Transcript Jeux de noms”: information on inventors from patent data

Academic patenting in Europe: new
evidence from the KEINS database
Francesco Lissoni
(Università di Brescia & CESPRI-Università Bocconi)
European Universities Learning to Compete
June 12, 2008, Stockholm
Sources
•
•
Lissoni F., Llerena P., McKelvey M., Sanditov B. (2008),
“Academic Patenting in Europe: New Evidence from the
KEINS Database”  IN THE BOOK
 Data on France, Italy and Sweden
Lissoni F., Nuvolari A., Tartari V., “Academic patenting in the
Netherlands”, not-yet-a-draft
2
Outline
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Motivation: re-assessment of academic patenting
phenomenon in Europe
Academic inventorship and the KEINS database: origin and
methodology
Academic patenting in Sweden in an international perspective
Summing up and research questions from 3.
More research questions
3
1. MOTIVATION: Promotion of university
patenting in Europe
Repeal of Hochschullehrerprivileg
Germany (2001 Reform of Employee Law), Austria (2002), Denmark
(2000, Act on Inventions at Public Research Institutions)
Introduction of Hochschullehrerprivileg
Italy (2001 Legge Finanziaria)
Titolarity of IPR over public funded research
UK (1998; National Health Service circular), Germany (1998), Belgium
(1999; Decree on Education)
IPR awareness campaigns
Germany (1998-2002), Sweden (1994; jointly to creation of
“Technology Bridging Foundations”), France (1999; 2001) 4
1. MOTIVATION: Is it really necessary to
promote university patenting in Europe?
Recent literature suggests that it may be the case that European
university produce patents, but do not own them
• EU universities have little or no tradition of self-administration: they
have traditionally left IPR management decisions in their professors’
hands, who in turn have left them in their business/govt sponsors’
hands
• In a few countries, professor’s priviledge tradition; almost anywhere,
professors are or regard themselves as civil servants, more responsive
to central government’s regulations, than to their universities’
• Absence of Bayh-Dole Act + big role (in a few countries) of large
national agencies  patents in government’s hands
 Best way to count university patents in Europe is to look at
the inventors, not the applicants  KEINS DATABASE!!!5
2. THE KEINS DATABASE
• Knowledge-based Entrepreneurship, Innovation Networks and
Systems in Europe, 2004-2007 (6th FP) / Workpackage 5: Analysis
of Scientific Entrepreneurship through Patent & Publications Data
 KEINS database on France, Italy and Sweden
• Further extensions: Netherlands (done), Denmark and UK
(ongoing)
• More extensions and updating: pending application to ESF
6
2. THE KEINS DATABASE
A closer look at patent documents
• Patent data have long been exploited by social scientists for
their rich information contents:
– on companies: patent counts as output measure of
innovation production function (Griliches, 1990)
– on technologies: studies on the (evolution of) the technological contents (classification) of patents (Engelsman &
Van Raan, 1994; Van Raan, 1997)
– on knowledge diffusion: studies on patent citations, esp. in
the geographical space (Jaffe and Trajtenberg, 2002)
• More info, previously unexploited, is now under scrutiny:
– accessory info on the value of patents: licensing, litigation
records (go to: http://www.epip.eu/)
– INFO ON INVENTORS
7
2. THE KEINS DATABASE
What are info on inventors useful for?
1.
More accurate geographical information (most basic, used
for long)
2. MOBILITY OF INVENTORS between applicants and across
cities/regions (Trajtenberg et al., 2006)
3. RELATIONAL DATA: who knows whom  networks of
inventors (Breschi and Lissoni, 2004)
4. NAMES DATABASE
 for matching purposes: academic inventors
(KEINS DATABASE; Lissoni et al., 2007)
 for interview purposes (PATSTAT project)
8
2. THE KEINS DATABASE
Methodology
All EPO patent
applications
(1978-2004)
Standardisation of company
names/addresses/parent co.
Company-level data
(~140k organizations)
Publicaton number,
priority date, IPC
class, citations etc.
Standardisation of inventors’ names
/addresses + Massacrator © routine
Inventor-level data set
9
2. THE KEINS DATABASE
INVENTOR-PROFESSOR
MATCHING EXERCISE
10
3. Academic patenting in Sweden in an
international perspective
11
Table 1. Academic inventors in France, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden
Prof.s
(nr) 1
Academic
inventors
(nr) 2
Academic
inv.
(% prof.)2
Academic
inv., incl.
unchecked
(nr) 3
Academic
inv., incl.
unchecked
(% prof.)3
France
30184
1205
3,99
1822
6,04
Italy
31573
1353
4,29
1395
4,42
Netherl.
