2012
DOI: 10.1007/s10961-012-9285-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Global technological collaboration network: network analysis of international co-inventions

Abstract: Global innovation networks are emerging as a result of the international division of innovation processes through, among others, international technological collaborations. At the aggregate level, the creation of technological collaboration between countries can be considered as mutually beneficial (or detrimental) and their random distribution is unlikely. Consequently, the dynamics and evolution of the technological collaborations can be expected to fulfil the criteria of a complex network. To study the stru… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
45
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(47 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
1
45
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Although China's international collaboration output in the ICM industry is still lagging behind that of the USA, we think the gap is most likely due to the difference in ICM patent numbers between the USA and China. This is because if a country has more patents, other countries will be more willing to cooperate with it [54], and the number of its own patents also affects its international collaboration output positively in each collaborative relationship [21]. Therefore, we recommend that the research institutions, colleges, and universities of each country and region (especially for Taiwan, Germany, the United Kingdom, and India) should participate in international collaboration actively, while the enterprises operate as the major force.…”
Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Although China's international collaboration output in the ICM industry is still lagging behind that of the USA, we think the gap is most likely due to the difference in ICM patent numbers between the USA and China. This is because if a country has more patents, other countries will be more willing to cooperate with it [54], and the number of its own patents also affects its international collaboration output positively in each collaborative relationship [21]. Therefore, we recommend that the research institutions, colleges, and universities of each country and region (especially for Taiwan, Germany, the United Kingdom, and India) should participate in international collaboration actively, while the enterprises operate as the major force.…”
Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, we analyzed the ICM international technical cooperation based on the international co-inventions. This practice is not only the choice of many scholars for the study of the international technical cooperation [20,21,24,25,46,48,54], but it has also been discussed and proven effective [43,55].…”
Section: Technical Classification System and Data Collectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Markets as well as networks and institutions need to be developed in order to contribute to the effectiveness of regional innovation systems (Lambooy, 2004). Prato and Nepelski (2012) studied the structure and evolution of global technological collaboration networks and they created a unique map of technological collaborations between countries around the world (i.e. the global technological collaboration network).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Global innovation networks are emerging as a result of the international division of the innovation processes through (among others) international technological collaborations (Prato and Nepelski, 2012). Innovation networks are connecting industry, academic institutions, and public and nonprofit organizations with a global network of research scientists to manage intellectual property and provide innovative solutions to challenging problems (Heisey and Adelman, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%