Nanotechnology as general-purpose technology: empirical evidence and implications

Developments in nanotechnology are poised to have a pervasive effect on various industries for years to come and nanotechnology management research is beginning to appear in peer-reviewed management journals. Much of the research on this early, emergent technology is focused on issues of definition and identification of technology type. In this study, we searched the US Patents and Trademarks Office database and used an expert validation methodology to develop a sample of the first 25 years (1980–2004) of nanotechnology patenting activity. We analysed this data for early evidence that nanotechnology is a general-purpose technology (GPT) – a transformative technology characterised by its pervasiveness, improvement over time, and pattern of diffusion. Our findings indicate that nanotechnology patenting activity has been growing in intensity and relative to overall patenting activity, and that it is pervasive across industry and technology sectors. Implications of nanotechnology as a GPT are discussed.

[1]  Subodh P. Kulkarni,et al.  Innovation Management: Strategies, Implementation and Profits , 1998 .

[2]  F. Narin.  Assessing Technological Competencies , 2006 .

[3]  James M Tour,et al.  Single wall carbon nanotube amplification: en route to a type-specific growth mechanism. , 2006, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[4]  Michael A. Wilson,et al.  Nanotechnology: Basic Science and Emerging Technologies , 2002 .

[5]  Cliff T. Bekar,et al.  General purpose technologies , 2013 .

[6]  M. Porter,et al.  The Competitive Advantage of Nations. , 1990 .

[7]  Patent Manuel,et al.  USING PATENT DATA AS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY INDICATORS , 1994 .

[8]  Kenneth I. Carlaw,et al.  Economic Transformations: General Purpose Technologies and Long Term Economic Growth , 2006 .

[9]  Christine M. Shea.  Future management research directions in nanotechnology: A case study , 2005 .

[10]  Manuel Trajtenberg,et al.  Diffusion of General Purpose Technologies , 1996 .

[11]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Nanotechnology: Societal Implications - , 2007 .

[12]  Elhanan Helpman,et al.  Adjusting to a New Technology: Experience and Training , 1998 .

[13]  Zan Huang,et al.  Longitudinal Patent Analysis for Nanoscale Science and Engineering: Country, Institution and Technology Field , 2003 .

[14]  Ricardo J. Wray,et al.  Validation of Database Search Terms for Content Analysis: The Case of Cancer News Coverage , 2006 .

[15]  Per Krusell,et al.  Can Technology Improvements Cause Productivity Slowdowns? , 1996, NBER Macroeconomics Annual.

[16]  Stuart J. H. Graham,et al.  Assessing the nature of nanotechnology: can we uncover an emerging general purpose technology? , 2008 .

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

[18]  F. Damanpour.  Organizational Innovation: A Meta-Analysis Of Effects Of Determinants and Moderators , 1991 .

[19]  P. Avouris,et al.  Nanotubes for electronics. , 2000, Scientific American.

[20]  John W. Murphy,et al.  Managing Technological Innovation , 1987 .

[21]  M. Porter.  The Competitive Advantage Of Nations , 1990 .

[22]  Tuomo Nikulainen,et al.  Identifying nanotechnological linkages in the Finnish economy – an explorative study , 2010, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[23]  Denis Loveridge,et al.  Nano-worlds as Schumpeterian emergence and Polanyian double-movements , 2008, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[24]  J. Nunnally.  Psychometric Theory (2nd ed), New York: McGraw-Hill. , 1978 .

[25]  G. Violante,et al.  Investment-Specific Technical Change in the Us (1947-2000): Measurement and Macroeconomic Consequences , 2002 .