IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/14030.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovation in the Service Sector and the Role of Patents and Trade Secrets

Author

Listed:
  • MORIKAWA Masayuki

Abstract

This paper, using Japanese firm-level data, presents findings about innovative activities in the service sector and the role of patents and trade secrets on innovation. According to the analysis, first, service firms have fewer product innovations than do manufacturing firms, but the productivity of innovative service firms is very high. Second, service firms have a low propensity for holding patents, but their holding of trade secrets is comparable to that of the manufacturing firms. Third, patents and trade secrets have positive relationships with product innovations, and the effects are quantitatively similar in magnitude in both the manufacturing and the service sectors. On the other hand, a positive relationship between trade secrets and process innovations is found only in the manufacturing sector. These results suggest a pivotal role of the law protecting trade secrets on innovation and productivity growth in the service sector.

Suggested Citation

  • MORIKAWA Masayuki, 2014. "Innovation in the Service Sector and the Role of Patents and Trade Secrets," Discussion papers 14030, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:14030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/14e030.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nishimura, Kiyohiko G. & Nakajima, Takanobu & Kiyota, Kozo, 2005. "Does the natural selection mechanism still work in severe recessions?: Examination of the Japanese economy in the 1990s," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 53-78, September.
    2. Bartelsman, Eric & Dobbelaere, Sabien & Peters, Bettina, 2013. "Allocation of Human Capital and Innovation at the Frontier: Firm-Level Evidence on Germany and the Netherlands," IZA Discussion Papers 7540, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Bronwyn Hall & Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers & Vania Sena, 2014. "The Choice between Formal and Informal Intellectual Property: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(2), pages 375-423, June.
    4. Kyoji Fukao & Hyeog Ug Kwon, 2006. "Why Did Japan'S Tfp Growth Slow Down In The Lost Decade? An Empirical Analysis Based On Firm‐Level Data Of Manufacturing Firms," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 57(2), pages 195-228, June.
    5. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," 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 315-380, Elsevier.
    6. Emek Basker, 2012. "Raising the Barcode Scanner: Technology and Productivity in the Retail Sector," NBER Chapters, in: Standards, Patents and Innovations, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Morikawa, Masayuki, 2013. "Productivity and survival of family firms in Japan," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 111-125.
    8. Amara, Nabil & Landry, Réjean & Traoré, Namatié, 2008. "Managing the protection of innovations in knowledge-intensive business services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1530-1547, October.
    9. Bronwyn H. Hall & Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers & Vania Sena, 2012. "The Choice between Formal and Informal Intellectual Property: A Literature Review," NBER Working Papers 17983, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2011. "Innovation and Productivity," NBER Working Papers 17178, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Marcel P. Timmer & Robert Inklaar & Mary O'Mahony & Bart van Ark, 2011. "Productivity and Economic Growth in Europe: A Comparative Industry Perspective," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 21, pages 3-23, Spring.
    12. Morikawa, Masayuki, 2010. "Labor unions and productivity: An empirical analysis using Japanese firm-level data," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 1030-1037, December.
    13. Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), 2010. "Handbook of the Economics of Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    14. Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
    15. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Antonio Musolesi & Jean-Pierre Huiban, 2010. "Innovation and productivity in knowledge intensive business services," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 63-81, August.
    17. Aija Leiponen, 2012. "The benefits of R&D and breadth in innovation strategies: a comparison of Finnish service and manufacturing firms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 21(5), pages 1255-1281, October.
    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. Shivendu Pratap Singh & Trina A. Sego & Shikhar Sarin, 2022. "Overcoming bias against funding of female-led entrepreneurial initiatives: the democratizing influence of online crowdlending platforms," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 16(4), pages 907-933, December.
    2. Bronwyn H. Hall & Vania Sena, 2017. "Appropriability mechanisms, innovation, and productivity: evidence from the UK," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1-2), pages 42-62, February.
    3. KATO Takao & KODAMA Naomi, 2019. "The Consequences of Short-Time Compensation: Evidence from Japan," Discussion papers 19056, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    4. Zhiwen Li & Oswin Aganda Anaba & Zhiqiang Ma & Mingxing Li, 2021. "Ghanaian SMEs Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evaluating the Influence of Entrepreneurial Orientation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-27, January.
    5. Limei Sun & Jinyu Wang & Zhicheng Wang & Leorey Marquez, 2020. "Mechanism of Carbon Finance’s Influence on Radical Low-Carbon Innovation with Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-14, September.
    6. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2024. "Effects of intellectual property rights protection on services export diversification in developing countries," KDI Journal of Economic Policy, Korea Development Institute (KDI), vol. 46(1), pages 53-89.

