The Pattern of Knowledge Flows between Technology Fields

This paper exploits recent contributions to the notions of modularity and autocatalytic sets, to identify the functional and structural units of an empirical knowledge pattern that de…ne the strongest systematic and self sustaining mechanisms of knowledge transfer and accumulation within the network. These ’core’structures are de…ned by the connectivity property that every node (technology …eld) in the core is connected to every other node in the same core by a circular self-sustaining information ‡ow. Our analysis reconstructs the architecture of the empirical knowledge pattern based on USPTO patent citation data at the level of resolution of 3-digits technology classes, for the period 1975-1999. Based on this …ne grained analysis, the changes through time in the cross-…eld architecture of knowledge transfer are investigated. Our results are consistent with the idea that the information and communication technologies (ICT), although representing the core of knowledge creation throughout the period, only in the second half became fully integrated with the other sectors.

[1]  E A Leicht,et al.  Community structure in directed networks. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[2]  Joel Mokyr,et al.  The Lever of Riches: Technological Creativity and Economic Progress , 1991 .

[3]  Rainer Frietsch,et al.  Linking Technology Areas to Industrial Sectors , 2003 .

[4]  Thomas Erlebach Ulrik Brandes.  Network Analysis , 2008 .

[5]  Serena Sordi,et al.  Patterns of Discovery , 2006 .

[6]  Robert E. Evenson,et al.  Introduction: Invention Input–Output Analysis , 1997 .

[7]  Chaomei Chen,et al.  Patents, citations & innovations: A window on the knowledge economy , 2003, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[8]  Stuart A. Kauffman,et al.  Optimal search on a technology landscape , 2000 .

[9]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Modularity and Innovation in Complex Systems , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[10]  N. Rosenberg,et al.  Chemical Engineering as a General Purpose Technology , 2000 .

[11]  Bart Verspagen,et al.  Structural change and technology : a long view , 2004 .

[12]  M. Newman.  Analysis of weighted networks. , 2004, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[13]  Luigi Marengo,et al.  Decomposability and modularity of economic interactions , 2001 .

[14]  Henry Chesbrough,et al.  Towards a Dynamics of Modularity , 2003 .

[15]  Rainer Frietsch,et al.  Linking Technology Areas to Industrial Sectors Final Report to the European Commission, DG Research , 2003 .

[16]  Edward N. Wolff,et al.  Spillover effects, linkage structure, and research and development , 1993 .

[17]  E. Helpman.  General purpose technologies and economic growth , 1998 .

[18]  Samuel Kortum,et al.  Assigning Patents to Industries: Tests of the Yale Technology Concordance , 1997 .

[19]  M. Weitzman,et al.  Recombinant Growth , 2009 .

[20]  O. Sorenson,et al.  Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data , 2001 .

[21]  J. A. Litterer,et al.  Organizations : systems, control and adaptation , 1969 .

[22]  Zvi Griliches,et al.  Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth , 1979 .

[23]  F. M. Scherer,et al.  The office of technology assessment and forecast industry concordance as a means of identifying industry technology origins , 1982 .

[24]  Mark Setterfield,et al.  What is Endogenous Growth Theory , 2007 .

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

[26]  K. Frenken.  A fitness landscape approach to technological complexity, modularity, and vertical disintegration , 2006 .

[27]  Scott E. Page,et al.  Two measures of difficulty , 1996 .

[28]  P. Sraffa.  Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities: Prelude to a Critique of Economic Theory , 1960 .

[29]  Piero Sraffa,et al.  Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities. Prelude to a Critique of Economic Theory. , 1961 .

[30]  Mauro Caminati,et al.  Knowledge growth, complexity and the returns to R&D , 2006 .

[31]  Z. Griliches.  Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: a Survey , 1990 .

[32]  Stanley Reiter,et al.  Knowledge, Discovery and Growth , 1992 .

[33]  Pierre Mohnen,et al.  Introduction: Input–Output Analysis of Interindustry R&D Spillovers , 1997 .

[34]  Róbert Ványi,et al.  Compositional evolution: the impact of sex, symbiosis and modularity on the gradualist framework of evolution , 2008, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[35]  Leon Danon,et al.  Comparing community structure identification , 2005, cond-mat/0505245.

[36]  F. Scherer,et al.  Technology Flows Matrix Estimation Revisited , 2002 .

[37]  Frederic M. Scherer,et al.  Inter-Industry Technology Flows and Productivity Growth , 1982 .

[38]  Philippe Aghion,et al.  Growth with Quality-Improving Innovations: An Integrated Framework , 2005 .

[39]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Aggregation of Variables in Dynamic Systems , 1961 .

