Scientific and technological regimes in nanotechnology. Combinatorial inventors and performance

Academics and policy makers are questioning about the relation between science and technology in the emerging field of nano science and technology (NST) and the effectiveness of different institutional regimes. We analyze the performance of inventors in the NST using multiple indicators. We clustered patents in three groups according to the scientific curricula of the inventors. The first two groups are composed by patents whose inventors respectively are all authors of at least one scientific publication in the NST and none of then has obtained a scientific publication in that field. Thirdly, we isolated those patents that have at least one inventor, who is also author of at least one scientific publication in the NST. The underlining presumption of this classification is that of a proxy of different institutional search regimes of the inventive activity; pure academic research, pure industrial R&D, and academic-industrial research partnerships.

[1]  Walter W. Powell,et al.  A Comparison of U.S. and European University-Industry Relations in the Life Sciences , 2001 .

[2]  Jean O. Lanjouw,et al.  How to Count Patents and Value Intellectual Property: Uses of Patent Renewal and Application Data , 1996 .

[3]  M. Meyer.  Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature , 2000 .

[4]  Robert J. W. Tijssen,et al.  Measuring and Evaluating Science—Technology Connections and Interactions , 2004 .

[5]  Luigi Orsenigo,et al.  The emergence of biotechnology , 1989 .

[6]  Francis Narin,et al.  Status report: Linkage between technology and science , 1992 .

[7]  Rikard Stankiewicz,et al.  The concept of “design space” , 2000 .

[8]  Vincent Mangematin,et al.  Editor's introduction: building and deploying scientific and technical human capital , 2004 .

[9]  Manuel Trajtenberg,et al.  Patents, Citations, and Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy , 2002 .

[10]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science , 1997 .

[11]  Bart Verspagen,et al.  Mapping Technological Trajectories as Patent citation Networks: a Study on the History of Fuel Cell Research , 2007, Adv. Complex Syst..

[12]  Martin Kenney,et al.  The role of social embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship: a comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford , 2004 .

[13]  S. Klepper.  Employee Startups in High‐Tech Industries , 2001 .

[14]  Maureen McKelvey.  Evolutionary Innovations: The Business of Biotechnology , 1996 .

[15]  Scott Stern,et al.  Are All Patent Examiners Equal? The Impact of Examiner Characteristics , 2002 .

[16]  Z. Griliches,et al.  Citations, Family Size, Opposition and the Value of Patent Rights Have Profited from Comments and Suggestions , 2002 .

[17]  M. Trajtenberg,et al.  University Versus Corporate Patents: A Window On The Basicness Of Invention , 1997 .

[18]  N. Rosenberg.  Why do firms do basic research (with their own money) , 1990 .

[19]  Bronwyn H Hall,et al.  Market value and patent citations , 2005 .

[20]  B. Kogut,et al.  Localization of Knowledge and the Mobility of Engineers in Regional Networks , 1999 .

[21]  Mark A. Schankerman,et al.  Patent Quality and Research Productivity: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators , 2004 .

[22]  Michael R. Darby,et al.  Grilichesian Breakthroughs: Inventions of Methods of Inventing and Firm Entry in Nanotechnology , 2005 .

[23]  Stephen Jay Kline.  What Is Technology? , 1985 .

[24]  L. Zucker,et al.  Star scientists and institutional transformation: patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[25]  Scott Shane,et al.  Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation , 2004 .

[26]  S. Breschi,et al.  Knowledge networks from patent data: Methodological issues and research targets , 2004 .

[27]  Michelle Gittelman,et al.  Does Good Science Lead to Valuable Knowledge? Biotechnology Firms and the Evolutionary Logic of Citation Patterns , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[28]  M. Trajtenberg,et al.  Universities as a Source of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis of University Patenting, 19651988 , 1995, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[29]  Mark A. Schankerman,et al.  Characteristics of patent litigation: a window on competition , 2001 .

[30]  Manuel Trajtenberg,et al.  The Welfare Analysis of Product Innovations, with an Application to Computed Tomography Scanners , 1989, Journal of Political Economy.

[31]  Richard R. Nelson,et al.  Institutions Supporting Technical Advance in Industry , 1986 .

[32]  D. Harhoff,et al.  Citation Frequency and the Value of Patented Inventions , 1999, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[33]  M. Trajtenberg.  A Penny for Your Quotes : Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations , 1990 .

[34]  S. Breschi,et al.  Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data , 2004 .

[35]  David Popp,et al.  THEY DON'T INVENT THEM LIKE THEY USED TO: AN EXAMINATION OF ENERGY PATENT CITATIONS OVER TIME , 2005 .

[36]  Scott Shane,et al.  Technology Regimes and New Firm Formation , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[37]  Rikard Stankiewicz,et al.  The Development of Beta Blockers at Astra-Hässle and the Technological System of the Swedish Pharmaceutical Industry , 1997 .

[38]  K. Pavitt.  What We Know about the Strategic Management of Technology , 1990 .

[39]  David C. Mowery,et al.  Paths of Innovation: Technological Change in 20th-Century America , 1998 .

[40]  Jean Pierre Courtial,et al.  Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry , 1991, Scientometrics.