21684
494
2,30
-
-
Sweden
15920
725
4,55
773
4,86
1
Professors active in 2004 (Italy, Sweden) or 2005 (France, the Netherlands) in Science, Medicine and Engineering
Data from checked professor-inventor matches (professors confirmed to be the inventors)
3 All records, checked and unchecked (excl. records for which professors denied being the inventors)
2
Academic patent applications*, by country; 1978-2002
1800
Netherlands
1978-1993: 438
1994-2003: 950
1600
Nr of patents
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
France
Italy
* Ac. scientists active in 2004 (further restrictions for France)
Sweden
1978-1993
1994-2002
Table 2b. Academic inventors1, % distribution by discipline
Disciplines
Sweden2
Italy
France
N’lands
Agricultural & Veterinary
3,7
2,9
0,0
7,3
Biological sciences
18,3
17,2
18,6
21,9
Chemical sciences
15,8
27,7
26,7
9,9
Earth sciences
0,0
0,3
0,1
1,0
Engineering
30,0
28,8
26,2
22,1
Math and info science
1,9
0,9
2,8
2,4
Medical sciences
22.5
16,8
20,1
21,9
Physical sciences
7,6
5,4
5,5
6,3
ALL DISCIPLINES
100
100
100
100
1
Professors active in 2004 (Italy, Sweden) or 2005 (France, the Netherlands)
on discipline is missing for 39% of Swedish academic inventors
2 Info
14
Table 2b-bis. Academic inventors1, % distribution by selected sub-discipline
Disciplines
Sweden
Biological sciences
Pharmacology & pharma. biology
7,9
Life sciences (biological disciplines)
4,7
Biological disciplines (others)
5,7
Chemical sciences
Chemistry (theoretical)
10,2
Organic & Industrial Chem.
5,7
Pharmaceutical chemistry
n.a.
Engineering
Mechanical & Civil eng.
6,3
Information & Electronic eng
16,8
Chemical eng.; Energy
6,9
Medical sciences
Life sciences (medical)
8,6
Medical disciplines (others)
13,9
Italy
France
N’lands
3,8
11,2
1,1
5,3
10,7
2,7
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
7,5
11,8
6,7
4,0
19,0
3,6
n.a
n.a
n.a
4,4
14,2
8,4
2,8
17,7
5,6
8,3
6,9
8,9
10,5
9,6
13,8
n.a.
n.a.15
Table 2a. Academic inventors as % of total professors1, by discipline
Sweden
Italy
France
Netherla
nds
n.a.
3,5
-
-
-
Agricultural &
Veterinary
2,7
1,9
n.a.
3,3
Biological sciences
7,0
4,4
4,4
3,4
Chemical sciences
8,5
12,1
9,4
3,3
Earth sciences
0,0
0,3
0,1
0,7
Engineering
4,5
5,8
5,3
2,8
Math and info science
0,9
1,6
0,6
0,6
Medical sciences
4,6
2,0
4,2
2,0
Physical sciences
4,7
2,7
2,5
1,5
ALL DISCIPLINES
4,5
4,3
4,0
2,3
Disciplines
16
Technological distribution of all the academic patents applications by country ; 19942002
100,0%
90,0%
% academic patents
80,0%
70,0%
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
0,0%
The Netherlands
France
Italy
Sw eden
Electronic
Instrumentation
Materials Chemistry
Pharmacology - Biotechnologies
Process Engineering
Mechanical Engineering Transports
Consumption goods - Civil Engineering
17
Academic patents as % of all patents by domestic inventors, 1985-2000; all and selected
technologies
18,0
Pharma; Biotech
16,0
% academic vs tot patents
14,0
12,0
10,0
8,0
Instruments
6,0
Chemicals; Materials
4,0
2,0
All technologies
Electrical eng.;
Electronics
0,0
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
18
Top ten owners of academic patents in Sweden, 1978-2003
PATs
MAIN CLASS
APPLICANTS
ABB
151
Equipment and electrical
machines
Ericsson
114
Telecommunications
Pharmacia UpJohn
75
Pharmacology and cosmetics
AstraZeneca
40
Pharmacology and cosmetics
Telia
27
Information Technologies
Siemens
25
Medical technologies
Karolinska
19
Biotechnologies
A & Science Invest
17
Pharmacology and cosmetics
Sandvik
16
Materials, Metallurgy
Kvaerner Pulping
13
Materials treatment
19
Top ten owners of academic patents in France, 1978-2003
APPLICANTS
PATs
MAIN CLASS
Francia
CNRS
220
Biotech., Medical technology
INSERM
99
Biotech., Organic Chemistry
Total
72
Macromolecular Chemistry,
Thermal Processes
France Telecom
55
Telecommunications
Cea
52
Surface treatments, Materials,
Metallurgy
Thales
45
Analysis, measure and control
technologies, Telecommunications
Rhodia
40
Macromolecular Chemistry,
Materials, Metallurgy
Universite Paris VI
42
Biotechnologies
Adir & Co.
