IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cge/wacage/575.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Exploration and Exploitation in US Technological Change

Author

Listed:
  • Carvalho, Vasco M.

    (University of Cambridge)

  • Draca, Mirko

    (University of Warwick and CAGE)

  • Kuhlen, Nikolas

    (University of Cambridge and The Alan Turing Institute)

Abstract

How do firms and inventors move through ‘knowledge space’ as they develop their innovations? We propose a method for tracking patterns of ‘exploration and exploitation’ in patenting behaviour in the US for the period since 1920. Our exploration measure is constructed from the text of patents and involves the use of ‘Bayesian Surprise’ to measure how different current patent-based innovations are from existing portfolios. Our results indicate that there are distinct ‘life-cycle’ patterns to firm and inventor exploration. Furthermore, exploration activity is more geographically concentrated than general patenting, but this concentration is centred outside the main hubs of patenting.

Suggested Citation

  • Carvalho, Vasco M. & Draca, Mirko & Kuhlen, Nikolas, 2021. "Exploration and Exploitation in US Technological Change," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 575, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    • Handle: RePEc:cge:wacage:575
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/centres/cage/manage/publications/wp575.2021.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sam Arts & Bruno Cassiman & Juan Carlos Gomez, 2018. "Text matching to measure patent similarity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 62-84, January.
    2. Andrews, Michael J. & Whalley, Alexander, 2022. "150 years of the geography of innovation," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    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. Pauly, Stefan & Stipanicic, Fernando, 2021. "The creation and diffusion of knowledge: Evidence from the Jet Age," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Docweb) 2112, CEPREMAP.
    2. Hong, Suckwon & Kim, Juram & Woo, Han-Gyun & Kim, Young-Choon & Lee, Changyong, 2022. "Screening ideas in the early stages of technology development: A word2vec and convolutional neural network approach," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    3. Benjamin Barber & Luis Diestre, 2022. "Can firms avoid tough patent examiners through examiner‐shopping? Strategic timing of citations in USPTO patent applications," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(9), pages 1854-1871, September.
    4. Biggi, Gianluca & Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Benfenati, Emilio, 2022. "Patent Toxicity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
      • Gianluca Biggi & Elisa Giuliani & Arianna Martinelli, 2020. "Patent Toxicity," LEM Papers Series 2020/33, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    5. Wei Du & Yibo Wang & Wei Xu & Jian Ma, 2021. "A personalized recommendation system for high-quality patent trading by leveraging hybrid patent analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9369-9391, December.
    6. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Arts, Sam, 2018. "Mind the gap: Capturing value from basic research through combining mobile inventors and partnerships," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1811-1824.
    7. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Pellegrino, Gabriele & Raiteri, Emilio, 2024. "Do patents enable disclosure? Evidence from the invention secrecy act," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    8. Shuguang Liu & Jiayi Wang & Yin Long, 2023. "Research into the Spatiotemporal Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Technological Innovation in China’s Natural Gas Industry from the Perspective of Energy Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-34, April.
    9. deGrazia, Charles A.W. & Pairolero, Nicholas A. & Teodorescu, Mike H.M., 2021. "Examination incentives, learning, and patent office outcomes: The use of examiner’s amendments at the USPTO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    10. Watzinger, Martin & Schnitzer, Monika, 2019. "Standing on the Shoulders of Science," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 215, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    11. Juranek, Steffen & Otneim, Håkon, 2021. "Using machine learning to predict patent lawsuits," Discussion Papers 2021/6, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    12. Luca Verginer & Federica Parisi & Jeroen van Lidth de Jeude & Massimo Riccaboni, 2022. "The Impact of Acquisitions in the Biotechnology Sector on R&D Productivity," Papers 2203.12968, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    13. Brachtendorf, Lorenz & Gaessler, Fabian & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2020. "Truly Standard-Essential Patents? A Semantics-Based Analysis," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 265, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    14. José Manuel López‐Fernández & Mariluz Maté‐Sánchez‐Val & Francisco Manuel Somohano‐Rodriguez, 2021. "The effect of micro‐territorial networks on industrial small and medium enterprises' innovation: A case study in the Spanish region of Cantabria," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 100(1), pages 51-77, February.
    15. Marco Testoni, 2022. "The market value spillovers of technological acquisitions: Evidence from patent‐text analysis," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(5), pages 964-985, May.
    16. Wernsdorf, Kathrin & Nagler, Markus & Watzinger, Martin, 2022. "ICT, collaboration, and innovation: Evidence from BITNET," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    17. Borchert, Philipp & Coussement, Kristof & De Weerdt, Jochen & De Caigny, Arno, 2024. "Industry-sensitive language modeling for business," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 315(2), pages 691-702.
    18. Sam Arts & Lee Fleming, 2018. "Paradise of Novelty—Or Loss of Human Capital? Exploring New Fields and Inventive Output," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1074-1092, December.
    19. Cesare Righi & Timothy Simcoe, 2020. "Patenting Inventions or Inventing Patents? Continuation Practice at the USPTO," NBER Working Papers 27686, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Bernardo S Buarque & Ronald B Davies & Ryan M Hynes & Dieter F Kogler, 2020. "OK Computer: the creation and integration of AI in Europe," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 13(1), pages 175-192.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    JEL Classification:;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cge:wacage:575. 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: Jane Snape (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dewaruk.html .

    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.