Upload
mya
View
36
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Co-patenting and inventive performance: in search of the proximity paradox. Lorenzo Cassi Université Paris 1, CES & OST Anne Plunket Université Paris Sud 11, ADIS. Geographical (and other forms of) proximity and networks. Aim of the paper: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Co-patenting and inventive performance: in
search of the proximity paradox
Lorenzo Cassi
Université Paris 1, CES & OST
Anne Plunket
Université Paris Sud 11, ADIS
Aim of the paper: Consider the joint impact of network and proximity factors and Contrast their impact on
Collaboration through co-inventor dyad formationInventive performance through forward citations
Geographical (and other forms of) proximity and networks
The role of geographical proximity
Knowledge diffusion and innovation are highly localized and embedded in industrial clusters
Long studied through knowledge externalities and their impact on knowledge creation (Jaffe, 1989; Audretsch and Feldaman, 1996)Under what conditions individuals and firms benefit from knowledge externalities?
The role of networks as Channels of knowledge diffusion Social proximity : individuals need to be embedded in networks: knowledge flows follow inter-personal links build through mobility, co-ethnicity, friendship, etc. (Almeida & Kogut, 1999; Agrawal et al., 2008; Breschi and Lissoni, 2009;)Networks are local to the extent that individuals are not very mobile (Breschi and Lissoni, 2009)Other forms of proximity mediate knowledge diffusion: organizational and technological proximity (Boschma, 2005, Nooteboom, et al. 2007)
Geographical (and other forms of) proximity and networks
Other forms of proximity: substitutes or complementsOther forms of proximity mediate knowledge diffusion
organizational proximity and technological proximity (Boschma, 2005)Social, organizational and geographical proximity are substitutes: similar roles in favoring learning and knowledge sharing
In sum:
1. Individuals need proximity to become connected, to share knowledge
2. Various forms of proximity may act as substitutes or complements
3. Individuals need to be embedded in networks
What about network positions ?
Geographical (and other forms of) proximity and networks
Network positions are important to access knowledge and resources:
Closure positions (= within component) - Coleman, 1988Share social proximity : have partners in common ; closure positions are highly localized (Ter Wal, 2011)Cohesive networks: reduce coordination cost and promotes trust and collaborationRisk of redundancy: similar knowledge bases and technological skills
Bridging positions (=across components) - Burt, 1992Brokerage position: link between separate components; channel across clustersAccess non redundant and novel sources of information and knowledge Promote creativity and provide opportunities for novel combinations “Weak ties”: difficult to coordinate and mobilize (but possibly compensated through other forms of proximity to reduce uncertainty)
Networks and knowledge
The proximity paradox?Network relations and proximity are “facilitators” of coordination, knowledge sharing and diffusion, they do not necessarily favor innovative performance (Boschma and Frenken, 2009)
Too much proximity may be harmful for innovation
Technological capabilities and cognitive/technological proximity play a more prominent role (Nooteboom, et al. 2007, Broekel and Boschma, 2011)
Data and network construction methodEPO patents in genomics (1990-2006) – ANR Corpus genomic with OST-INRA-ADIS - from Patstat
All co-inventor dyads between inventors reporting a European postal address (EU15 and Switzerland and Norway - 12,968 patents – 4406 applicants – 24,708 inventors
Network built using five-year windows (links die out) : network in 1994 is built on patents published between 1990 and 1994
All ties and potential ties
To avoid simultaneity biases, we consider all proximity determinants with a lag of one period
We investigate only links among already active actors – bridging and intracomponent ties
Links Total number
%
1. Bridging links 1,084 2.592. New Component link 24,460 57.853. Pendant links 15,470 36.894. Intra-component link 1,120 2.67Total 41,934 100
Independent variables and controlsUnit of analysis: co-inventor dyads (closure or bridging dyads)
Proximity variables based on inventors’ individual characteristics (previsous period)
Geographical proximity: geographical location of inventors at the NUTS 3 level -Organizational proximity
Same applicant: within the same governance structure - (private company, research institutes and universities, non for-profit organizations and individuals Same organizational type: between firms or between academics
Technological proximity : Jaffe Index based on IPC codes Social proximity between already indirectly connected inventors (when social distance is == 2, 3 and 4)
Control variablesAverage and absolute degree (preferential attachement)Average and absolute experience (time since first patent)Border (neighbor countries)Number of inventors Cosure and bridging patent: Mixed ties
Dependent variables and estimation1. The likelihood of collaboration
How proximity (spatial, social, cognitive, organizational and institutional proximity) affect the choice of collaboration partners?
