Comparison on nano-patent of both sides of the Taiwan Strait andtheir industry development strategy

Abstract

Abstract: First, the nano-patent of both sides of the Taiwan Strait is retrieved with subject term search in Derwent Innovation Index (DII), and then a comparison from the distribution of time, assignee, class code, and subject category is made. After that, through Derwent manual code co-occurrence analysis on the time zone, the special emphasis of Taiwan and Mainland China is distinguished with the indicators of manual codes’ frequency and centrality. Furthermore, in the perspective of technology evolution, the development divergence is described and the lately research front of both sides of the Taiwan Strait is revealed by empirical research, in which Taiwan’s focus is touch screen (t04-f02a2) and Mainland China’s concern is oxyethylene co-polymers (a05-h03). At last, four countermeasures are indicated from the standpoint of long term collaboration.

Key words: patentometrics, nano-patent, patent manual code co-occurrence, development strategy

CLC Number:

C932.6

Gao Jiping, Ding Kun. Comparison on nano-patent of both sides of the Taiwan Strait andtheir industry development strategy[J]. Science Research Management, 2012, (6): 100-109.

References

[1] Alencar M, Porter A L, Antunes A. Nanopatenting patterns in relation to product life cycle[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2007, 74(9): 1661-1680.
[2] Roco M C. International perspective on government nanotechnology funding in 2005[J]. Journal of Nanoparticle Research. 2005, 7(6): 707-712.
[3] Baker S, Aston A. The business of nanotech[J]. Business Week. 2005, 14: 64-71.
[4] WIPO. Patent report 2009 - Statistics on worldwide patent activities[M]. Geneva, World Intellectual Property Organization Press, 2009.
[5] Porter A, Newman N. Handbook of quantitative science and technology research[M]. Berlin, Springer, 2005.
[6] Abraham B P, Moitra S D. Innovation assessment through patent analysis[J]. Technovation. 2001, 21(4): 245-252.
[7] Iversen E J. An excursion into the patent-bibliometrics of Norwegian patenting[J]. Scientometrics. 2000, 49(1): 63-80.
[8] Jaffe A B, Trajtenberg M, Fogarty M S. Knowledge spillovers and patent citations: Evidence from a survey of inventors[J]. American Economic Review. 2000, 18(5): 215-218.
[9] Lee J. Heterogeneity, brokerage, and innovative performance: endogenous formation of collaborative inventor networks[J]. Organization Science. 2010, 21(4): 804-822.
[10] Hegde D, Sampat B. Examiner citations, applicant citations, and the private value of patents[J]. Economics Letters. 2009, 105(3): 287-289.
[11] Agrawal A, Kapur D, Mchale J. How do spatial and social proximity influence knowledge flows? Evidence from patent data[J]. Journal of Urban Economics. 2008, 64(2): 258-269.
[12] Yoon B, Phaal R, Probert D. Morphology analysis for technology roadmapping: application of text mining[J]. R&D Management. 2008, 38(1): 51-63.
[13] Risov M, Kasravi K. Patent Mining-Discovery of Business Value from Patent Repositories. 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Hawii: IEEE Press. 2007:1-10.
[14] Marinova D, Mcaleer M. Nanotechnology strength indicators: international rankings based on US patents[J]. Nanotechnology. 2003, 14: R1-R7.
[15] Hullmann A, Meyer M. Publications and patents in nanotechnology[J]. Scientometrics. 2003, 58(3): 507-527.
[16] Schummer J. Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology[J]. Scientometrics. 2004, 59(3): 425-465.
[17] Tolles W M. Societal implications of nanoscience and nanotechnology [M]. Arlington, NSF Press, 2001.
[18] Huang Z, Chen H, Yip A, et al. Longitudinal patent analysis for nanoscale science and engineering: Country, institution and technology field[J]. Journal of Nanoparticle Research. 2003, 5(3): 333-363.
[19] Porter A L, Youtie J, Shapira P, et al. Refining search terms for nanotechnology[J]. Journal of Nanoparticle Research. 2008, 10(5): 715-728.
[20] Kostoff R N, Stump J A, Johnson D, et al. The structure and infrastructure of the global nanotechnology literature[J]. Journal of Nanoparticle Research. 2006, 8(3): 301-321.
[21] Chunjuan L, Yue C, Tianxia B. Patentometric study of global academies. 4th International Conference on Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics & 9th COLLNET Meeting. Berlin: Humboldt-Universit?t zu Berlin. 2008: 1-6.
[22] 王小晓,丁堃. 高速列车寿命预测技术专利计量分析[J]. 科技管理研究. 2010, 30(4): 212-215.
[23] Chen C. Searching for intellectual turning points: Progressive knowledge domain visualization[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2004, 101(Suppl 1): 5303-5310.
[24] Chen C. CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2006, 57(3): 359-377.
[25] Kleinberg J. Bursty and hierarchical structure in streams[J]. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery. 2003, 7(4): 373-397.
[26] 高继平,丁堃,刘宇等. 知识基础与前沿载文间的知识流动分析[J]. 情报杂志. 2009, 28(10): 98-102.
[27] 宋华,崔大祥,贺蓉等. 聚氧乙烯-聚氧丙烯-聚氧乙烯共聚物羧基化方法. 中国专利:CN200810038537.1, 2008-06-05.