Who captures value from science-based innovation? The distribution of benefits from GMR in the hard disk drive industry

Abstract

Hard disk drive industry a b s t r a c tWe analyze the discovery of giant magneto-resistance (GMR) and its development and commercialization by the global disk drive industry to answer the question of "Who captures the benefits from innovation in a global innovation system?" We assess the returns to the scientists, firms, and countries associated with GMR. We find that the French and German scientists that discovered GMR and their labs benefited by receiving the Nobel Prize and small licensing fees. The firm that first commercialized the technology, IBM, captured profits from selling hard disk drives and magnetic heads using GMR. Other hard disk drive and head manufacturers based in the U.S. and Japan were able to quickly assimilate the technology and catch up with IBM. France and Germany reaped limited returns due to the lack of domestic firms with the absorptive capacity to commercialize GMR. The U.S. and Japan benefited from the success of their firms in commercializing GMR, as did other countries which were part of the global value chains of those companies. Consumers and firms that incorporated hard drives in their products ultimately benefited from cheaper hard drives with greater capacity. These findings illustrate the importance of absorptive capacity at the firm and national level in capturing benefits from innovation. They also show that the benefits to first mover firms can be short-lived in a competitive industry with open transfer of knowledge and limited appropriability regimes. Finally, they show that the location of jobs and wages associated with innovative products depends on the structure of the global value chains of leading firms.

Does the Multiple-Participant Innovation Improve Regional Innovation Efficiency? A Study of China’s Regional Innovation Systems

“…Even though the revolution of institutions improves their exploration ability, sometimes there exists a gap between invention and innovation. In the case of giant magneto-resistance, invented by two famous scientists from two well-known universities, the idea was not transformed into an innovation outcome until 10 years' work from IBM's team; the reason for this summarized by the authors was mainly because of a lack of coordination with government and industry [33]. The above-mentioned cases prove that a local university's participation brings positive spillover to the local cluster and a lock-in of development occurs without correct interaction with government.…”

Quantitative Identification of Technological Discontinuities

“…When he discovered the GMR effect, Grunberg realized the high potential of application of the GMR effect to AMR sensors, because the structure of the GMR sensor was easily compatible with the AMR sensors (Binasch et al, 1989;Thompson, 2008) and applied for a patent. This patent has been acknowledged by all major firms in the magnetic information storage domain and earned more than 10 million dollars in licensing fees (Dedrick and Kraemer, 2015).…”

Duality or Specialization: The Innovation Performance and the Interaction between Science-Based Innovation and Technology-Based Innovation

“…Geographical cluster is defined as the area where the enterprise is located by using dummy variables, 0 is for the inland areas and the 1 is for coastal areas. The environment of industry has an important influence on the firm's innovation performance [34]. For example, the Silicon Valley is the model of the electronics industry, South Korea, China Taiwan and Southeast Asia followed by a secondary cluster.…”