Patents as instruments for exploring innovation dynamics: geographic and technological perspectives on “photovoltaic cells”

The recently developed Cooperative Patent Classifications of the U.S. Patent and Trade Office (USPTO) and the European Patent Office (EPO) provide new options for an informed delineation of samples in both USPTO data and the Worldwide Patent Statistical Database (PatStat) of EPO. Among the “technologies for the mitigation of climate change” (class Y02), we zoom in on nine material technologies for photovoltaic cells; and focus on one of them (CuInSe2) as a lead case. Two recently developed techniques for making patent maps with interactive overlays—geographical ones using Google Maps and maps based on citation relations among International Patent Classifications (IPC)—are elaborated into dynamic versions that allow for online animations and comparisons by using split screens. Various forms of animation are discussed. The longitudinal development of Rao-Stirling diversity in the IPC-based maps provided us with a heuristics for studying technological diversity in terms of generations of the technology. The longitudinal patterns are clear in USPTO data more than in PatStat data because PatStat aggregates patent information from countries in different stages of technological development, whereas one can expect USPTO patents to be competitive at the technological edge.

[1]  Dale S. Niederhauser,et al.  The Nature of Technology , 2013 .

[2]  M. Grätzel,et al.  A low-cost, high-efficiency solar cell based on dye-sensitized colloidal TiO2 films , 1991, Nature.

[3]  A. Jaffe.  Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms&Apos; Patents, Profits and Market Value , 1986 .

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

[5]  M. Hosein Fallah,et al.  The typology of technology clusters and its evolution — Evidence from the hi-tech industries , 2011 .

[6]  R. Hanneman.  Introduction to Social Network Methods , 2001 .

[7]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  In Search of a Network Theory of Innovations: Relations, Positions, and Perspectives , 2013 .

[8]  Gaston Heimeriks,et al.  The Network Structure of Technological Developments; Technological Distance as a Walk on the Technology Map , 2012 .

[9]  Calvin S. Weng,et al.  A New Comprehensive Patent Analysis Approach for New Product Design in Mechanical Engineering , 2011 .

[10]  T. Unold,et al.  1.18 – Chalcopyrite Thin-Film Materials and Solar Cells , 2012 .

[11]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Which cities produce excellent papers worldwide more than can be expected? A new mapping approach--using Google Maps--based on statistical significance testing , 2011, ArXiv.

[12]  魏屹东,et al.  Scientometrics , 2018, Encyclopedia of Big Data.

[13]  D. Krackhardt,et al.  Visualizing Complexity in Networks : Seeing Both the Forest and the Trees , 2003 .

[14]  Derek deS. Price,et al.  The Science/Technology Relationship, the Craft of Experimental Science, and Policy for the Improvement of High Technology Innovation : Research Policy , 1987 .

[15]  Jean-Loup Guillaume,et al.  Fast unfolding of communities in large networks , 2008, 0803.0476.

[16]  Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie,et al.  The Worldwide Count of Priority Patents: A New Indicator of Inventive Activity , 2012 .

[18]  M. Feldman,et al.  Innovation in Cities: Science-Based Diversity, Specialization and Localized Competition , 1999 .

[19]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Interactive overlay maps for US patent (USPTO) data based on International Patent Classification (IPC) , 2012, Scientometrics.

[20]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Patent overlay mapping: Visualizing technological distance , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[21]  Z. Griliches.  Productivity, R&D, and the Data Constraint , 1998 .

[22]  V. Veefkind,et al.  A new EPO classification scheme for climate change mitigation technologies , 2012 .

[23]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  How Do Emerging Technologies Conquer the World? An Exploration of Patterns of Diffusion and Network Formation , 2010, ArXiv.

[24]  Hélène Dernis,et al.  Measuring Patent Quality , 2013 .

[25]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Mapping (USPTO) Patent Data using Overlays to Google Maps , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[26]  Vladimir Batagelj,et al.  Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek , 2005 .

[27]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The new Excellence Indicator in the World Report of the SCImago Institutions Rankings 2011 , 2011, J. Informetrics.

[28]  M. Tushman,et al.  Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Designs: A Cyclical Model of Technological Change , 1990 .

[29]  A. Fire,et al.  Potent and specific genetic interference by double-stranded RNA in Caenorhabditis elegans , 1998, Nature.

[30]  Lars Stolt,et al.  Cu(InGa)Se2 Solar Cells , 2005 .

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

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

[33]  Satoru Kawai,et al.  An Algorithm for Drawing General Undirected Graphs , 1989, Inf. Process. Lett..

[34]  Harsha Aturupane.  Poverty, human development and growth : an emerging consensus? , 1994 .

[35]  Jacob Schmookler,et al.  Economic Sources of Inventive Activity , 1962, The Journal of Economic History.

[36]  C. R. Rao,et al.  Diversity: its measurement, decomposition, apportionment and analysis , 1982 .

[37]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Mapping excellence in the geography of science: An approach based on Scopus data , 2011, J. Informetrics.

[38]  M. Scheu,et al.  Mapping nanotechnology patents: The EPO approach , 2006 .

[39]  Michael M. Hopkins,et al.  Mapping the de facto governance in the case of emerging science and technologies , 2013 .

[40]  V. Hoffmann,et al.  The impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies on technical change – Does the locus of policies matter? , 2012 .

[41]  Ismael Rafols,et al.  Local emergence and global diffusion of research technologies: An exploration of patterns of network formation , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[42]  Ichiro Sakata,et al.  Extracting the commercialization gap between science and technology — Case study of a solar cell , 2010 .

[43]  Arvids A. Ziedonis,et al.  The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh–Dole act of 1980 , 2001 .

[44]  Martin A. Green,et al.  Solar cell efficiency tables (version 41) , 2013 .

[45]  Paola Criscuolo,et al.  The 'home advantage' effect and patent families. A comparison of OECD triadic patents, the USPTO and the EPO , 2006, Scientometrics.

[46]  A. Stirling.  A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society , 2007, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[47]  D. Archibugi,et al.  Measuring technological change through patents and innovation surveys , 1996 .

[48]  P. Lundin.  Is silence still golden? Mapping the RNAi patent landscape , 2011, Nature Biotechnology.

[49]  Robert T. Averitt.  The Economics and Management of Intellectual Property: Towards Intellectual Capitalism , 2000 .

[50]  Daniele Rotolo,et al.  Innovation as a nonlinear process, the scientometric perspective, and the specification of an ‘innovation opportunities explorer’ , 2012, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[51]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Which cities produce more excellent papers than can be expected? A new mapping approach, using Google Maps, based on statistical significance testing , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[52]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  In search of a network theory of innovations: Relations, positions, and perspectives , 2013, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[53]  Frank W. Geels,et al.  Feelings of Discontent and the Promise of Middle Range Theory for STS , 2007 .