Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Knowledge creation and dissemination by Kosetsushi in sectoral innovation systems: insights from patent data

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Public institutes for testing and research called Kosetsushi constitute an important component of regional innovation policies in Japan. They are organized as a technology diffusion program to help small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) improve productivity through various technology transfer activities. Using comprehensive patent data, this study quantitatively evaluates technology transfer activities of Kosetsushi from the perspective of sectoral innovation systems. The key findings can be summarized as follows. First, local SMEs’ technological portfolios (the distribution of patents across technological fields) indicate a better fit with those of Kosetsushi than with those of local universities. This tendency is salient for manufacturing Kosetsushi. Second, Kosetsushi collaborate on research with local SMEs compared to local universities. This tendency is salient for manufacturing Kosetsushi. Third, in regions where SMEs’ innovative activities concentrate in biotechnology, Kosetsushi are likely to engage in licensing. In regions where SMEs’ innovative activities concentrate in mechanical engineering, Kosetsushi are likely to engage in technical consultation. Fourth, the successful commercialization of Kosetsushi patents relies on both understanding of technological needs of local SMEs and upgrading scientific quality of Kosetsushi researchers. Policy and research implications are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The author treats “Kosetsushi” as plural because of their diversity in terms of size, location, history, functions (i.e., research, technology diffusion, and intermediation), technologies, organizational structures, and ownership structures. See Appendix Fig. 1, Tables 5, and 6.

  2. This study identifies the location of innovation using inventor addresses for the following reasons. First, if the location of innovation is identified at the level of applicant address, innovations by large firms would be overly concentrated in Tokyo and Osaka where most of the large firms’ headquarters are located. Second, in Japan, national universities (former imperial universities in particular) have been the most important source of scientific knowledge valuable for industrial innovations. Before the incorporation of national universities in 2004, patents invented by national universities were filed by a nation or a university inventor. This makes it difficult to identify the location of innovation from an applicant address because of the unavailability of information on the home addresses of the university inventors. Third, most of Kosetsushi are one of the divisions of local authorities. This means that it is the local authorities that apply for the patents invented by Kosetsushi. As local authorities have other divisions, such as prefectural universities, that may invent patentable technologies, it is inappropriate to assume that all patents filed by local authorities are invented by Kosetsushi. As explained below, this study identifies the location of innovation as a prefecture indicated in the inventor address that includes the name of the organization.

  3. Universities include national, prefectural, municipal, and private universities.

References

  • Acs, Z., Audretsch, D., & Feldman, M. (1992). Real effects of academic research: comment. American Economic Review, 82(1), 363–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z., Audretsch, D., & Feldman, M. (1994). R&D spillovers and recipient firm size. Review of Economics and Statistics, 76(2), 336–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, T., Daim, T., & Lavoie, F. (2007). Measuring the efficiency of university technology transfer. Technovation, 27(5), 306–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anselin, L., Varga, A., & Acs, Z. (1997). Local geographic spillovers between university research and high technology innovations. Journal of Urban Economics, 42(3), 422–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arundel, A., van de Paal, G., & Soete, L. (1995). Innovation strategies of Europe’s largest industrial firms: Results of the PACE Survey on Information Sources, Public Research, Protection of Innovations, and Government Programmes. Maastricht: MERIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asheim, B., Coenen, L., & Vang, J. (2007). Face-to-face, buzz, and knowledge bases: Sociospatial implications for learning, innovation, and innovation policy. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 25(5), 655–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asheim, B., & Gertler, M. (2005). The geography of innovation: Regional innovation systems. In J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery, & R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 291–317). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Autant-Bernard, C. (2001). Science and knowledge flows: Evidence from the French case. Research Policy, 30(7), 1069–1078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapple, W., Lockett, A., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2005). Assessing the relative performance of university technology transfer offices in the UK: Parametric and non-parametric evidence. Research Policy, 34(3), 369–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chukumba, C., & Jensen, R. (2005). University invention, entrepreneurship, and startups. NBER Working Paper #11475.

  • Cohen, W., Nelson, R., & Walsh, J. (2000). Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent (or not). NBER Working Paper No. 7552.

  • Dornbusch, F., & Brenner, T. (2013). Universities as local knowledge hubs under different technology regimes? New evidence from academic patenting. Fraunhofer ISI Working Paper R6/2013.

