Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Capturing the economic value of triadic patents

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study provides a comprehensive analysis of patent family characteristics of triadic patents. We test specific features of triadic patent families to highlight common correlation patterns between patent value, as measured by patent forward citation data, and the structure of triadic patent families that cover the same invention at the international level. Our results suggest that the share of USPTO, EPO and JPO patents in the patent family, and the time span between the earliest priority application and latest priority application, are positively associated with the value of inventions in the triadic patent families.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. ,OECD Triadic Patent Families database, March 2017.

  2. “To account for this, the TPF database uses consolidated patent families. Any patents that are directly or indirectly linked to other patents are counted as a single patent family. For example, if patent A shares priorities 1 and 2, and patent B shares priorities 2 and 3, priorities 1 and 2 are directly linked, as are priorities 2 and 3. As they both share a direct link with priority 2, priorities 1 and 3 are indirectly linked. All patents sharing one of these three priorities are assembled in a single patent family in the OECD TPF database.” Popp (2005).

  3. OECD Citations database, March 2017.

  4. We only accessed the data of citations from USPTO patents.

  5. We used the minimum and mean values of the number of USPTO patents within the family to plot the graph.

References

  • Albert, M. B., Avery, D., Narin, F., & McAllister, P. (1991). Direct validation of citation counts as indicators of industrially important patents. Research Policy, 20(3), 251–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archontopoulos, E., Guellec, D., Stevnsborg, N., de la Potterie, B. V. P., & Van Zeebroeck, N. (2007). When small is beautiful: Measuring the evolution and consequences of the voluminosity of patent applications at the EPO. Information Economics and Policy, 19(2), 103–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, A., Bakshi, R., & Sanyal, M. K. (2017). Valuation of patent: A classification of methodologies. Research Bulletin, 42(4), 158–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bessen, J. (2008). The value of US patents by owner and patent characteristics. Research Policy, 37(5), 932–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callaert, J., Van Looy, B., Verbeek, A., Debackere, K., & Thijs, B. (2006). Traces of prior art: An analysis of non-patent references found in patent documents. Scientometrics, 69(1), 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chanchetti, L. F., Diaz, S. M. O., Milanez, D. H., Leiva, D. R., de Faria, L. I. L., & Ishikawa, T. T. (2016). Technological forecasting of hydrogen storage materials using patent indicators. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 41(41), 18301–18310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Criscuolo, P. (2006). The’home advantage’effect and patent families. A comparison of OECD triadic patents, the USPTO and the EPO. Scientometrics, 66(1), 23–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, M. (2000). Patents, innovation and growth. Economic Record, 76(234), 255–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Rassenfosse, G., Dernis, H., Guellec, D., Picci, L., & de la Potterie, B. V. P. (2013). The worldwide count of priority patents: A new indicator of inventive activity. Research Policy, 42(3), 720–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dechezleprêtre, A., Ménière, Y., & Mohnen, M. (2017). International patent families: from application strategies to statistical indicators. Scientometrics, 111(2), 793–828.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dernis, H., Guellec, D., & de la Potterie van, B. V. P. (2001). Using patent counts for cross country comparisons of technology output. Science Technology Industry Review, 27, 128–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frakes, M. D., & Wasserman, M. F. (2015). Does the US patent and trademark office grant too many bad patents: evidence from a quasi-experiment. Stanford Law Review, 67, 613.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frietsch, R., Neuhäusler, P., Jung, T., & Van Looy, B. (2014). Patent indicators for macroeconomic growth—the value of patents estimated by export volume. Technovation, 34(9), 546–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frietsch, R., & Schmoch, U. (2009). Transnational patents and international markets. Scientometrics, 82(1), 185–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimaldi, M., Cricelli, L., Di Giovanni, M., & Rogo, F. (2015). The patent portfolio value analysis: A new framework to leverage patent information for strategic technology planning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 94, 286–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grupp, H. (1998). Foundations of the economics of innovation. Theory, measurement and practice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guellec, D., & de la Potterie, B. V. P. (2000). Applications, grants and the value of patent. Economics Letters, 69(1), 109–114.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Guellec, D., & de la Potterie, B. V. P. (2002). The value of patents and patenting strategies: countries and technology areas patterns. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 11(2), 133–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guellec, D., & de La Potterie, B. V. P. (2007). The economics of the European patent system: IP policy for innovation and competition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J., & Cloodt, M. (2003). Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators? Research Policy, 32(8), 1365–1379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2005). Market value and patent citations. RAND Journal of Economics, 36, 16–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harhoff, D., Narin, F., Scherer, F., & Vopel, K. (1999). Citation frequency and the value of patented inventions. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 81(3), 511–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harhoff, D., Scherer, F. M., & Vopel, K. (2003). Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights. Research Policy, 32(8), 1343–1363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hikkerova, L., Kammoun, N., & Lantz, J. S. (2014). Patent life cycle: new evidence. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 88, 313–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A. B., & De Rassenfosse, G. (2017). Patent citation data in social science research: Overview and best practices. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(6), 1360–1374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2002). Patents, citations, and innovations: A window on the knowledge economy. Cambridge: MIT press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, Y., & Yoon, B. (2015). Development of patent roadmap based on technology roadmap by analyzing patterns of patent development. Technovation, 39, 37–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanjouw, J. O., Pakes, A., & Putnam, J. (1998). How to count patents and value intellectual property: The uses of patent renewal and application data. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 46(4), 405–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanjouw, J. O., & Schankerman, M. (2004). Patent quality and research productivity: Measuring innovation with multiple indicators. The Economic Journal, 114(495), 441–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. G. (2009). What affects a patent’s value? An analysis of variables that affect technological, direct economic, and indirect economic value: An exploratory conceptual approach. Scientometrics, 79(3), 623–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, J. (1994). The Importance of Patent Scope: An Empirical Analysis. The RAND Journal of Economics, 25(2), 319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, C. (2010). Patent families: When do different definitions really matter? Scientometrics, 86(1), 39–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messinis, G. (2011). Triadic citations, country biases and patent value: The case of pharmaceuticals. Scientometrics, 89(3), 813–833.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. (2000). Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature. Research Policy, 29(3), 409–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moser, P., Ohmstedt, J., & Rhode, P. W. (2017). Patent citations—an analysis of quality differences and citing practices in hybrid corn. Management Science, 64(4), 1926–1940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narin, F., & Noma, E. (1985). Is technology becoming science? Scientometrics, 7, 369–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narin, F., Noma, E., & Perry, R. (1987). Patents as indicators of corporate technological strength. Research Policy, 16(2–4), 143–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pakes, A., & Schankerman, M. (1984). The rate of obsolescence of patents, research gestation lags, and the private rate of return to research resources. In R&D, patents, and productivity (pp. 73-88). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Pavitt, K. (1985). Patent statistics as indicators of innovative activities: possibilities and problems. Scientometrics, 7(1–2), 77–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popp, D. (2005). Using the triadic patent family database to study environmental innovation. Environment Directorate Working Paper ENV/EPOC/WPNEP/RD (p. 2).

