Abstract
This paper presents a new methodology to describe global innovations networks. Using 167,315 USPTO patents granted in 2009 and the papers they cited, this methodology shows “scientific footprints of technology” that cross national boundaries, and how multinational enterprises interact globally with universities and other firms. The data and the map of these flows provide insights to support a tentative taxonomy of global innovation networks.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
This phrase was suggested by one referee report—we thank this careful reviewer for this suggestion.
The limit of 5,000 most cited journals was chosen given decreasing returns to search—the 150 most cited journals identified 22,577 ISI-indexed SNPRs, the 1,000 most cited journals returned around 50,000 ISI-indexed SNPRs and the journals between the 1,001st and the 5,000th position added more 26,987 papers. Time constraints pushed us to define this limit for this paper.
A comparison with the literature. Narin et al. (1997, p. 324) report that "citations to US authored papers have tripled in 6 years". Their data, organized by two year totals, show that in 1986–1987 a little more than 10,000 papers were cited and in 1993–1994 little more than 30,000 papers were cited. Our one year data for 2009 show US patents citing 60,301 ISI-indexed papers. A general trend of increasing citations of scientific papers is captured by this comparison.
See Tables 7 and 8 in “Appendix” section for the list of 30 technological subdomains, according to OST, and the list of 27 science and engineering fields, according to ISI. The number of citations in Figs. 2 and 3 are larger than in other tables since one patent may have more than one USPTO classification, which may be translated to more than one OST subdomain. For the methodology for definition of OST technological subdomains, see Ribeiro et al (2010, Sect. II). Furthermore, each ISI-indexed SNPR may be classified in than one ISI science and engineering field.
One referee report called our attention to this point—we thank this careful reviewer for this suggestion related to the difference among the groups suggested from Table 1.
References
Bhattacharya, S., & Meyer, M. (2003). Large firms and the science-technology interface Patents, patent citations, and scientific output of multinational corporations in thin films. Scientometrics, 58(2), 265–279.
Braun, T., Glanzel, W., & Grupp, H. (1996). The weight of 50 nations in 27 science areas, 1989–1993 (part I). Scientometrics, 33(3), 263–293.
Britto, G., Camargo, O. S., Kruss, G., & Albuquerque, E. M. (2013). Global interactions between firms and universities: global innovation networks as first steps towards a Global Innovation System. Innovation and Development, 3(1), 71–88.
Callaert, J., Grouwels, J., & Van Looy, B. (2012). Delineating the science footprint in technology: Identiying scientific publications within non-patent references. Scientometrics, 91(2), 383–398.
Callaert, J., Pellens, M., & Van Looy, B. (2014). Sources of inspiration? Making sense of scientific references in patents. Scientometrics, 98(3), 1617–1629.
Callaert, J., van Looy, B., Verbeek, A., Debackere, K., & Thus, B. (2006). Traces of prior art: An analysis of non-patent references found in patent documents. Scientometrics, 69(1), 3–20.
Cantwell, J. (2009). Innovation and information technology in the MNE. In A. M. Rugman (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of international business (pp. 417–446). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Second Edition.
Cohen, W., Nelson, R., & Walsh, J. (2002). Links and impacts: the influence of public R&D on industrial research. Management Science, 48(1), 1–23.
Colyvas, J., Crow, M., Gelijns, A., Mazzoleni, R., Nelson, R., Rosenberg, N., et al. (2002). How do university inventions get into practice? Management Science, 48(1), 61–72.
Cozzens, S., & Catalán, P. (2008) Global systems of innovation: water supply and sanitation in developing countries. In VI Globelics conference, Mexico. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.147.5441&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
Dunning, J., & Lundan, S. (2008). Multinational enterprises and the global economy (2nd ed.). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Ernst, D. (2006). Innovation offshoring: Asia’s emerging role in Global Innovation Networks. Honolulu: East-West Center.
Fernandes, A. C., Souza, B., Stampford, A., Suzigan, W., Chaves, C., & Albuquerque, R. (2010). Academy—Industry links in Brazil: Evidence about channels and benefits for firms and researchers. Science and Public Policy, 37(7), 485–498.
Freeman, C., & Soete, L. (1997). The economics of industrial innovation. London: Pinter.
Guan, J., & He, Y. (2007). Patent-bibliometric analysis on the Chinese science—Technology linkages. Scientometrics, 72(3), 403–425.
