Value chain of nanotechnology: a comparative study of some major players
Source abstract
Abstract
The article provides a general overview for the landscapes of national nanotechnology development from 1991 to 2010. More than 230,000 unique patents are identified based on a composite search strategy in the Derwent innovation index database. According to the concordance between patent classification and industry technology, some main application areas are identified to compare the positions and specializations among the leading countries. By extracting the content of the “use” subfield in the abstracts and harvesting the keywords representing characteristics of life cycle, nanotechnology patents are grouped into four categories: nanomaterials, nanointermediates, nano-enabled products, and nanotools, which can be seen as four stages of nanotechnology’s value chain. These analyses enable us to identify the distributions of value chain and prolific research institutions among the leading countries. It is found that China is productive in nanomaterials and nanointermediates, rather than nano-enabled products and nanotools, which could be mainly explained by the fact that Chinese academia makes a main contribution to nanotechnology patenting. However, there is a big gap between university patenting and market demands, leading to a low rate of technology transfer or licensing.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Intellectual Property and Patents · Firm Innovation and Growth · Innovation and Knowledge Management
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (21)
Show source-provided references
1. Alencar MSM, Porter AL, Antunes AMS (2007) Nanopatenting patterns in relation to product life cycle. Technol Forecast Soc Change 74(9):1661–168010.1016/j.techfore.2007.04.002 ↗
2. Bai CL (2005) Ascent of nanoscience in China. Science 309(5731):61–6310.1126/science.1115172 ↗
3. Braun T, Schubert A, Zsindely S (1997) Nanoscience and nanotechnology on the balance. Scientometrics 38(2):321–32510.1007/BF02457417 ↗
4. Glänzel W, Meyer M (2003) Patents cited in the scientific literature: an exploratory study of ‘reverse’ citation relations in the triple helix. Scientometrics 58(2):415–42810.1023/A:1026248929668 ↗
5. Guan J, Ma N (2007) China’s emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology: a comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience ‘giants’. Res Policy 36(6):880–88610.1016/j.respol.2007.02.004 ↗
6. Guan J, Wang G (2010) A comparative study of research performance in nanotechnology for China’s inventor–authors and their non-inventing peers. Scientometrics 84:331–34310.1007/s11192-009-0140-9 ↗
7. Hassan M (2005) Small things and big changes in the developing world. Science 309(5731):65–6610.1126/science.1111138 ↗
8. Kostoff RN, Barth RB, Lau CGY (2008) Quality vs. quantity of publications in nanotechnology field from the People’s Republic of China. Chin Sci Bull 53(8):1272–128010.1007/s11434-008-0183-y ↗
9. Leydesdorff L, Zhou P (2007) Nanotechnology as a field of science: its delineation in terms of journals and patents. Scientometrics 70(3):693–71310.1007/s11192-007-0308-0 ↗
10. Liu X, Zhang P, Li X, Chen H, Dang Y, Larson C, Roco MC, Wang X (2009) Trends for nanotechnology development in China, Russia, and India. J Nanopart Res 11(8):1854–1866
11. Lux Research (2004) Sizing nanotechnology’s value chain. Lux Research. http://www.luxresearchinc.com . Accessed 6 Nov 2009
12. Mogoutov A, Kahane B (2007) Data search strategy for science and technology emergence: a scalable and evolutionary query for nanotechnology tracking. Res Policy 36(6):893–90310.1016/j.respol.2007.02.005 ↗
13. OECD (2009) Nanotechnology—an overview based on indicators and statistics. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, Paris
14. Porter AL, Youtie J, Shapira P, Schoeneck DJ (2008) Refining search terms for nanotechnology. J Nanopart Res 10(5):715–72810.1007/s11051-007-9266-y ↗
15. Roco MC (2005) International perspective on government nanotechnology funding in 2005. J Nanopart Res 7(6):707–71210.1007/s11051-005-3141-5 ↗
16. Schmoch U (2008) Concept of a technology classification for country comparisons. Final report to the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), WIPO. http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ipstats/en/statistics/patents/pdf/wipo_ipc_technology.pdf . Accessed 5 May 2010
17. Schummer J (2004) Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology. Scientometrics 59(3):425–46510.1023/B:SCIE.0000018542.71314.38 ↗
18. Shapira P, Wang J (2009) From lab to market? Strategies and issues in the commercialization of nanotechnology in China. Asian Bus Manage 8(4):461–48910.1057/abm.2009.15 ↗
19. Youtie J, Shapira P, Porter AL (2008) Nanotechnology publications and citations by leading countries and blocs. J Nanopart Res 10(6):981–98610.1007/s11051-008-9360-9 ↗
20. Zhou P, Leydesdorff L (2006) The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Res Policy 35(1):83–10410.1016/j.respol.2005.08.006 ↗
21. Zitt M, Bassecoulard E (2006) Delineating complex scientific fields by an hybrid lexical-citation method: an application to nanosciences. Inf Process Manage 42(6):1513–153110.1016/j.ipm.2006.03.016 ↗