  • Fischer, T., & Leidinger, J. (2014). Testing patent value indicators on directly observed patent value: An empirical analysis of Ocean Tomo patent auctions. Research Policy, 43(3), 519–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fontana, R., Geuna, A., & Matt, M. (2006). Factors affecting university-industry R&D projects: The importance of searching, screening and signaling. Research Policy, 35(2), 309–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukugawa, N. (2005). Characteristics of knowledge interactions between universities and small firms in Japan. International Small Business Journal, 23(4), 379–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukugawa, N. (2008). Evaluating the strategy of local public technology centers in regional innovation systems: Evidence from Japan. Science and Public Policy, 35(3), 159–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukugawa, N. (2009). Determinants of licensing activities of local public technology centers in Japan. Technovation, 29(12), 885–892.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukugawa, N. (2013). University spillovers into small technology-based firms: Channel, mechanism, and geography. Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(4), 415–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukugawa, N. (2016). Knowledge spillover from university research before the national innovation system reform in Japan: Localization, mechanisms, and intermediaries. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 24(1), 100–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukugawa, N., & Goto, A. (2016). Problem solving and intermediation by local public technology centers in regional innovation systems: The first report on a branch-level survey on technical consultation. RIETI Discussion Paper, 16-E-062.

  • Furman, J., & Stern, S. (2011). Climbing atop the shoulders of giants: The impact of institutions on cumulative research. American Economic Review, 101(5), 1933–1963.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galasso, A., & Schankerman, M. (2014). Patents and cumulative innovation: Causal evidence from the courts. IIR Working Paper No. 13-16.

  • Gambardella, A., Harhoff, D., & Verspagen, B. (2008). The value of European patents. European Management Review, 5(2), 69–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gertler, M. (2003). Tacit knowledge and the economic geography of context, or the undefinable tacitness of being (there). Journal of Economic Geography, 3(1), 75–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goto, A., & Motohashi, K. (2007). Construction of a Japanese patent database and a first look at Japanese patenting activities. Research Policy, 36(9), 1431–1442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goto, A., & Nagata, A. (1997). Technological opportunities and appropriating the returns from innovation: Comparison of survey results from Japan and the US. Tokyo: National Institute of Science and Technology Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B., Jaffe, A., & Trajtenberg, M. (2005). Market value and patent citations. RAND Journal of Economics, 36(1), 16–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harhoff, D., Scherer, F., & Vopel, K. (2003). Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights. Research Policy, 32(8), 1343–1363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, D., Breitzman, T., Olivastro, D., & Hamilton, K. (2001). The changing composition of innovative activity in the US: A portrait based on patent analysis. Research Policy, 30(4), 681–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howells, J. (2006). Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy, 35(5), 715–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, K., & Murray, F. (2009). Does patent strategy shape the long-run supply of public knowledge? Evidence from human genetics. Academy of Management Journal, 52(6), 1193–1221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Intarakumnerd, P., & Chaoroenporn, P. (2013). The roles of intermediaries and the development of their capabilities in sectoral innovation systems: A case study of Thailand. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 21(2), 99–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A. (1989). Real effects of academic research. American Economic Review, 79(5), 957–970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Japan Association for the Advancement of Research Cooperation. (2001). Survey on local public technology centers in regional innovation systems. Tokyo: JAREC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarmin, R. (1999). Evaluating the impact of manufacturing extension on productivity growth. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 18(1), 99–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. (2001). Proofs and prototypes for sale: The licensing of university inventions. American Economic Review, 91(1), 240–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kneller, R. (2007). Bridging islands: Venture companies and the future of Japanese and American industry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lach, S., & Schankerman, M. (2008). Incentives and invention in universities. Rand Journal of Economics, 39(2), 403–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, R., Klevorick, A., Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (1984). Survey research on R&D appropriability and technological opportunity. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F. (2002). Sectoral systems of innovation and production. Research Policy, 31(2), 247–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E. (1995). Academic research underlying industrial innovations: Sources, characteristics, and financing. Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(1), 55–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markman, G., Phan, P., Balkin, D., & Gianiodis, P. (2005). Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 241–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R., & Moodysson, J. (2011). Comparing knowledge bases: On the geography and organization of knowledge sourcing in the regional innovation system of Scania. Sweden European Urban and Regional Studies, 20(2), 170–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattes, J. (2012). Dimensions of proximity and knowledge bases: Innovation between spatial and non-spatial factors. Regional Studies, 46(8), 1085–1099.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce. (1886). Noshomu-sho Hokoku (Report of the Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce). Tokyo: Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce. (1912). Komu-kyoku Chosa Kogyo Ni Kansuru Shisetsu Kogai. Tokyo: Seisan Chosa Kai.

