University Patenting: Estimating the Diminishing Breadth of Knowledge Diffusion and Consumption by Carlos Rosell and Ajay Agrawal Comments by Mark Schankerman.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Does banks corporate control benefit firms? Evidence from US banks control over firms voting rights by Joao A. C. Santos and Kristin E. Wilson Comments.
Advertisements

The Elixir or Burden of Youth? Exploring differences among start- ups and established firms in innovation behaviour in the UK Paola Criscuolo, Nicos Nicolau.
By Anthony Campanaro & Dennis Hernandez
Doing an Econometric Project Or Q4 on the Exam. Learning Objectives 1.Outline how you go about doing your own econometric project 2.How to answer Q4 on.
Harnessing Success: Determinants of University Technology Licensing Performance Sharon Belenzon Nuffield College, Oxford University Mark Schankerman London.
CHAPTER 2 Building Empirical Model. Basic Statistical Concepts Consider this situation: The tension bond strength of portland cement mortar is an important.
Clustering V. Outline Validating clustering results Randomization tests.
6-1 Introduction To Empirical Models 6-1 Introduction To Empirical Models.
4.3 Confidence Intervals -Using our CLM assumptions, we can construct CONFIDENCE INTERVALS or CONFIDENCE INTERVAL ESTIMATES of the form: -Given a significance.
What is MPC? Hypothesis testing.
The Art and Science of Teaching (2007)
Models with Discrete Dependent Variables
Linear Regression.
Statistics II: An Overview of Statistics. Outline for Statistics II Lecture: SPSS Syntax – Some examples. Normal Distribution Curve. Sampling Distribution.
Comments to: “Identifying R&D Shortfalls in LDC” Andrés Rodriguez-Clare Rodrigo Fuentes, Central Bank of Chile Barcelona, June 2005.
QM Spring 2002 Business Statistics Introduction to Inference: Hypothesis Testing.
CFS021002HK-ZWE391-ql Discussion of Ownership structure and diversification strategies (by Shao, Jun from Nankai University) Qiao Liu, HKU Corporate Governance.
University Patenting: Estimating the Diminishing Breadth of Knowledge Diffusion and Consumption Saturday, September 30, 2006 EPFL Lausanne, Switzerland.
CMP3265 – Professional Issues and Research Methods Research Proposals: n Aims and objectives, Method, Evaluation n Yesterday – aims and objectives: clear,
Research problem, Purpose, question
Test Taking Tips How to help yourself with multiple choice and short answer questions for reading selections A. Caldwell.
Research Methods and Design
SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION
Extension to ANOVA From t to F. Review Comparisons of samples involving t-tests are restricted to the two-sample domain Comparisons of samples involving.
Chapter 3 An Overview of Quantitative Research
The value of software-related patents in the European Patent System Salvatore Torrisi Department of Management, Università di Bologna and CESPRI-Bocconi.
A theory of growth and volatility at the aggregate and firm level By Comin and Mulani Comments by: Claudio Raddatz.
Health and Disease in Populations 2001 Sources of variation (2) Jane Hutton (Paul Burton)
Sociology 5811: Lecture 10: Hypothesis Tests Copyright © 2005 by Evan Schofer Do not copy or distribute without permission.
Comments on: “External Financing, Access to Debt Markets and Stock Returns” by F.Y. Eric C. Lam and K.C. John Wei Santiago Bazdresch University of Minnesota.
Heterogeneity among research spin-offs: the case of “intellectual property-based firms” Margarida Fontes - INETI & DINAMIA Oscarina Conceição - DINAMIA.
10.2 Tests of Significance Use confidence intervals when the goal is to estimate the population parameter If the goal is to.
Multiple Regression 3 Sociology 5811 Lecture 24 Copyright © 2005 by Evan Schofer Do not copy or distribute without permission.
HAOMING LIU JINLI ZENG KENAN ERTUNC GENETIC ABILITY AND INTERGENERATIONAL EARNINGS MOBILITY 1.
1 Chapter 10: Introduction to Inference. 2 Inference Inference is the statistical process by which we use information collected from a sample to infer.
Section 10.3: Large-Sample Hypothesis Tests for a Population Proportion.
C M Clarke-Hill1 Analysing Quantitative Data Forming the Hypothesis Inferential Methods - an overview Research Methods.
Review. POL 242 – Strong Correlation. Positive or Negative?
Lecture 02.
Rethinking Research Deane Neubauer Professor Emeritus, University of Hawaii, Manoa Presented to the School of Social Science and Languages King Mongkut’s.
Statistical Inference for the Mean Objectives: (Chapter 9, DeCoursey) -To understand the terms: Null Hypothesis, Rejection Region, and Type I and II errors.
Chapter 13: Limited Dependent Vars. Zongyi ZHANG College of Economics and Business Administration.
Patterns of Organization (Rhetorical Analysis) Argumentative Research Paper.
1 Regression & Correlation (1) 1.A relationship between 2 variables X and Y 2.The relationship seen as a straight line 3.Two problems 4.How can we tell.
Comments on “Does Syndicate Pressure Affect Analysts’ Incentive to Produce Information? Evidence from Recommended Firms’ Securities Class Action Lawsuits”
Lecture 12 Preview: Model Specification and Model Development Model Specification: Ramsey REgression Specification Error Test (RESET) RESET Logic Model.
Are All Patent Examiners Equal?: The Impact of Examiner Characteristics on Patent Statistics & Litigation Outcomes Iain Cockburn, Boston University & NBER.
Overview of Regression Analysis. Conditional Mean We all know what a mean or average is. E.g. The mean annual earnings for year old working males.
Correlation & Regression Analysis
Stylized Facts of Patent Litigation Jean O. Lanjouw and Mark Schankerman.
Section 10.2: Tests of Significance Hypothesis Testing Null and Alternative Hypothesis P-value Statistically Significant.
Classroom Strategies That Work. Questions, Cues, and Advance Organizers Helping Students Activate Prior Knowledge.
What is Research?. Intro.  Research- “Any honest attempt to study a problem systematically or to add to man’s knowledge of a problem may be regarded.
Research methods revision The next couple of lessons will be focused on recapping and practicing exam questions on the following parts of the specification:
Climbing atop the Shoulders of Giants: The Impact of Institutions on Cumulative Research Furman and Stern AER 2011.
Critiquing Quantitative Research.  A critical appraisal is careful evaluation of all aspects of a research study in order to assess the merits, limitations,
Copyright © 2013, 2009, and 2007, Pearson Education, Inc. 1 FINAL EXAMINATION STUDY MATERIAL III A ADDITIONAL READING MATERIAL – INTRO STATS 3 RD EDITION.
Comments: CEO hedging opportunities and the weighting of performance measures in compensation.
Knowledge of the Marketplace
Research Problems, Purposes, & Hypotheses
Justus A. Baron Northwestern University
Sampling distribution
Discussion by Aart Kraay The World Bank October 14, 2004
Week 11 Chapter 17. Testing Hypotheses about Proportions
Statistics and Data Analysis
Section 10.2: Tests of Significance
Introduction to Econometrics
Corporate governance, chief executive officer compensation, and firm performance 刘铭锋
Statistics II: An Overview of Statistics
Chapter 4 Summary.
Presentation transcript:

