This paper addresses the issue of how science-technology interaction can be measured in the knowledge-driven economy. More
specifically, it compares the patent citation indicator to another patent-based measure using data on a small European economy.
Patent citation patterns will be compared to researcher patents. Comparing the two indicators suggests different patterns
of science-technology linkage. An analysis of revealed technology contributions of academic inventors and a survey-based analysis
of technological collaboration and knowledge transfer point to a possible explanation. Furthermore the research presents evidence
that suggests technology sectors are related to different modes of collaboration in inventive processes amongst academics.
Authors:Julie Callaert, Joris Grouwels, and Bart Van Looy
view on science–technologyinteractions.
At the same time, NPRs in patent documents contain noise. Several efforts have been made in the past to assess different types of NPRs. Narin and Noma ( 1985 ) reported an average of 0.3 NPRs per patent
Authors:Bart Looy, Edwin Zimmermann, Reinhilde Veugelers, Arnold Verbeek, Johanna Mello, and Koenraad Debackere
We investigate the relationship between the science intensity of technology domains and country's performance within these
domains. The number of references in patents to scientific articles is considered as an approximation of the science intensity
of a technology domain whereas a country's technological performance is measured in terms of its technological productivity
(i.e. number of patents per capita). We use USPTO patent-data for eight European countries in ten technological domains. A
variance analysis (ANOVA) is applied. Country as an independent variable does not explain a significant portion of the observed
variance in science intensity (p=0.25). Technology domain, however, explains a significant portion of the observed variance
(p<0.001). Moreover, in science intensive fields we find a positive relation between the science linkage intensity of these
fields and the technological productivity of the respective countries involved. These findings seem to suggest the relevancy
of designing innovation policies, aimed at fostering interaction between knowledge generating actors and technology producers,
in a field specific manner.
Authors:Sujit Bhattacharya, Hildrun Kretschmer, and Martin Meyer
The paper presents a methodology for studying the interactions between science and technology. Our approach rests mostly on patent citation and co-word analysis. In particular, this study aims to delineate intellectual spaces in thin-film technology in terms of science/technology interaction. The universe of thin-film patents can be viewed as the macro-level and starting point of our analysis. Applying a bottom-up approach, intellectual spaces at the micro-level are defined by tracing prominent concepts in publications, patents, and their citations of scientific literature. In another step, co-word analysis is used to generate meso-level topics and sub-topics. Overlapping structures and specificities that emerge are explored in the light of theoretical understanding of science-technology interactions. In particular, one can distinguish prominent concepts among patent citations that either co-occur in both thin-film publications and patents or reach out to one of the two sides. Future research may address the question to what extent one can interpret directionality into this.
Firms operating in science-based technological fields reflect some of the complexities of the science-technology interaction. The present study attempts to investigate these interactions by analyzing patent citations, publication and patent outputs of multinational corporations (MNCs) in 'thin film' technology. In particular we explore different characteristics of knowledge production and knowledge utilization of these firms. The results indicate no correlation between intensity of research activity and patents produced by the MNCs. The relationship between scientific and technological knowledge generation as well as the linkage between science and technology appear to be firm-specific rather than dependent on a technological or industrial sector. The dispersion of journal sources for the majority of patent citations of scientific literature as well as for the majority of scientific outputs is narrow. Basic journals play an important role in patent citation as well as in addressing research of MNCs in thin-film technology.
Patent citations to the research literature offer a way for identifying and comparing contributions of scientific and technical knowledge to technological development. This case study applies this approach through a series of analyses of citations to Dutch research papers listed on Dutch-invented and foreign patents granted in the US during the years 1987–1996.First, we examined the general validity and utility of these data as input for quantitative analyses of science-technology interactions. The findings provide new empirical evidence in support of the general view that these citations reflect genuine links between science and technology. The results of the various analyses reveal several important features of industrially relevant Dutch science: (1) the international scientific impact of research papers that are also highly cited by patents, (2) the marked rise in citations to Dutch papers on foreign-invented patents; (3) the large share of author-inventor self-citations in Dutch-invented patents; (4) the growing relevance of the life sciences, (5) an increase in the importance of scientific co-operation. We also find significant differences between industrial sectors as well as major contributions of large science-based multinational enterprises, such as Philips, in domestic science-technology linkages.The paper concludes by discussing general benefits and limitations of this bibliometric approach for macro-level analysis of science bases in advanced industrialised countries like the Netherlands.
Authors:Michel Zitt, Suzy Ramanana-Rahary, Elise Bassecoulard, and Françoise Laville
This article depicts some features of the geography of science and technology outputs in the EU, with a particular attention
to regional “co-location” of these two pillars of the “knowledge-based society”. Economists have, for a decade, paid great
attention to local “spillovers” stating that industrial firms often draw advantages from the presence of nearby academic centres.
The presence in the same areas of strong academic and technological resources is both a condition and a result of science-technology
interactions. Concentrating on publications and patents as proxies of the science and technology level in regions, we built
a typology of regions according to their commitment to the two knowledge-base activities and then analysed the co-locations
of science and technology from several points of view. A fine-grain lattice, mainly based on standard Nuts3 level, was used.
Co-location, at the EU level, is not a general rule. A strong potential for spillover/ interaction does exist in the top-class
regions which concentrate a high proportion of European S and T output. But for regions with a small/medium level of S&T activity,
a divergence of orientations appears between a science-oriented family and a technology-oriented family, indicating an imbalance
between local S and T resources. If we look at the S-oriented regions, whilst controlling for underlying factors, such as
population and regional economic product, a significant geographic linkage between T and S appears. This suggests a trajectory
of science-based technological development. A careful examination of S&T thematic alignments and specialisation is necessary
to develop the hypothesis that fostering academic resources could increase the technological power along a growth path.
company is associated are mostly company-university coauthored papers. Consequently, company involvement in publications could also be considered to signal science-technologyinteractions (Godin 1993 ; Calvert and Patel 2003 ; Tijssen 2004 ; Tijssen and
) and non-patent literature (to measure science–technologyinteractions). The approach in this paper is more appropriate to address current policy concerns related to public access to the knowledge produced by universities.
The third contribution