Scientometrics

, Volume 109, Issue 3, pp 2303–2327 | Cite as

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

Article

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.

Keywords

Innovation Intermediaries Japan Patents Sectoral innovation systems SMEs Technology transfer 

JEL Classification

D83 L26 M13 O31 O32 O33 

Notes

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).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author has no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Acs, Z., Audretsch, D., & Feldman, M. (1992). Real effects of academic research: comment. American Economic Review, 82(1), 363–367.Google Scholar
  2. Acs, Z., Audretsch, D., & Feldman, M. (1994). R&D spillovers and recipient firm size. Review of Economics and Statistics, 76(2), 336–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, T., Daim, T., & Lavoie, F. (2007). Measuring the efficiency of university technology transfer. Technovation, 27(5), 306–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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
  6. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 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
  8. Autant-Bernard, C. (2001). Science and knowledge flows: Evidence from the French case. Research Policy, 30(7), 1069–1078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chukumba, C., & Jensen, R. (2005). University invention, entrepreneurship, and startups. NBER Working Paper #11475.Google Scholar
  11. 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.Google Scholar
  12. 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.Google Scholar
  13. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fukugawa, N. (2005). Characteristics of knowledge interactions between universities and small firms in Japan. International Small Business Journal, 23(4), 379–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fukugawa, N. (2009). Determinants of licensing activities of local public technology centers in Japan. Technovation, 29(12), 885–892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fukugawa, N. (2013). University spillovers into small technology-based firms: Channel, mechanism, and geography. Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(4), 415–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 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.Google Scholar
  21. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Galasso, A., & Schankerman, M. (2014). Patents and cumulative innovation: Causal evidence from the courts. IIR Working Paper No. 13-16.Google Scholar
  23. Gambardella, A., Harhoff, D., & Verspagen, B. (2008). The value of European patents. European Management Review, 5(2), 69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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
  27. Hall, B., Jaffe, A., & Trajtenberg, M. (2005). Market value and patent citations. RAND Journal of Economics, 36(1), 16–38.Google Scholar
  28. Harhoff, D., Scherer, F., & Vopel, K. (2003). Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights. Research Policy, 32(8), 1343–1363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Howells, J. (2006). Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy, 35(5), 715–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jaffe, A. (1989). Real effects of academic research. American Economic Review, 79(5), 957–970.Google Scholar
  34. Japan Association for the Advancement of Research Cooperation. (2001). Survey on local public technology centers in regional innovation systems. Tokyo: JAREC.Google Scholar
  35. Jarmin, R. (1999). Evaluating the impact of manufacturing extension on productivity growth. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 18(1), 99–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. (2001). Proofs and prototypes for sale: The licensing of university inventions. American Economic Review, 91(1), 240–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kneller, R. (2007). Bridging islands: Venture companies and the future of Japanese and American industry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lach, S., & Schankerman, M. (2008). Incentives and invention in universities. Rand Journal of Economics, 39(2), 403–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 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
  40. Malerba, F. (2002). Sectoral systems of innovation and production. Research Policy, 31(2), 247–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mansfield, E. (1995). Academic research underlying industrial innovations: Sources, characteristics, and financing. Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(1), 55–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Markman, G., Phan, P., Balkin, D., & Gianiodis, P. (2005). Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 241–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mattes, J. (2012). Dimensions of proximity and knowledge bases: Innovation between spatial and non-spatial factors. Regional Studies, 46(8), 1085–1099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 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
  46. Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce. (1912). Komu-kyoku Chosa Kogyo Ni Kansuru Shisetsu Kogai. Tokyo: Seisan Chosa Kai.Google Scholar
  47. Motohashi, K., & Muramatsu, S. (2012). Examining the university industry collaboration policy in Japan: Patent analysis. Technology in Society, 34(2), 149–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 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.Google Scholar
  49. National Institute of Science and Technology Policy. (2003). University–industry collaborations 1983–2002. Tokyo: National Institute of Science and Technology Policy.Google Scholar
  50. Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Nikkei. (2014). Patents owned by the local authorities. Nikkei Glocal, 238, 10–25.Google Scholar
  52. 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
  53. Office of Technology Assessment, US Congress. (1990). Making things better: Competing in manufacturing, OTA-ITE-443. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  54. Pavitt, K. (1984). Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13(6), 343–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Putnam, J. (1996). The value of international patent rights. Ph.D. thesis, Yale University.Google Scholar
  58. Romijn, H., & Albaladejo, M. (2002). Determinants of innovation capability in small electronics and software firms. Research Policy, 31(7), 1053–1067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Storper, M., & Venables, A. (2004). Buzz: Face-to-face contact and the urban economy. Journal of Economic Geography, 4(4), 351–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 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.
  64. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 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

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tohoku UniversitySendaiJapan

Personalised recommendations