Tie formation using a conditional logit model – tie versus no tie formation
for any observed tie, we randomly select five possible but not realized co-inventor ties, which provide five controls for each co-inventor
Dyad formation using conditional logit = f(proximity, proximity interactions, controls)
2. The value of inventions:
How proximity affect the value of patents?Number of citations per patent as a proxy for the value of an invention (Harhoff, et al. 2003; Gambardella, Harhoff, and Verspagen, 2008)Citations based on patent families – 5 years - (Martinez, 2010, OECD) # forward Citations using
negative binomial = f(proximity, proximity interactions, controls)
Network tie formation regressions
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)VARIABLES Closure Closure Closure Closure Bridge Bridge Bridge Bridge
Geographical proximity 0.815*** 0.469*** 0.683*** 0.681*** 0.729*** 0.684*** 0.608*** 0.684***
[19.24] [9.75] [18.69] [18.82] [21.70] [21.26] [15.01] [21.27]Same applicant 1.460*** 4.342*** 5.400*** 4.027*** 0.366 3.218*** 2.698*** 2.610***
[4.88] [16.94] [8.07] [16.38] [1.08] [3.65] [10.95] [10.21]Same type 0.347* 2.372*** 0.389* -0.011 -0.075 -0.068 0.698* -0.458
[2.04] [5.95] [2.53] [-0.02] [-0.78] [-0.74] [2.17] [-1.40]Technological proximity 2.884*** 2.871*** 3.347*** 2.631*** 1.734*** 1.818*** 1.756*** 1.468***
[8.47] [8.62] [9.23] [5.24] [7.67] [7.82] [7.75] [4.61]Geographical proximity x same applicant -0.690*** -0.573***
[-10.27] [-7.24]Geographical proximity x Same type 0.397*** 0.146**
[5.92] [2.70]Technological proximty x Same applicant -1.932* -0.887
[-2.22] [-0.75]Technological proximity x Same type 0.551 0.567
[0.83] [1.24]Border -1.706*** -1.672*** -1.599*** -1.626*** -1.201*** -1.176*** -1.178*** -1.174***
[-7.93] [-8.41] [-8.91] [-8.97] [-9.62] [-9.81] [-9.77] [-9.77]Degrees - Avrg 0.954*** 1.009*** 0.972*** 0.986*** -0.683*** -0.667*** -0.657*** -0.663***
[5.40] [5.87] [5.89] [5.90] [-5.24] [-5.23] [-5.17] [-5.17]Degrees - Abs.diff. -0.237** -0.264** -0.274** -0.268** 0.325*** 0.333*** 0.331*** 0.333***
[-2.67] [-3.01] [-3.26] [-3.17] [3.72] [3.86] [3.84] [3.85]Experience - Abs.diff -0.376+ -0.319+ -0.292 -0.287 0.327** 0.310** 0.307** 0.311**
[-1.92] [-1.74] [-1.63] [-1.59] [2.75] [2.69] [2.64] [2.68]Experience - Avrg -0.187+ -0.211* -0.201* -0.206* -0.121 -0.124+ -0.127+ -0.125+
[-1.79] [-2.08] [-2.04] [-2.08] [-1.60] [-1.67] [-1.71] [-1.67]
Observations 11,584 11,584 11,584 11,584 11,656 11,656 11,656 11,656Log Likelihood -650.8 -679.6 -700.5 -703.6 -1244 -1269 -1265 -1269
D.F. 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10Chi2 707.4 679.0 723.3 721.3 924.0 797.5 796.5 792.0
Dep.Var type type type type type type type type
Robust z-statistics in brackets *** p<0.001, ** p<0.01, * p<0.05, + p<0.1
Tie formation
(9) (10) (11) (12)VARIABLES Closure Closure Closure Closure
Social proximity (= 2) 2.689*** 5.460*** 6.573*** 4.680***[5.91] [5.42] [15.03] [12.14]
Social proximity (= 3) 1.592** 6.023*** 3.998*** 3.181***[2.86] [6.42] [11.51] [7.85]