[40]  F. Rao,et al.  Local modularity measure for network clusterizations. , 2005, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[41]  A. Pakes,et al.  The Value of Patents as Indicators of Inventive Activity , 1986 .

[42]  Scott E Page,et al.  Uncertainty , Di culty , and Complexity , 1998 .

[43]  Mauro Caminati,et al.  A knowledge based approach to collaboration in basic research , 2009 .

[44]  Bart Verspagen,et al.  Measuring intersectoral technology spillovers estimates from the European and US patent office databases , 1997 .

[45]  Daniel A. Levinthal.  The Slow Pace of Rapid Technological Change: Gradualism and Punctuation in Technological Change , 1998 .

[46]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  The changing composition of innovative activity in the US -- a portrait based on patent analysis , 2001 .

[47]  Thomas W. Malone,et al.  Coordination Theory and Collaboration Technology , 2001 .

[48]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Modularity and Innovation in Complex Systems , 2003 .

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

[50]  K. Pavitt,et al.  Knowledge Specialization, Organizational Coupling, and the Boundaries of the Firm: Why Do Firms Know More than They Make? , 2001 .

[51]  M. V. Valkenburg.  Network Analysis , 1964 .

[52]  R. Cowan.  Network models of innovation and knowledge diffusion , 2004 .

[53]  H. Simon,et al.  The Organization of Complex Systems , 1977 .

[54]  F. Scherer,et al.  Using Linked Patent and R&D Data to Measure Interindustry Technology Flows , 1984 .

[55]  Z. Griliches.  The Search for R&D Spillovers , 1991 .

[56]  Dale W. Jorgenson,et al.  Accounting for Growth in the Information Age , 2005 .

[57]  M. Fung,et al.  Measuring the intensity of knowledge flow with patent statistics , 2002 .

[58]  M E J Newman,et al.  Modularity and community structure in networks. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[59]  P. Arabie,et al.  An algorithm for clustering relational data with applications to social network analysis and comparison with multidimensional scaling , 1975 .

[60]  Sandeep Krishna,et al.  Graph Theory and the Evolution of Autocatalytic Networks , 2002, nlin/0210070.

[61]  Chaomei Chen,et al.  Review of Patents, citations & innovations: a window on the knowledge economy by Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2002 , 2003 .

[62]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of , 1990 .

[63]  L. Samuelson.  Economic Theory and Experimental Economics , 2005 .

[64]  Keith Pavitt,et al.  Specialisation and Systems Integration: Where Manufacture and Services Still Meet , 2003 .

[65]  Manuel Trajtenberg,et al.  THE NBER/SLOAN PROJECT ON INDUSTRIAL TECHAIOLOGY AND PRODUCTIVITY: INCORPORATING LEARNING FROM PLANT VISITS AND INTERVIEWS INTO ECONOMIC RESEARCHt Knowledge Spillovers and Patent Citations: Evidence from a Survey of Inventors , 2000 .

[66]  K. Pavitt.  Technologies, Products and Organization in the Innovating Firm: What Adam Smith Tells Us and Joseph Schumpeter Doesn't , 1998 .

[67]  M E J Newman,et al.  Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[68]  D. Jorgenson.  Information Technology and the U.S. Economy , 2001 .

[69]  Samuel Kortum,et al.  What is behind the recent surge in patenting , 1999 .

[70]  Stuart A. Kauffman,et al.  ORIGINS OF ORDER , 2019, Origins of Order.

[71]  HERBERT A. SIMON,et al.  The Architecture of Complexity , 1991 .

[72]  A. Prencipe.  Corporate Strategy and Systems Integration Capabilities: Managing Networks in Complex Systems Industries , 2003 .

[73]  P. David.  The Dynamo and the Computer: An Historical Perspective on the Modern Productivity Paradox , 1990 .

[74]  Joel Mokyr,et al.  The Lever of Riches: Technological Creativity and Economic Progress. , 1991 .

[75]  M. Hirsch,et al.  Differential Equations, Dynamical Systems, and Linear Algebra , 1974 .

[76]  W. Devine,et al.  From Shafts to Wires: Historical Perspective on Electrification , 1983, The Journal of Economic History.

[77]  Daniel K. N. Johnson.  The OECD Technology Concordance (OTC): Patents by Industry of Manufacture and Sector of Use , 2002 .

[78]  Rosemarie H. Ziedonis,et al.  The patent paradox revisited: an empirical study of patenting in the U , 2001 .

[79]  Frederic M. Scherer,et al.  Inter-Industry Technology Flows in the United States : Research Policy , 1987 .

[80]  Bart Verspagen,et al.  Technology Spillovers between Sectors and over Time. , 1999 .

[81]  Jacob Schmookler,et al.  Invention and Economic Growth , 1967 .