38
Organic Chemistry
Institut Pasteur
38
Biotech., Organic Chemistry
20
Top ten owners of academic patents in Italy, 1978-2003
APPLICANTS
PATs
MAIN CLASS
ST-Microelectronicss
143
Semiconductors
CNR
111
Chemistry, Materials
ENI
97
Chemistry, Materials
Sigma-Tau
67
Chemistry, Materials
Ausimont
51
Chemistry, Materials
Telecom Italia Gruppo
33
Telecommunications
MIUR
26
Chemistry, Materials
Fidia Gruppo
21
Pharmacology, Biotechnologies
ARS Holding
19
Pharmacology, Biotechnologies
Optical Technologies
19
Equipment & electrical machines
21
Top ten owners of academic patents in the Netherlands, 1978-2003
APPLICANTS
PATs
MAIN CLASS
Philips
236
Electronics
Unilever
98
Pharmacology - Biotechnologies
Leiden University
73
Pharmacology - Biotechnologies
Utrecht University
43
Pharmacology - Biotechnologies
AKZO
43
Instrumentation and
Pharmacology Biotechnologies
Delft University
42
Process Engineering
University of Groningen
32
Pharmacology - Biotechnologies
Stichting voor de technische
wetenschappen (STW)
31
Instrumentation and
Pharmacology Biotechnologies
Leadd (Leiden univ.)
23
Pharmacology - Biotechnologies
University of Amsterdam
22
Pharmacology - Biotechnologies
22
% of patent applications, by type of assignee
100,0%
Ownership of academic patents by domestic inventors in the Netherlands,
France, Italy, Sweden and the US; 1994-2001
0,5%
8,6%
9,0%
90,0%
1,6%
24,8%
14,3%
5,3%
8,9%
24,2%
80,0%
3,6%
70,0%
60,0%
1,7%
50,6%
50,0%
72,0%
61,4%
40,0%
80,2%
68,7%
30,0%
20,0%
38,7%
10,0%
10,2%
10,5%
The Netherlands
France
Universities
Italy
0,0%
Source: for France, Italy, Sweden and United States Lissoni et al. (2006).
Firms
4,9%
Sweden
Individuals
US
Government
23
7,0%
6,0%
5,0%
4,0%
3,0%
2,0%
1,0%
0,0%
% weight of academic patent applications on total applications
Weight of
ofacademic
academic patents
patents
by domestic
inventors,
by country
and
Weight
patentson
ontotal
the total
patents
by domestic
inventor,
by country
(1994-2001)
andtype
typeofofownership
ownership
(1994-2001)
7,0%
6,2%
6,0%
6,0%
5,0%
4,3%
4,0%
3,4%
4,0%
4,0%
US *
Franc e
Italy
3,0%
S weden
2,0%
1,0%
1,0%
0,3%
0,4%
0,3%
0,0%University ow ned academic patents
University-owned academic
patents (1) (2) US
The Netherlands
All academic patents
All academic patents
France
Italy
Sw eden
(1) US univ-owened patent inc lude no-profit organizations (4,2% of tot obs); all data inc lude c o-assigned
patents (sourc e: Thursby et al., 2006)
(2) Estimate of weight of univ-owned patents from Mowery and S ampat (2006)
24
4. Summing up and research questions
 Does Europe really fare worse than the US in academic patenting? YES,
in absolute numbers. NO, as % of overall patenting activity, esp. Sweden
 Does a “European model” of academic patenting exist? YES, it consists of
leaving ownership largely in business companies’ hands. BUT:
 things are changing: university ownership is increasing (Della Malva,
Lissoni, Llerena, 2008)
 the Netherlands seems to be a partial exception
 Ownership patterns for academic patenting are affected both by:
 IPR regulations
 Institutional features of academic systems
 Academic scientists’ incentives to invent-for-patenting, disclose to
universities, and relate to industry
 Stratification of universities with respect to patent portfolios
25
5. More research questions
 Quality of academic patenting  citation analysis
 Identity and scientific productivity of academic inventors
(Breschi, Lissoni and Montobbio, 2007)
 Problems of inventorship attribution (Lissoni and
Montobbio, 2008)
26
The value of academic patents
Average of the received citations in the Netherlands, Italy, France and Sweden.
1994-2002
2,50
2,30
2,04
2,13
2,00
2,16
2,11
1,89
2,24
1,92
1,50
1,00
0,50
0,00
THE NETHERLANDS
Academic patents
ITALY
FRANCE
SWEDEN
Not academic patents
27
The value of academic patents
28