Jaffe, A., & Trajtenberg, M. (2002). Patent, citations, and innovation. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Klevorick, A., Levin, R., Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (1995). On the sources and significance of New York: Inter-industry differences in technological opportunities. Research Policy, 24, 185–205.
Lemley, M., & Sampat, B. (2012). Examiner characteristics and patent office outcomes. Review of economics and statistics, 94(3), 817–827.
Linden, G., Kraemer, K. L., & Dendrick, J. (2007). Who captures value in a Global Innovation System? The case of Apple`s iPod. Irvine: Personal Computer Industry Center/University of California.
Narin, F., Hamilton, K. S., & Olivastro, D. (1997). The increasing linkage between US technology and public science. Research Policy, 26(3), 317–330.
Narin, F., & Noma, E. (1985). Is technology becoming science? Scientometrics, 7(3–6), 369–381.
National Science Board (NSB) (2006). Science and Engineering Indicators 2006. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind06/.
Nelson, R. R. (Ed.). (1993). National innovation system: A comparative analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nelson, R., & Rosenberg, N. (1993). Technical innovation and national systems. In R. Nelson (Ed.), National innovation systems: A comparative analysis (pp. 3–27). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Observatoire des Sciences et des techniques (2006). Science & Technologie: Indicateurs 2006. Paris: Economica. Retrieved from http://www.obsost.fr/fr/frressources_en_ligne/rapports_analyses_reference/rapport2006VersionTelechargeable.
OECD. (2008). The internationalization of business R&D: evidence, impacts and implications. Paris: OECD.
Pavitt, K. (1988). Uses and abuses of patent statistics. In A. F. J. Van Raan (Ed.), Handbook of quantitative studies of science and technology (p. 1988). Amsterdam: North Holland.
Rapini, M. (2007). Interação Universidade-Empresa no Brasil: Evidências do Diretório dos Grupos de Pesquisa do CNPq. Estudos Econômicos, 37(2), 212–233.
Ribeiro, L. C., Ruiz, R. M., Bernardes, A. T., & Albuquerque, E. (2010). Matrices of science and technology interactions and patterns of structured growth: implications for development. Scientometrics, 83(1), 55–75.
Roach, M., & Cohen, W. (2013). Lens or prism? Patent citations as a measure of knowledge flow from public research. Management Science, 59(2), 504–525.
Rosenberg, N. (1982). Inside the black box: Technology and economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schmoch, U. (1997). Indicators and the relations between science and technology. Scientometrics, 38(1), 103–116.
The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2007). Sharing the idea: The emergence of Global Innovation Networks. London: The Economist.
Tijssen, R. J., Buter, R. K., & van Leeuwen, N. (2000). Technological relevance of science: An assessment of citation linkages between patents and research papers. Scientometrics, 47(2), 389–412.
Trajtenberg, M. (1990). A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics, 20(1), 172–187.
Verbeek, A., Debackere, K., & Luwel, M. (2003). Science cited in patents: a geographic “flow” analysis of bibliographic citation patterns in patents. Scientometrics, 58(2), 241–263.
Verbeek, A., Debackere, K., Luwel, M., Andries, P., Zimmerman, E., & Deleus, F. (2002). Linking science to technology: using bibliographic references in patents to build linkages schemes. Scientometrics, 54(3), 399–420.
Zitt, M., & Bassecoulard, E. (2004). Internationalization of science in the prism of bibliometric indicators: journals, collaboration, and geographic distribution. In H. Moed, W. Glanzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems (pp. 407–436). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Acknowledgments
Research for this paper was partially funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (Project INGINEUS, Grant Agreement No. 225368). The authors alone are responsible for its contents which do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the European Commission, nor is the European Commission responsible for any use that might be made of the information appearing herein. Additionally, financial support from Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais (Fapemig) is acknowledged. The authors would also like to thank the research assistance from Marcelo de Brito Brandão, Rafaella Oliveira, Tatiana Guimarães, Manuel Bueno, Esther Guimarães and Giulia Tonon. We would like to thank the three anonymous referees from Scientometrics for their criticisms and suggestions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ribeiro, L.C., Kruss, G., Britto, G. et al. A methodology for unveiling global innovation networks: patent citations as clues to cross border knowledge flows. Scientometrics 101, 61–83 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1351-2
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1351-2