Social proximity (= 4) 0.468 4.174*** 3.454*** 2.380***[0.99] [3.47] [9.13] [4.81]
Geographical proximity 0.720*** 0.430*** 0.371*** 0.409***[10.30] [9.21] [7.46] [8.48]
Same applicant 1.744*** 2.057*** 4.136*** 2.289***[4.59] [4.98] [6.70] [5.43]
Same type 0.371 0.387 0.325 -0.150[1.34] [1.60] [1.28] [-0.64]
Technological proximity 0.923+ 1.843** 0.678 0.795[1.78] [2.86] [1.31] [1.57]
Social proximity (= 2) x Geographical proximity -0.700***[-5.86]
Social proximity (= 3) x Geographical proximity -0.448***[-3.63]
Social proximity (= 4) x Geographical proximity -0.620***[-5.63]
Social proximity (= 2) x Technological proximity 0.055[0.04]
Social proximity (= 3) x Technological proximity -3.660**[-3.05]
Social proximity (= 4) x Technological proximity -2.216[-1.35]
Tie formation with social proximity
Tie formation with social proximity - cont
Social proximity (= 2) x Same applicant -3.752***[-5.44]
Social proximity (= 3) x Same applicant -2.376***[-3.51]
Social proximity (= 4) x Same applicant -2.780***[-3.91]
Social proximity (= 2) x Same type 1.980***[3.64]
Social proximity (= 3) x Same type 0.664[1.09]
Social proximity (= 4) x Same type 0.738[1.13]
Border -2.555*** -2.075*** -2.222*** -2.194***[-4.92] [-6.12] [-5.18] [-5.68]
Degrees - Avrg 0.154 -0.065 -0.012 -0.060[0.57] [-0.25] [-0.05] [-0.23]
Degrees - Abs.diff. -0.031 0.002 0.040 0.064[-0.23] [0.01] [0.28] [0.47]
Experience - Abs.diff 0.436 0.694* 0.618* 0.612*[1.33] [2.28] [2.00] [2.06]
Experience - Avrg -0.168 -0.229 -0.134 -0.190[-1.12] [-1.63] [-0.90] [-1.37]
Observations 11,584 11,584 11,584 11,584Log Likelihood -254.3 -278.1 -261.2 -276.3
Inventive performance - Citations regressions
(2) (3) (4) (5) (12) (13) (14) (15)VARIABLES Closure Closure Closure Closure Bridge Bridge Bridge Bridge
Geographical proximity 0.011 -0.001 -0.026 -0.028 0.006 0.010 0.103 0.012
[0.18] [-0.01] [-0.57] [-0.61] [0.12] [0.21] [1.53] [0.25]Same applicant 0.337 0.494 -2.601 0.557+ -0.460 -3.116 0.274 0.387
[0.87] [1.55] [-0.89] [1.72] [-0.49] [-1.32] [0.84] [1.18]Same type 0.669+ 0.411 0.595 5.270+ 0.925*** 0.886*** 0.231 4.611*
[1.78] [0.89] [1.61] [1.87] [3.43] [3.32] [0.57] [2.54]Technological proximity 10.587* 10.995* 7.764 17.515*** 5.132* 2.816 5.739* 11.004**
[2.34] [2.44] [1.31] [3.36] [2.10] [1.01] [2.51] [2.59]Technological proximity sq -7.086* -7.380* -5.562 -11.616** -3.928* -2.239 -4.253* -7.652*
[-2.26] [-2.37] [-1.33] [-3.28] [-2.24] [-1.10] [-2.50] [-2.51]Geographical proximity x same applicant -0.069
[-0.78]Geographical proximity x Same type -0.085 -0.201*
[-0.93] [-2.22] Technological proximty x Same applicant 7.811 1.165 9.443
[0.95] [0.95] [1.37]Technological proximty sq x Same applicant -4.648 -5.988
[-0.82] [-1.22]Technological proximity x Same type -12.814 -10.548+
[-1.61] [-1.89] Technological proximity sq x Same type 8.351 6.966+
[1.49] [1.71]Border 0.536 0.329 0.439 0.498 -0.707+ -0.683 -0.604 -0.722+
[0.73] [0.47] [0.64] [0.75] [-1.70] [-1.63] [-1.41] [-1.74]Degrees - Avrg 1.158*** 1.158*** 1.152*** 1.131*** -0.158 -0.132 -0.192 -0.128
