1 / 27

Academic Inventors, Technological Profiles and Patent Value:

Academic Inventors, Technological Profiles and Patent Value:. An Analysis of Academic Patents owned by Swedish based firms. Daniel Ljungberg, Lecturer University of Gothenburg. Evangelos Bourelos, PhD University of Gothenburg. Maureen McKelvey, Professor University of Gothenburg.

aliya
Download Presentation

Academic Inventors, Technological Profiles and Patent Value:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Academic Inventors, Technological Profiles and Patent Value: An Analysis of Academic Patents owned by Swedish based firms Daniel Ljungberg, Lecturer University of Gothenburg Evangelos Bourelos, PhD University of Gothenburg Maureen McKelvey, Professor University of Gothenburg

  2. Academic Patents • Patent Value

  3. ContributionAcademic vs Non-Academic Patents, owned by a firm

  4. Corporate Patents Focus on firm-owned patents • Academic patents= At least 1 academic inventor • Value= Citations

  5. Academic Patenting in Sweden • Professor’s privilege • 80% owned by firms Patent Value Lissoni et al. 2008

  6. Research nature and patent value • Basic vs Applied Research Academic Inventors Firms Academic patents – higher long-term value Focus on short-term returns

  7. University-Industry Collaboration Non-academic Patents Academic Patents VS

  8. Hypothesis 1 • The effect of academic inventors on the value of firm-owned patents is differentiated over time, with an expected disadvantage in the short-term and an expected advantage in the long-term

  9. University-Industry Collaboration Patent

  10. Core technology patents

  11. Hypothesis 2 • Patents belonging to firms 'core technologies have higher value, as compared to patents in non-core technologies

  12. Effect on academic patent’s value • Technological profile

  13. Effect on academic patent’s value

  14. Hypothesis 3 • Controlling for whether patents belong to the core technologies of firms decreases the effect of academic inventors on patent value

  15. Data Swedish inventor Firm-owned Firm data (Orbis, etc) PATSTAT-KITeS 1978-2009 Swedish patents KEINS/APE-INV

  16. Dependent variables

  17. Independent variables

  18. Control variables • Backward patent citations • Non-patent references • Number of inventors • IPC classes • Firm dummies • Priority year dummies • Dummies for technological class

  19. Descriptive statistics

  20. Descriptive statistics Table 3. Forward patent citations (FPCs) by inventorship: Mean citations per patent.

  21. Econometric results Negative Binomial regressions

  22. Econometric results -0.193*** -0.137* 0.420***

  23. Econometric results -0.139** -0.0791 0.431***

  24. Econometric results -0.140** -0.0888 0.405***

  25. Conclusions • Academic patents have higher long-term value • Academic patents, owned by firm (and not comparing ownership), have lower short-term value but similar long-term • Firms might seek collaboration for short-term returns

  26. Conclusions • Patent value is heavily dependent on technological profile of the firm • Core patents have higher value • Technological profile an important control when assessing academic patenting • Academic involvement per se is not adequate to evaluate the patent value • Technological profile and furthermore the collaboration type has to be assessed

  27. THANKS • Questions?

More Related