IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/14005.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Differences in Science Based Innovation by Technology Life Cycles: The case of solar cell technology

Author

Listed:
  • MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki
  • TOMOZAWA Takanori

Abstract

This paper analyzes the role of university research in industrial innovation by different phases of the technology life cycle (TLC) and by patent analysis of solar cell technology. It is found that, in the early phase of TLC, the role of academic research is to broaden the technology scope to provide a variety of technologies to the market. Industry can be benefited directly from universities as a source of new technology. In contrast, in the later phase of TLC where both product and process innovation are important, university industry collaboration (UIC) patents are greater in patent quality as measured by normalized forward citation. In addition, scientific paper citations and the experience of UIC by firms' inventors are beneficial to high impact inventions. Therefore, the impact of academic research comes into play in a more indirect way, using scientific knowledge embodied by industry researchers in the later phase of TLC.

Suggested Citation

  • MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki & TOMOZAWA Takanori, 2014. "Differences in Science Based Innovation by Technology Life Cycles: The case of solar cell technology," Discussion papers 14005, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:14005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/14e005.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mansfield, Edwin, 1991. "Academic research and industrial innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    2. Anthony Arundel & Aldo Geuna, 2004. "Proximity and the use of public science by innovative European firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(6), pages 559-580.
    3. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 388-410, April.
    4. Motohashi, Kazuyuki & Muramatsu, Shingo, 2012. "Examining the university industry collaboration policy in Japan: Patent analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 149-162.
    5. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2003. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Motohashi, Kazuyuki, 2005. "University-industry collaborations in Japan: The role of new technology-based firms in transforming the National Innovation System," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 583-594, June.
    7. Victor Gilsing & Rudi Bekkers & Bodas Isabel Maria Freitas & Marianne van Der Steen, 2011. "Differences in technology transfer between science-based and development based industries: transfer mechanisms and barriers," Post-Print hal-01487500, HAL.
    8. Beise, Marian & Stahl, Harald, 1999. "Public research and industrial innovations in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 397-422, April.
    9. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2010. "Diversity of science linkages: A survey of innovation performance effects and some evidence from Flemish firms," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 4, pages 1-26.
    10. Schumpeter Tamada & Yusuke Naito & Fumio Kodama & Kiminori Gemba & Jun Suzuki, 2006. "Significant difference of dependence upon scientific knowledge among different technologies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(2), pages 289-302, August.
    11. Haupt, Reinhard & Kloyer, Martin & Lange, Marcus, 2007. "Patent indicators for the technology life cycle development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 387-398, April.
    12. Rosell, Carlos & Agrawal, Ajay, 2009. "Have university knowledge flows narrowed?: Evidence from patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 1-13, February.
    13. Orietta Marsili & Bart Verspagen, 2002. "Technology and the dynamics of industrial structures: an empirical mapping of Dutch manufacturing," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(4), pages 791-815, August.
    14. Feller, Irwin & Ailes, Catherine P. & Roessner, J. David, 2002. "Impacts of research universities on technological innovation in industry: evidence from engineering research centers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 457-474, March.
    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. Bruns, Stephan B. & Kalthaus, Martin, 2020. "Flexibility in the selection of patent counts: Implications for p-hacking and evidence-based policymaking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).

    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. Aschhoff, Birgit & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2008. "Successful Patterns of Scientific Knowledge Sourcing: Mix and Match," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-033 [rev.], ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Nola Hewitt-Dundas, 2013. "The role of proximity in university-business cooperation for innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 93-115, April.
    3. Fontana, Roberto & Geuna, Aldo & Matt, Mireille, 2006. "Factors affecting university-industry R&D projects: The importance of searching, screening and signalling," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 309-323, March.
    4. Bekkers, Rudi & Bodas Freitas, Isabel Maria, 2008. "Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1837-1853, December.
    5. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," 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 275-314, Elsevier.
    6. Toole, Andrew A., 2012. "The impact of public basic research on industrial innovation: Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 1-12.
    7. Victor Gilsing & Rudi Bekkers & Bodas Isabel Maria Freitas & Marianne van Der Steen, 2011. "Differences in technology transfer between science-based and development based industries: transfer mechanisms and barriers," Post-Print hal-01487500, HAL.
    8. Toole, Andrew A., 2011. "The impact of public basic research on industrial innovation: Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," ZEW Discussion Papers 11-063, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. Mueller, Pamela, 2006. "Exploring the knowledge filter: How entrepreneurship and university-industry relationships drive economic growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1499-1508, December.
    10. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Federico Caviggioli & Alessandra Colombelli & Antonio De Marco & Giuseppe Scellato & Elisa Ughetto, 2023. "Co-evolution patterns of university patenting and technological specialization in European regions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 216-239, February.
    12. Martina Kauffeld-Monz, 2005. "Knowledge spillovers within regional networks of innovation and the contribution made by public research," ERSA conference papers ersa05p440, European Regional Science Association.
    13. Manuela Gussoni, 2009. "The determinants of inter-firms R&D cooperation and partner selection. A literature overview," Discussion Papers 2009/86, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    14. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    15. Malo, Stéphane, 2009. "The contribution of (not so) public research to commercial innovations in the field of combinatorial chemistry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 957-970, July.
    16. Broström, Anders & McKelvey, Maureen, 2009. "How do Organisational and Cognitive Distances Shape Firms’ Interactions with Universities and Public Research Institutes?," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 188, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    17. Perkmann, Markus & King, Zella & Pavelin, Stephen, 2011. "Engaging excellence? Effects of faculty quality on university engagement with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 539-552, May.
    18. Nelson, Andrew J., 2012. "Putting university research in context: Assessing alternative measures of production and diffusion at Stanford," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 678-691.
    19. Maietta, Ornella Wanda, 2015. "Determinants of university–firm R&D collaboration and its impact on innovation: A perspective from a low-tech industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1341-1359.
    20. Pablo D'Este & Simona Iammarino, 2010. "The spatial profile of university‐business research partnerships," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 89(2), pages 335-350, June.

    More about this item

    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:eti:dpaper:14005. 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: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.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.