Early Patterns of Commercialization in Graphene
Graphene is a novel nanomaterial consisting of a single layer of carbon atoms. It has attracted significant attention due to its distinctive properties, which include great strength, electrical and thermal conductivity, and lightness. While many diverse and exciting potential applications are discussed, the commercialization of scientific discoveries such as graphene is inherently uncertain. There is often considerable time lag between the science, the early development of a new technology, and its adoption by corporate and other actors. In part this relates to the extent to which firms are able to absorb knowledge and engage in learning to implement applications of the new technology. In this chapter, we consider three different possible patterns of corporate learning and activity These are: (1) a linear process, where patenting follows scientific discovery; (2) a “double-boom” phenomenon, where corporate (patenting) activity is first concentrated in technological improvements and then followed by a period of technology productization; and (3) a concurrent model, where scientific discovery in publications occurs in parallel with patenting. We analyze corporate publication and patent activity across countries and lines of application. The results indicate that, while graphene as a whole is experiencing concurrent scientific development and patenting growth, country- and application-specific trends offer some evidence of both the linear and double-boom models. Thus the empirical path of development cannot be accounted for by just one of the models; nor is one model sufficient guidance for policy and strategy formation.
KeywordsPatent Activity Corporate Activity National Innovation System Memory Area Graphene Domain
This study was undertaken with support from the Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University (sponsored by the National Science Foundation under cooperative agreement #0937591). Additional support was provided through a UK-US Collaboration Development Award (Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, and the Foreign & Commonwealth Office’s Global Partnership Fund); and the UK-US Higher Education, New Partnership Fund (British Council). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors.
This paper was previously published as Philip Shapira, Jan Youtie and Sanjay Arora, “Early patterns of commercial activity in graphene,” Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 2012, 14:811, DOI: 10.1007/s11051-012-0811-y. It is reproduced here, with minor revisions. Permission from Springer is gratefully acknowledged.
- Abernathy W, Utterback J (1978) Patterns of industrial innovation. Technol Rev 80(7):40–47Google Scholar
- Cockburn I, Henderson R, Stern S (1999) The diffusion of science driven drug discovery: organizational change in pharmaceutical research. NBER Working Paper 7359. Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
- 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 7552, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
- Edquist C (ed) (1997) Systems of innovation. Technologies, institutions and organizations. Pinter Publisher, London/WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- Hobday M (2005) Firm-level innovation models: perspectives on research in developed and developing countries. TASM 17(2):121–146Google Scholar
- ITRS (2010) International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors 2010 Update Overview. http://www.itrs.net/Links/2010ITRS/2010Update/ToPost/2010_Update_Overview.pdf. Accessed 14 Apr 2011
- Liebowitz SJ, Margolis SE (1995) Are network externalities a new source of market failure? Res Law Econ 7:1–22Google Scholar
- Lundvall BÁ (ed) (1992) National systems of innovation. Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Pinter Publisher, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Malerba F (2005) Sectoral systems: how and why innovation differs across sectors. In: Fagerberg J, Mowery D, Nelson R (eds) Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Mowery D (2011) Nanotechnology and the U.S. national innovation system: continuity and change. J Technol Transfer. doi: 10.1007/s10961-011-9210-2
- Nelson RR, Winter S (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
- Nobelprize.org (2011) The Nobel Prize in Physics 2010. Nobelprize.org. 2 Sep 2011 http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2010/
- Porter ME (1990) The competitive advantage of nations. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Rogers EM (2003) Diffusion of innovations, 5th edn. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Rogers D (2011) Graphene is beginning to revolutionise the market for plastic electronics. Plast Electron 3(6):57–61Google Scholar
- Shapira P, Youtie J, Kay L (2011) National innovation systems and the globalization of nanotechnology innovation. J Technol Transfer. doi: 10.1007/s10961-011-9212-0
- Takeuchi H, Nonaka I (1986) The new product development game. Harv Bus Rev 64:137–146Google Scholar