Knowledge flows in clusters and innovation networks : the case of canadian biotechnology and nanotechnology

Literature review -- Clusters -- Localized knowledge spillovers -- Innovation networks -- Research questions, objectives and methodology -- Research objectives -- Methodology -- The localisation versus urbanisation controversy -- Basic results -- Indicators for Marshall and Jacobs externalities -- Performance measures -- Other circumstances and conditions of analysis -- Conclusions -- Innovation in Canadian biotechnology clusters -- Canadian biotechnology clusters -- Patent ownership in Canadian biotechnology clusters -- Biotechnology field specialization in clusters -- Collaboration in Canadian biotechnology based on patent co-assignment -- Geographical aspects of collaboration -- International collaborations -- Inter-cluster collaborations -- Distance-based analysis of all out-of-cluster collaborations -- Comparison of biotechnology and nanotechnology innovation networks -- Canadian biotechnology and nanotechnology clusters -- Collaboration patterns in Canadian biotechnology and nanotechnology -- Local collaboration in the cluster-based subnetworks -- Gatekeepers of Canadian biotechnology clusters -- Geographical and cognitive proximity -- Collaboration in geographical space -- Collaboration in technological space -- In a search of the gatekeepers -- Star scientists in Canadian biotechnology network -- Identification of the star scientists in Canadian biotechnology -- The positions of the star and QQ-star scientists in the network -- Conclusions and recommendations

Detecting Emerging Technologies in Artificial Intelligence Scientific Ecosystem Using an Indicator-based Model

Early identification of emergent topics is of eminent importance due to their potential impacts on society. There are many methods for detecting emerging terms and topics, all with advantages and drawbacks. However, there is no consensus about the attributes and indicators of emergence. In this study, we evaluate emerging topic detection in the field of artificial intelligence using a new method to evaluate emergence. We also introduce two new attributes of collaboration and technological impact which can help us use both paper and patent information simultaneously. Our results confirm that the proposed new method can successfully identify the emerging topics in the period of the study. Moreover, this new method can provide us with the score of each attribute and a final emergence score, which enable us to rank the emerging topics with their emergence scores and each attribute score

Impacts of collaboration and network indicators on patent quality: The case of Canadian nanotechnology innovation

This article studies the impact of collaboration and co-inventorship network characteristics of Canadian nanotechnology inventors on the quality of their inventions. We investigate the impact of four types of variables on patent quality, using the number of claims as a proxy for quality: (a) the presence of highly central inventors; (b) the presence of star inventors; (c) repeated collaboration; (d) international collaboration. We show that the presence of more central inventors and of stars in the research team has a positive influence on patent quality, while repeated collaboration has a negative impact. Patents owned by foreign organisations, controlling for whether assignees are firm, yields patents of higher quality

Canadian nanotechnology innovation networks: intra-cluster, inter-cluster and foreign collaboration

This article studies innovation in Canadian nanotechnology clusters and networks using data from the intersection of the Nanobank database for Canadian inventors with that obtained from a search strategy modified from Porter et al. (2006). Using this selection of patents, we identify, analyze and characterize 8 Canadian nanotechnology clusters. We then construct the Canadian nanotechnology innovation network and describe the collaborative behaviour of the inventors. Most collaborative activity takes place inside nanotechnology clusters and Canadian inventors who decide to build cooperation ties outside their clusters most often prefer to do so with collaborators from abroad, mainly from the USA. A distance-based analysis confirms an important role of the geographical proximity when searching for a cooperation partner. Nevertheless, this importance significantly decreases when no partners are found within 600 km. Very distant or overseas collaborations are then preferred while the mid-range distance options are overlooked

Who's right, Marshall or Jacobs? The localization versus urbanization debate

A large amount of literature provides empirical evidence in support of Marshall or Jacobs theories regarding the specialization or diversity effects on the economic performance of regions. This paper surveys these scholarly contributions and summarizes their results according to their similarities and differences. The reviewed empirical work presents a diverse picture of possible conditions and circumstances under which each kind of externalities could be at work. The wide breadth of findings is generally not explained by differences in the strength of agglomeration forces across industries, countries or time periods, but by measurement and methodological issues. The levels of industrial and geographical aggregation together with the choice of performance measures, specialization and diversity indicators are the main causes for the lack of resolution in the debate. The 3-digit industrial classification seems to be the level at which MAR and Jacobs effects are undistinguishable from one another, and this is often exacerbated by a high level of geographical aggregation