    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. Morikawa, Masayuki, 2019. "Innovation in the service sector and the role of patents and trade secrets: Evidence from Japanese firms," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 43-51.
    2. Crass, Dirk & Valero, Francisco Garcia & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2019. "Protecting Innovation Through Patents and Trade Secrets: Evidence for Firms with a Single Innovation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 117-156.
    3. Mounir Amdaoud & Christian Le Bas, 2020. "Firm Patenting and Types of innovation in Least Developed Countries. An Empirical Investigation on Patenting Determinants," Working Papers hal-03059466, HAL.
    4. Masayuki Morikawa, 2014. "What Types of Companies Have Female and Foreign Directors?," AJRC Working Papers 1404, Australia-Japan Research Centre, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    5. Bos, Brenda & Broekhuizen, Thijs L.J. & de Faria, Pedro, 2015. "A dynamic view on secrecy management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2619-2627.
    6. Stephen Glaeser & Jeremy Michels & Robert E. Verrecchia, 2020. "Discretionary disclosure and manager horizon: evidence from patenting," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 597-635, June.
    7. Barros, Henrique M., 2021. "Neither at the cutting edge nor in a patent-friendly environment: Appropriating the returns from innovation in a less developed economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    8. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia & Yang, Jialei, 2022. "Distinguishing between appropriability and appropriation: A systematic review and a renewed conceptual framing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    9. Morikawa, Masayuki, 2016. "What types of companies have female directors? Evidence from Japan," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 37, pages 1-7.
    10. MORIKAWA Masayuki, 2014. "What Types of Company Have Female and Foreign Directors?," Discussion papers 14032, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    11. Banholzer, Nicolas & Behrens, Vanessa & Feuerriegel, Stefan & Heinrich, Sebastian & Rammer, Christian & Schmoch, Ulrich & Seliger, Florian & Wörter, Martin, 2019. "Knowledge spillovers from product and process inventions in patents and their impact on firm performance. End report," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 222367, June.
    12. Sofka, Wolfgang & de Faria, Pedro & Shehu, Edlira, 2018. "Protecting knowledge: How legal requirements to reveal information affect the importance of secrecy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 558-572.
    13. Senyuta, Olena & Žigić, Krešimir, 2016. "Managing spillovers: An endogenous sunk cost approach," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 45-64.
    14. Emeric Henry & Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda, 2016. "Keeping Secrets: The Economics of Access Deterrence," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 95-118, August.
    15. Crass, Dirk & Garcia Valero, Francisco & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2016. "Protecting innovation through patents and trade secrets: Determinants and performance impacts for firms with a single innovation," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Bettina Peters & Rebecca Riley & Iulia Siedschlag & Priit Vahter & John McQuinn, 2014. "Innovation and Productivity in Services: Evidence from Germany, Ireland and the United Kingdom," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation 2014-04, Joint Research Centre.
    17. Miozzo, Marcela & Desyllas, Panos & Lee, Hsing-fen & Miles, Ian, 2016. "Innovation collaboration and appropriability by knowledge-intensive business services firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1337-1351.
    18. Bernhard Ganglmair & Imke Reimers, 2019. "Visibility of Technology and Cumulative Innovation: Evidence from Trade Secrets Laws," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2019_119v1, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    19. Stefan, Ioana & Bengtsson, Lars, 2017. "Unravelling appropriability mechanisms and openness depth effects on firm performance across stages in the innovation process," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 252-260.
    20. Dosi, Giovanni & Palagi, Elisa & Roventini, Andrea & Russo, Emanuele, 2023. "Do patents really foster innovation in the pharmaceutical sector? Results from an evolutionary, agent-based model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 564-589.

    More about this item

    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
    • L80 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - General

    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:14030. 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.