University Patenting: Estimating the Diminishing Breadth of Knowledge Diffusion and Consumption by Carlos Rosell and Ajay Agrawal Comments by Mark Schankerman (LSE and CEPR)

Policy Concern Does university patenting and technology management restrict the dissemination of university-based knowledge? Empirical formulation: Are university patented inventions increasingly cited by a more concentrated set of subsequent patentees, relative to corporate patents? Why is this interesting? 1.Knowledge may be interesting/useful to a smaller or more concentrated set of firms 2.Knowledge may be more restricted by university tech management for income maximisation objectives

Paper is original, and the authors do a very nice, careful job of demonstrating that the answer is yes to the empirical question. Moreover, the narrowing (increase in assignee concentration) of cites is mainly due to heavy patenting (‘experienced) universities; thus probably not transitional. Overall the finding is robust and I believe it. But in my view the authors cannot tell distinguish between hypotheses 1 and 2, so there is no basis to claim that dissemination for downstream use is restricted (patent thicket problem exacerbated) on this evidence.

Approach: Difference in differences regression framework, comparing fragmentation of backward cites for universities to corporate patents, and the same for forward cites. For forward cites: patents issued in and For backward cites: patents applied for in and Truncation issues probably second order (though citing distributions do differ for university and non-university patents) Authors are careful to control for patent characteristics, including tech field, originality, and generality. Thus their finding of increased concentration of cites to university patents is not due to reduced generality of patents.

Some Queries and Suggestions Why the specific periods chosen? Large samples, so authors can include multiple time windows to identify the fuller pattern of changes. If the concern is patent thickets and complementary technologies (PTCT), then we should examine whether the increased concentration is stronger in ‘complex’ tech areas (e.g. semiconductors, software) relative to ‘linear’ tech like pharmaceuticals. Authors interact tech class dummies with the period dummy, but do not ask if the coefficients link to the complexity issue. Also could interact tech class with university-period dummy.

If the issue is PTCT, then the offending patents should be the ones still in force. Lapsed patents create no hold-up or licensing problem. Can authors distinguish cites to patents still in force versus those to lapsed patents? If their interpretation is right (it is about strategic restriction), shouldn’t their finding be stronger (only present?) for cites to in-force patents. I am unclear why backward and forward cites are symmetrical for your argument. Why should backward cite concentration reflect licensing behavior, even under the null hypothesis that strategic restriction through licensing occurs?

Would be useful to have information on use of exclusive v non-exclusive licensing by universities over time -- direct evidence linking to nature of licensing activity. If the authors’ interpretation is right, use of exclusive should be growing. AUTM data has such information for 1990’s and I don’t think it shows that.

My central concern about how to interpret the interesting empirical finding in the paper is this: Patent cites are references to prior art. They constrain the property rights in the citing patent by circumscribing the scope of allowable claims. We also think they tell us something about patterns of sequential (cumulative) innovation. But cites do NOT imply anything directly about 1.complementarity in production: Do I need to license your patent to implement mine? 2.complementarity in research: Did I need to license your patent to conduct the research that generated my patent?

Thus, observing fewer assignees citing university patents does not by itself mean that the dissemination of university patents for downstream use is narrowing.

Original, well executed paper that delivers new, interesting findings. Interpretation: jury is still out, more needs to be done. In summary: we now know something new. We are just not sure what it is.