case of the National Institute of Standards and Technology," UNCG Economics Working Papers 11-16, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.
    8. Dirk Czarnitzki & Kornelius Kraft, 2010. "Which Firms Buy Licenses? Market Positions and License Expenditures," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 112(3), pages 471-488, September.

    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. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    2. Hala Abou-Ali & Mohammed Belhaj, 2008. "Cost Benefit Analysis of Desert Locusts Control: A Multicountry Perspective," Working Papers 801, Economic Research Forum, revised 01 Jan 2008.
    3. Yannis Caloghirou & Stavros Ioannides & Nicholas S. Vonortas, 2003. "Research Joint Ventures," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(4), pages 541-570, September.
    4. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 1999. "Markets for technology (why do we see them, why don't we see more of them and why we should care)," DEE - Working Papers. Business Economics. WB 6520, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía de la Empresa.
    5. Matthias Firgo & Peter Mayerhofer, 2015. "Wissens-Spillovers und regionale Entwicklung - welche strukturpolitische Ausrichtung optimiert des Wachstum?," Working Paper Reihe der AK Wien - Materialien zu Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft 144, Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien, Abteilung Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Statistik.
    6. Lee, Young Hoon & Kim, YoungJun, 2016. "Analyzing interaction in R&D networks using the Triple Helix method: Evidence from industrial R&D programs in Korean government," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 93-105.
    7. Oh, Jong-Min, 2017. "Absorptive capacity, technology spillovers, and the cross-section of stock returns," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 146-164.
    8. Becker Wolfgang & Peters Jürgen, 2005. "Innovation Effects of Science-Related Technological Opportunities / Innovationseffekte von technologischen Möglichkeiten aus dem Wissenschaftsbereich: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Findings," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 225(2), pages 130-150, April.
    9. Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2010. "Economics of Technology Policy," 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 1181-1218, Elsevier.
    10. Neil Foster-McGregor, 2012. "Innovation and Technology Transfer across Countries," wiiw Research Reports 380, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
    11. Matthias Firgo & Peter Mayerhofer, 2015. "Wissensintensive Unternehmensdienste, Wissens-Spillovers und regionales Wachstum. Teilprojekt 1: Wissens-Spillovers und regionale Entwicklung – Welche strukturpolitische Ausrichtung optimiert das Wach," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 58342.
    12. Petr Hanel & Alain St-Pierre, 2002. "Effects of R & D Spillovers on the Profitability of Firms," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 20(4), pages 305-322, June.
    13. Gernot Hutschenreiter & Serguei Kaniovski, 1999. "Embodied Technology Diffusion in the Austrian Economy," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 7711.
    14. Kevin J. Fox & Peter Goodridge & Jonathan Haskel & Gavin Wallis, 2017. "Spillovers from R&D and Other Intangible Investment: Evidence from UK Industries," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 63, pages 22-48, February.
    15. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Cinzia Daraio, 2013. "Knowledge spillover effects at the sub-regional level. Theory and estimation," DIAG Technical Reports 2013-13, Department of Computer, Control and Management Engineering, Universita' degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza".
    16. Simeth, Markus & Raffo, Julio D., 2013. "What makes companies pursue an Open Science strategy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1531-1543.
    17. Mudambi, Ram & Swift, Tim, 2009. "Professional guilds, tension and knowledge management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 736-745, June.
    18. Belderbos, Rene & Carree, Martin & Diederen, Bert & Lokshin, Boris & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2004. "Heterogeneity in R&D cooperation strategies," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(8-9), pages 1237-1263, November.
    19. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2012. "Productivity effects of basic research in low-tech and high-tech industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1555-1564.
    20. Sena, Vania, 2004. "Total factor productivity and the spillover hypothesis: Some new evidence," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 31-42, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation And Invention: O31; Intellectual Property Rights: O34;

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:taf:ecinnt:v:11:y:2002:i:3:p:211-231. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/GEIN20 .

    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.