The 'home advantage' effect and patent families. A comparison of OECD triadic patents, the USPTO and the EPO

SummaryThis paper examines the extent of the 'home advantage' effect in the USPTO and the EPO patent data and in the OECD triadic patent families. By comparing a set of internationalisation indicators for a sample of European, US and Japanese MNEs it finds that, contrary to what is often assumed, this effect is not only present in the USPTO but also in the EPO. OECD triadic patent data, instead, are not biased towards any particular home country. It also finds that, because MNEs do not systematically file their patents with the EPO, the USPTO and the JPO, the OECD triadic patent family dataset excludes many patents, especially those invented in the US and accounted for in the USPTO, though it is mainly only low-value patents that are excluded. Thus OECD triadic patents can be considered a satisfactory alternative to the USPTO and the EPO for measuring R&D internationalisation.

[1]  Daniele Archibugi,et al.  Patenting as an indicator of technological innovation: a review , 1992 .

[2]  Ulrich Schmoch,et al.  Technological strategies of telecommunications equipment manufacturers: A patent analysis , 1994 .

[3]  Hélène Dernis,et al.  Triadic Patent Families Methodology , 2004 .

[4]  Mark A. Schankerman,et al.  The Quality of Ideas: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators , 1999 .

[5]  H. Grupp,et al.  Patent statistics in the age of globalisation: new legal procedures, new analytical methods, new economic interpretation , 1999 .

[6]  Martin Bloom Multinationals and industrial property: the control of the world's technology , 1990 .

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

[8]  Luc Soete,et al.  A general test of technological gap trade theory , 1981 .

[9]  K. Pavitt,et al.  Large Firms in the Production of the World's Technology: An Important Case of “Non-Globalisation” , 1991 .

[10]  Developement Second European report on S&T Indicators : [science research development] , 1997 .

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

[12]  D. Archibugi,et al.  Specialization and size of technological activities in industrial countries: The analysis of patent data , 1992 .

[13]  Zvi Griliches,et al.  R&D, Patents, and Productivity , 1981 .

[14]  Bart Verspagen,et al.  The Spatial Dimension of Patenting by Multinational Firms in Europe , 2002 .

[15]  S. Winter,et al.  Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development , 1987 .

[16]  Konrad Faust,et al.  International patent data: Their utilization for the analysis of technological developments , 1983 .

[17]  L. G. Soete,et al.  The use of foreign patenting as an internationally comparable science and technology output indicator , 2005, Scientometrics.

[18]  Sally Wyatt,et al.  Multinationals and Industrial Property: The Control of the World's Technology, Gilles Y. Bertin and Sally Wyatt. 1988. Humanities Press International, Atlantic Highlands, NJ. 202 pages. ISBN: 0-391-03582-7. $35.00 , 1988 .

[19]  C. L. Bas,et al.  'Location versus home country advantages' in R&D activities: some further results on multinationals' locational strategies , 2002 .

[20]  P. Patel,et al.  Patterns of internationalisation of corporate technology: location vs. home country advantages. , 1999 .

[21]  A. Pakes,et al.  The Rate of Obsolescence of Knowledge, Research Gestation Lags, and the Private Rate of Return to Research Resources , 1979 .

[22]  Paola Criscuolo,et al.  R&D internationalisation and knowledge transfer : impact on MNEs and their home countries , 2004 .

[23]  Jacques Michel,et al.  Patent citation analysis.A closer look at the basic input data from patent search reports , 2001, Scientometrics.