[3.46] [3.50] [3.43] [3.39] [-0.40] [-0.34] [-0.50] [-0.35]Degrees - Abs.diff. -0.313+ -0.313+ -0.319* -0.326* 0.042 0.040 0.035 0.043
[-1.92] [-1.94] [-1.98] [-2.04] [0.21] [0.20] [0.18] [0.22]Experience - Abs.diff -0.622* -0.629* -0.633* -0.667* -0.524+ -0.522+ -0.554+ -0.545+
[-2.14] [-2.17] [-2.17] [-2.31] [-1.72] [-1.70] [-1.85] [-1.82]Experience - Avrg 0.045 0.063 0.061 0.071 0.198 0.166 0.168 0.179
[0.26] [0.37] [0.36] [0.43] [1.13] [0.94] [0.95] [1.00]# inventors per patent -1.010** -0.991* -0.981* -0.957* -0.000 -0.005 -0.012 -0.005
[-2.60] [-2.55] [-2.56] [-2.48] [-0.00] [-0.02] [-0.04] [-0.02]Closure and briging patent 1.068** 1.041** 1.042** 1.041** -0.239 -0.190 -0.269 -0.181
[2.81] [2.76] [2.78] [2.76] [-0.71] [-0.57] [-0.80] [-0.55]Constant -6.330*** -6.555*** -5.274* -8.960*** -3.243** -2.488+ -3.013* -5.337**
[-3.56] [-3.68] [-2.35] [-4.23] [-2.65] [-1.87] [-2.53] [-3.25]
Observations 1,070 1,070 1,070 1,070 1,065 1,065 1,065 1,065Log Likelihood -466.0 -465.9 -465.6 -465.2 -470.4 -470.0 -469.3 -469.8
D.F. 23 23 24 24 23 24 23 24Robust z-statistics in brackets *** p<0.001, ** p<0.01, * p<0.05, + p<0.1
(6) (7) (8) (9)VARIABLES Closure Closure Closure Closure
Social proximity (= 2) -1.064+ -0.017 -0.631 -1.730***
[-1.88] [-0.01] [-0.86] [-3.71]Social proximity (= 3) -1.275+ -11.024* -1.576+ -1.818***
[-1.89] [-2.26] [-1.70] [-3.52]Social proximity (= 4) -1.677* 6.789 -2.125* -2.077***
[-1.99] [1.43] [-2.09] [-3.34]Degrees - Avrg 1.418*** 1.401*** 1.338*** 1.318***
[4.18] [3.90] [3.95] [3.90]Degrees - Abs.diff. -0.318+ -0.283+ -0.314+ -0.299+
[-1.95] [-1.73] [-1.92] [-1.81]Geographical proximity -0.108 -0.005 -0.008 -0.007
[-0.85] [-0.10] [-0.17] [-0.16]Same applicant 0.418 0.395 1.410+ 0.385
[1.28] [1.17] [1.80] [1.18]Same type 0.519 0.515 0.600 -0.346
[1.42] [1.42] [1.59] [-0.40]Technological proximity 8.851* 9.597 8.919+ 8.965*
[1.98] [1.40] [1.94] [1.97]Technological proximity sq -5.938+ -5.465 -6.007+ -6.006+
[-1.95] [-1.05] [-1.91] [-1.92]Border 0.722 0.760 0.575 0.560
[1.03] [1.12] [0.88] [0.85]Experience - Abs.diff -0.763* -0.896** -0.765* -0.756*
[-2.47] [-2.74] [-2.46] [-2.43]Experience - Avrg 0.070 0.081 0.104 0.102
[0.43] [0.50] [0.63] [0.62]# inventors per patent -0.979* -1.005* -0.929* -0.928*
[-2.45] [-2.55] [-2.34] [-2.36]closure and briging 1.225** 1.232** 1.177** 1.222**
[3.11] [3.27] [3.10] [3.19]Social proximity (= 2) x Geographical proximity 0.103
[0.75]Social proximity (= 3) x Geographical proximity 0.154
[0.84]Social proximity (= 4) x Geographical proximity 0.102
[0.41]
Social proximity (= 2) x Technological proximity -2.330[-0.25]
Social proximity (= 2) x Technological proximity sq 0.488[0.07]
Social proximity (= 3) x Technological proximity 29.740*[2.12]
Social proximity (= 3) x Technological proximity sq -22.057*[-2.24]
Social proximity (= 4) x Technological proximity -24.607+[-1.69]
Social proximity (= 4) x Technological proximity sq 15.560[1.46]