Who owns the intellectual property and where? The case of Canadian biotechnology

In this paper, we examine biotechnology innovation in Canada. We make a profile description of Canadian biotechnology in the 12 most important agglomerations in terms of patenting quality and quantity, the nature of biotechnology activities, the properties of the assignees and their propensity to collaborate. The analysis of patent-owning organisations reveals a crucial role of the publicly funded research in Canadian biotechnology. We identify and compare the importance of well developed intellectual property policies and functioning technology transfer offices at universities. We find evidence of only very little cooperation that would result in the co-assignment of the intellectual property among organisations

Is Canadian intellectual property leaving Canada? A study of nanotechnology patenting

In this study we explore the patent ownership for the innovations created by Canadian nanotechnology inventors. We find that although there is a great innovative potential and inventive productivity among Canadian researchers, a lot of the intellectual property actually leaves the country: Around 50% of the nanotechnology patents invented by Canadian inventors are owned by foreign assignees. We also note the predominance of private companies among the patent owners. Almost one-third of all the Canadian-invented nanotechnology patents is assigned to a single American firm, Xerox Corporation. Furthermore, we explore the role of Canadian nanotechnology star inventors. The results show that the fruits of their great inventive productivity are collected outside Canada

Collaboration spaces in Canadian biotechnology: A search for gatekeepers

The paper studies the network of Canadian biotechnology co-inventors and compares the structure of the links between inventors within, and outside of, the cluster. Two types of proximity between individuals are compared: within cluster co-invention refers to geographical proximity while co-patenting links (network component) represent social proximity between inventors of an epistemic community. We show that the cluster-based subnetworks are more fragmented and less centralized than the network components. The paper then proposes two indicators measuring an inventor's importance as a gatekeeper, i.e. an individual at the cluster's frontier responsible for the inflow of the external knowledge to the cluster

Bibliometric analysis of the Impact of NSERC Funding on Scientific Development of the Funded Researchers

Funding has been acknowledged in many articles to be the main determinant of scientific development and it is viewed as an important factor that has a significant effect on the scientific output since it provides a better access to the research resources. Effective funding allocation to highly innovative and original research enables a country to remain at the frontier in the scientific fields, which in the 21st century seems to be crucial for improving a nation’s position world-wide. Every year, a considerable amount of money is being invested on research, mainly in the form of funding allocated to universities and research institutes, in order to improve the scientific potential of the country. Hence, to better distribute the available funds and to set the most proper R&D investment strategies for the future, evaluation of the productivity of the researchers in respect to the amount of funding that they have received and the impact of such funding is crucial. In this paper, using the data on 15 years of journal publications of the NSERC funded researchers and by means of bibliometric analysis , the scientific development of the funded researchers and their scientific collaboration patterns will be investigated in the period of 1996-2010. According to the results it seems that there is a positive relation between the average level of funding and quantity and quality of the scientific output. In addition, whenever funding allocated to the researchers has increased, the number of co-authors per paper has also augmented. Hence, the increase in the level of funding may enable researchers to get involved in larger projects and/or scientific teams and increase their scientific output respectively

Star scientists and their positions in the Canadian biotechnology network

This paper identifies the prominent inventors (star scientists) in the Canadian biotechnology co-inventorship network by taking into consideration either only patent quantity or both patent quantity and quality. The paper studies the positions of these stars in the network structure and results show that inventors with a higher number of patents assume more central positions in the network: they have more collaborators, enjoy better access to information and also have greater control over knowledge flows in the network. Nevertheless, their network positions do not have higher levels of local cliquishness, suggesting that a clustered local neighbourhood may not have any positive impact on a scientist's innovative productivity. We also find that the majority of the stars play a knowledge gatekeeping role – nurturing clusters with knowledge originating outside. Finally, we examine and discuss the network dynamics and the role of these stars in the information transmission efficiency