  • Sapsalis, E., & van de la Potterie, B. V. P. (2007). The institutional sources of knowledge and the value of academic patents. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 16(2), 139–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, F. M., & Harhoff, D. (2000). Technology policy for a world of skew-distributed outcomes. Research Policy, 29(4–5), 559–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tong, X., & Frame, J. (1994). Measuring national technological performance with patent claims data. Research Policy, 23(2), 133–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trajtenberg, M. (1990). A penny for your quotes: patent citations and the value of innovations. RAND Journal of Economics, 21(1), 172–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., & Jaffe, A. (1997). University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 5(1), 19–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Zeebroeck, N. (2011). The puzzle of patent value indicators. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 20(1), 33–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Zeebroeck, N., de la Potterie, B. V. P., & Guellec, D. (2009). Claiming more: the increased voluminosity of patent applications and its determinants. Research Policy, 38(6), 1006–1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics and Industrial Engineering, Polytechnique Montreal, P.O. Box 6079, Downtown Office, Montreal, QC, H3C 3A7, Canada

    Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry

Authors
  1. Leila Tahmooresnejad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Catherine Beaudry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leila Tahmooresnejad.

Appendices

Appendix 1

See Tables 5 and 6.

Table 5 Descriptive statistics
Full size table
Table 6 Correlation matrix
Full size table

Appendix 2

See Tables 7 and 8.

Table 7 Regression results for the total number of forward citations using zero-inflated negative binomial models
Full size table
Table 8 Regression results for the totalnumber of forward citations in the first three years using zero-inflated negative binomial models
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tahmooresnejad, L., Beaudry, C. Capturing the economic value of triadic patents. Scientometrics 118, 127–157 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2959-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2959-4

Keywords