Social proximity (= 2) x Technological proximity -2.330[-0.25]
Social proximity (= 2) x Technological proximity sq 0.488[0.07]
Social proximity (= 2) x Same applicant -1.251[-1.59]
Social proximity (= 3) x Same applicant -0.340[-0.33]
Social proximity (= 4) x Same applicant 0.049[0.04]
Social proximity (= 2) x Same type 1.158[1.36]
Social proximity (= 3) x Same type 0.115[0.10]
Social proximity (= 4) x Same type 0.119[0.10]
Constant -5.038** -5.289* -5.323** -4.466*[-2.88] [-2.10] [-2.82] [-2.43]
Observations 1,070 1,070 1,070 1,070Log Likelihood -461.1 -458.7 -459.8 -460.1
D.F. 28 31 28 28
Robust z-statistics in brackets *** p<0.001, ** p<0.01, * p<0.05, + p<0.1
ConclusionResults confirm previous studies on:
Collaboration and knowledge flowsSocial, organizational and geographical proximity are substitutesOutside the governance structure, organizational and geographical proximity are complements The various forms of proximity strongly explains the formation of networks and geography remains important even after controlling for other forms of proximity
Innovative performance and the proximity paradox Geographical and organizational proximity is not significantToo close social proximity is negative for closure ties Technological proximity has a key role; it has an inverted u-shape
Less close proximity is more beneficial for bridging ties
Thank you very much for your attention!
CountryPatent Inventors
fractional cumulative fractional cumulative
AT 213,26 844 419,83 427
BE 612,17 1983 897 908
CH 467,13 1554 871,33 896
DE 3630,55 13879 5717,75 5776
DK 510,83 2193 865,75 874
ES 185,92 818 603 606
FI 168,36 662 402 405
FR 1816,37 6407 3456,83 3491
GR 17,83 45 35 35
IE 57,4 215 118 119
IT 358,17 1193 767,67 772
LU 0,25 1 1 1
NL 845,38 2797 1341,42 1357
NO 105,83 299 200 201
PT 9,19 38 32 32
SE 426,5 1303 758,33 767
UK 2241,41 6773 3639,5 3687
others 1301,46 7321 4252,58 4354
Total 12968 48325 24379 24708
Inventors and patent by country (fractional and cumulative counting)
Citations include self-citations
Closure ties Bridging tiesVariable N Mean SD Min Max N Mean SD Min Max
Citations 1070 0.23 0.90 0 9 1065 0.23 0.87 0 9
Degrees - Avrg 1070 2.12 0.52 0.69 3.51 1065 1.82 0.49 0.69 3.60
Degrees - Abs.diff. 1070 1.71 0.87 0 3.95 1065 1.53 0.82 0 3.93
Geographical proximity 1070 -2.66 2.44 -7.30 0 1065 -3.37 2.47 -7.99 0
Same applicant 1070 0.59 0.49 0 1 1065 0.26 0.44 0 1
Same type 1070 0.29 0.45 0 1 1065 0.42 0.49 0 1
Technological proximity 1070 0.73 0.20 0 1 1065 0.71 0.21 0 1
Technological proximity 1070 0.57 0.29 0 1 1065 0.55 0.28 0 1
Border 1070 0.03 0.18 0 1 1065 0.09 0.28 0 1
Experience - Abs.diff 1070 1.54 0.50 0.69 2.71 1065 1.61 0.45 0.69 2.74
Experience - Avrg 1070 1.14 0.77 0 2.71 1065 1.22 0.73 0 2.77
# inventors per patent 1070 1.95 0.37 1.10 2.94 1065 1.91 0.46 1.10 3.85
Closure and briging patent 1070 0.08 0.27 0 1 1065 0.14 0.35 0.00 1
Social proximity (=2) 1070 0.67 0.47 0 1
Social proximity (=3) 1070 0.16 0.37 0 1
Social proximity (=4) 1070 0.09 0.28 0 1