    Google Scholar 

  • Motohashi, K., & Muramatsu, S. (2012). Examining the university industry collaboration policy in Japan: Patent analysis. Technology in Society, 34(2), 149–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagaoka, S., & Walsh, J. (2009). Commercialization and other uses of patents in Japan and the U.S.: Major findings from the RIETI-Georgia Tech inventor survey. RIETI Discussion Paper 09E011.

  • National Institute of Science and Technology Policy. (2003). University–industry collaborations 1983–2002. Tokyo: National Institute of Science and Technology Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  • Nikkei. (2014). Patents owned by the local authorities. Nikkei Glocal, 238, 10–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odagiri, H. (1999). University–Industry collaboration in Japan: Facts and interpretations. In L. Branscomb, F. Kodama, & R. Florida (Eds.), Industrializing knowledge: University–industry linkages in Japan and the United States (pp. 252–265). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of Technology Assessment, US Congress. (1990). Making things better: Competing in manufacturing, OTA-ITE-443. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt, K. (1984). Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13(6), 343–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piergiovanni, R., Santarelli, E., & Vivarelli, M. (1997). From which source do small firms derive their innovative inputs? Some evidence from Italian industry. Review of Industrial Organization, 12(2), 243–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ponds, R., Oort, F., & Frenken, K. (2010). Innovation, spillovers and university-industry collaboration: An extended knowledge production function approach. Journal of Economic Geography, 10(2), 231–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, J. (1996). The value of international patent rights. Ph.D. thesis, Yale University.

  • Romijn, H., & Albaladejo, M. (2002). Determinants of innovation capability in small electronics and software firms. Research Policy, 31(7), 1053–1067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapira, P., Youtie, J., & Kay, L. (2011). Building capabilities for innovation in SMEs: A cross-country comparison of technology extension policies and programmes. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, 3(3–4), 254–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D., Wright, M., Chapple, W., & Lockett, A. (2008). Assessing the relative performance of university technology transfer in the US and UK: A stochastic distance function approach. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 17(7–8), 717–729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storper, M., & Venables, A. (2004). Buzz: Face-to-face contact and the urban economy. Journal of Economic Geography, 4(4), 351–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki, J., Tsukada, N., & Goto, A. (2015). Role of public research institutes in Japan’s national innovation system: Case study of AIST. RIKEN and JAXA, Science, Technology & Society, 20(2), 133–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Intellectual Property Organization. (2016). IPC concordance table. http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ipstats/en/statistics/patents/xls/ipc_technology.xls. Accessed on 26 Aug 2016.

  • Yegros-Yegros, A., Rafols, I., & D’Este, P. (2015). Does interdisciplinary research lead to higher citation impact? The different effect of proximal and distal interdisciplinarity. PLoS ONE, 10(8), e0135095. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0135095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoshihara, M., & Tamai, K. (1999). Lack of incentive and persistent constraints: Factors hindering technology transfer at Japanese Universities. In L. Branscomb, F. Kodama, & R. Florida (Eds.), Industrializing knowledge: University–industry linkages in Japan and the United States (pp. 348–363). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the anonymous referees for their comments and suggestions. The usual caveats apply. This study was conducted as a part of the research project “The Role of Public Research Institutions in the Japan’s National Innovation System” at the Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI). This article is based on the RIETI Discussion Paper 16-E-061. The author would like to thank project members, with a special mention to Akira Goto, Jun Suzuki, Naotoshi Tsukada, Isamu Yamauchi, and Patarapong Intarakumnerd for their collaboration. This study was funded by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (15K03411).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Tohoku University, 6-6-11-804 Aramaki, Aoba-ku, Sendai, 980-8579, Japan

    Nobuya Fukugawa

Authors
  1. Nobuya Fukugawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nobuya Fukugawa.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author has no conflict of interest.

Appendix

Appendix

See Fig. 1 and Tables 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Source: National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology “Current Status of Kosetsushi”

Year of establishment of Kosetsushi active as of 2009. Note: Reorganized Kosetsushi are treated as newly-established ones due to data constraints.

Full size image
Table 5 Kosetsushi in the early phase
Full size table
Table 6 Number of Kosetsushi by organization, ownership, and technology
Full size table
Table 7 Resource allocation to Kosetsushi since 1990
Full size table
Table 8 Definitions of variables and descriptive statistics
Full size table
Table 9 Technological fields based on IPC8 Technology Concordance
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fukugawa, N. Knowledge creation and dissemination by Kosetsushi in sectoral innovation systems: insights from patent data. Scientometrics 109, 2303–2327 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2124-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2124-x

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation