Big science and innovation: gestation lag from procurement to patents for CERN suppliers

Abstract

CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, is the most important laboratory for particle physics in the world. It requires cutting edge technologies to deliver scientific discoveries. This paper investigates the time span needed for technology suppliers of CERN to absorb the knowledge acquired during the procurement relation and develop it into a patent. We estimate count data models relying on a sample of CERN suppliers for the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), a particle accelerator. Firms in our sample received their first LHC-related order over a long-time span (1995–2008). This fact is exploited to estimate the time lag that separates the beginning of the procurement relationship and the filing date of patents. Becoming a supplier of CERN is associated with a statistically significant increase in the number of patent applications by firms. Moreover, such an effect requires a relatively long gestation lag in the range of five to eight years.

The impact of the Italian Space Agency on scientific knowledge: Evidence from academic publications

“…Evidence of the role of time is also provided by Bastianin et al. (2021) who show that the increase in the number of patent applications that firms experiment after becoming a supplier of CERN requires a relatively long gestation lag in the range of five to eight years.…”

“…Scandura (2016), for instance, shows that the impact of collaboration on two variables such as the share of R&D employment and the R&D expenditure per employee is positive and requires two years to become evident. Evidence of the role of time is also provided by Bastianin et al (2021) who show that the increase in the number of patent applications that firms experiment after becoming a supplier of CERN requires a relatively long gestation lag in the range of five to eight years. In the period 2008-17, ASI has invested in research contracts an average of 26.7 million of euros per year, an amount equal to about 15 percent of yearly expenditure for Industry contracts.…”

Technology transfer from procurement relationships in big science contexts

“…Of the various kinds of collaborations that BSCs establish with suppliers (e.g., contract research, joint research, training, conferences and the creation of physical infrastructures) (D’Este and Patel, 2007), procurement relationships act as a powerful tool to support suppliers’ innovation through the exchange of technology and tacit knowledge (Autio et al, 2004; Bastianin et al, 2022; Bastianin and Del Bo, 2021; Castelnovo and Dal Molin, 2021; Castelnovo et al, 2018; Dal Molin and Previtali, 2019; Florio et al, 2018; Ghisetti, 2017). Such procurement favors technological spillovers and innovation impacts from BSCs to suppliers (Castelnovo and Dal Molin, 2021; Dal Molin and Previtali, 2019; Castelnovo et al, 2018; Autio et al, 2004).…”

“…However, interactions between suppliers and BSCs are often neglected and, to the best of our knowledge, the processes of collaboration between BSCs and suppliers have been understudied. According to different authors, the context of BSCs is different from that of universities (Bastianin et al, 2022; Li-Yin et al, 2022; Rådberg and Löfsten, 2022; Scarrà and Piccaluga, 2020). As was first highlighted by Weimberg (1961), Big Science is a particular kind of research, mainly funded by national governments and international agencies, and characterized by the use of large-scale RIs that develop cutting-edge technologies (e.g., the Large Hadron Collider, LHC, at CERN).…”

“…However, as pointed out by Florio et al (2018), it would be inappropriate to consider the impact of BSCs only in terms of their scientific dimension. In fact, these RIs develop large, capital-intensive and cutting-edge technologies that are often the result of collaborative procurement relationships between them and suppliers, involving technological spillovers and knowledge diffusion (Autio et al, 2003; Bastianin et al, 2022; Bastianin and Del Bo, 2021; Castelnovo and Dal Molin, 2021; Castelnovo et al, 2018; Dal Molin and Previtali, 2019; Florio et al, 2018).…”