IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/indinn/v15y2008i4p393-409.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovative Output, Productivity and Profitability. A Test Comparing USPTO and EPO Data

Author

Listed:
  • Enrico Santarelli
  • Francesca Lotti

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to test whether patent-based indicators are still reliable measures of innovativeness in light of organizational changes in the field of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) protection and the regulatory reforms already occurred and under way, respectively, at the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the European Patent Office (EPO). For most high-tech industries, patents represent an outcome of the production process and their number can be taken as a proxy for a firm's ability to improve its productivity growth and profitability. The case study reported here concerns the biotechnology industry in Italy, whose firms, by definition, have Intellectual Property (IP) activities in their portfolios. For this purpose, we use a unique dataset which collects balance sheet items and patent information from EPO and USPTO. After linking firms' financial and production data with the patent information, we estimate a modified knowledge production function in which the dependent variable is alternatively (labor) productivity growth and profitability. Although based on a quite small sample, our findings provide some indication of a statistically significant relationship between patents with the EPO and both productivity growth and, in particular, profitability. This suggests that firms might pursue different strategies when patenting with the USPTO and the EPO.

Suggested Citation

  • Enrico Santarelli & Francesca Lotti, 2008. "Innovative Output, Productivity and Profitability. A Test Comparing USPTO and EPO Data," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 393-409.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:indinn:v:15:y:2008:i:4:p:393-409
    DOI: 10.1080/13662710802273280
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13662710802273280
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13662710802273280?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. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Productivity and R&D at the Firm Level," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 100-133, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1.
    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. Roberta Piergiovanni & Enrico Santarelli, 2013. "The more you spend, the more you get? The effects of R&D and capital expenditures on the patenting activities of biotechnology firms," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 497-521, February.
    2. Ann Hipp & Björn Jindra & Kehinde Medase, 2023. "Nothing new in the East? New evidence on productivity effects of inventions in the GDR," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2301, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.

    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. Dirk Czarnitzki & Hanna Hottenrott & Susanne Thorwarth, 2011. "Industrial research versus development investment: the implications of financial constraints," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 35(3), pages 527-544.
    2. Diégo Legros & Fabrice Galia, 2012. "Are innovation and R&D the only sources of firms’ knowledge that increase productivity? An empirical investigation of French manufacturing firms," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 167-181, October.
    3. Martin Andersson & Hans Lööf, 2009. "Learning‐by‐Exporting Revisited: The Role of Intensity and Persistence," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 111(4), pages 893-916, December.
    4. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Schoen, Anja & Wastyn, Annelies, 2014. "Selection bias in innovation studies: A simple test," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 287-299.
    5. Nils Grashof, 2020. "Sinking or swimming in the cluster labour pool? A firm-specific analysis of the effect of specialized labour," Jena Economics Research Papers 2020-006, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    6. Bronwyn Hall & Alessandro Maffioli, 2008. "Evaluating the impact of technology development funds in emerging economies: evidence from Latin America," The European Journal of Development Research, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 172-198.
    7. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2017. "Digital knowledge generation and the appropriability trade-off," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 991-1002.
    8. Toole, Andrew A. & King, John L., 2011. "Industry-science connections in agriculture: Do public science collaborations and knowledge flows contribute to firm-level agricultural research productivity?," ZEW Discussion Papers 11-064, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. Ornaghi, Carmine, 2006. "Spillovers in product and process innovation: Evidence from manufacturing firms," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 349-380, March.
    10. Cappelli, Riccardo & Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius, 2014. "Sources of spillovers for imitation and innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 115-120.
    11. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Oriani, Raffaele, 2006. "Does the market value R&D investment by European firms? Evidence from a panel of manufacturing firms in France, Germany, and Italy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 971-993, September.
    12. Hanna Hottenrott & Bronwyn H. Hall & Dirk Czarnitzki, 2016. "Patents as quality signals? The implications for financing constraints on R&D," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 197-217, April.
    13. Giammario Impullitti, 2007. "International Schumpeterian Competition and Optimal R&D subsidies," Economics Working Papers ECO2007/55, European University Institute.
    14. Jacques Mairesse & Pierre Mohnen, 1990. "Recherche-Développement et productivité : un survol de la littérature économétrique," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 237(1), pages 99-108.
    15. Kaiser, Ulrich, 2009. "Patents and profit rates," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 79-80, August.
    16. Jacques Mairesse, 2008. "Employment, innovation, and productivity: evidence from Italian microdata," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 17(4), pages 813-839, August.
    17. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Productivity, R&D, and Basic Research at the Firm Level in the 1970s," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 82-99, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Colombelli, Alessandra & Grilli, Luca & Minola, Tommaso & Mrkajic, Boris, 2020. "To what extent do young innovative companies take advantage of policy support to enact innovation appropriation mechanisms?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(10).
    19. Bruno Crepon & Emmanuel Duguet & Jacques Mairesse, 1998. "Research, Innovation And Productivity: An Econometric Analysis At The Firm Level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 115-158.
    20. Cecilia Garcia-Penalosa & Eve Caroli & Philippe Aghion, 1999. "Inequality and Economic Growth: The Perspective of the New Growth Theories," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 37(4), pages 1615-1660, December.

    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:indinn:v:15:y:2008:i:4:p:393-409. 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/CIAI20 .

    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.