Evaluation of citations of Russian publications in the world patent documents

12+ Submit an article

Received: 01.06.2017 Published: 01.06.2017

DOI: 10.22394/2410-132X-2017-3-1-13-20

Abstract

According to the European patent agency, 15% of the references in the patent search reports are so-called non-patent literature (NPL), which refer to scientific publications not related to the patents. An included overview of research proves that a high level of NPL citation indicates a research intensity of technical solutions proposed by the patent. There has been evaluated the level of citation of Russian scientific publications, indexed in Scopus, in patent documents with cross-country comparisons. It has shown by the indicator «number of citations of national publications patents» Russian Federation is almost 87 times inferior to the United States and more than ten times worse than the performance of Japan, China, and Germany. The indicator «number of citations in patents per 1,000 publications» for Russia is (4,9) less than for Turkish (5,4), Argentine (8,5), Mexican (7,0) and South African publications (7,6). Publications of Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt also have a substantially higher value of this indicator: with 8,0 to 15,3 and 9,5, respectively.

Keywords

How to cite

Для цитирования:

ЦВЕТКОВА Л.А. ОЦЕНКА ЦИТИРУЕМОСТИ РОССИЙСКИХ ПУБЛИКАЦИЙ В ПАТЕНТНЫХ ДОКУМЕНТАХ МИРА // Экономика науки. 2017. Т. 3, № 1. С. 13–20. https://doi.org/10.22394/2410-132X-2017-3-1-13-20

For citation:

Tsvetkova L.A. Evaluation of citations of Russian publications in the world patent documents // Economics of Science. 2017. Vol. 3, no. 1. P. 13–20. https://doi.org/10.22394/2410-132X-2017-3-1-13-20

How to Cite

Tsvetkova L.A. Evaluation of citations of Russian publications in the world patent documents // Economics of Science. 2017. Vol. 3, no. 1. P. 13–20. https://doi.org/10.22394/2410-132X-2017-3-1-13-20

References

  1. Резюме аналитического материала в отношении рекомендации 8 Комитета по развитию и интеллектуальной собственности Всемирной организации интеллектуальной собственности (2010) / WIPO. Женева, 22–26 ноября 2010 г. http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/mdocs/ru/cdip_3/cdip_3_inf_2_study_iii_inf_1.pdf.
  2. Narin F., Hamilton K. S., Olivastro D. (1997) The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science // Research Policy. № 26. P. 317–330.
  3. Callaert J., Van Looy B., Verbeek A., Debackere K., Thijs B. (2006) Traces of Prior Art: An Analysis of Non-Patent References Found in Patent Documents // Scientometrics. № 69(1). Р. 3–20.
  4. Cassiman B., Veugelers R., Zuniga P. (2008) In search of performance effects of (in)direct industry science link // Industrial and Corporate Change. № 17(4). Р. 611–646.
  5. Branstetter L. (2005) Exploring the Link between Academic Science and Industrial Innovatio // Annals of Economics and Statistics. № 79/80. Р. 119–142.
  6. Harhoff D., Scherer F. M., Vopel K. (2003) Citations, Family Size, Opposition and the Value of Patent Rights // Research Policy. № 32. Р. 1343–1363.
  7. Meyer M. (2006) Are Patenting Scientists the Better Scholars? An Exploratory Comparison of Inventorauthors with their Non-inventing Peers in Nanoscience and Technology // Research Policy. № 35. Р. 1646–1662.
  8. Игами М., Оказаки Т. (2008) Современное состояние сферы нанотехнологий: анализ патентов // Форсайт. № 4(8). С. 22–31.
  9. Enquiries Into Intellectual Property’s Economic Impact (2015) / OECD. 2015. http://www.oecd. org/sti/ieconomy/KBC2-IP.Final.pdf.
  10. GlobalR@Dfundingforecast (2016) / IRI. 2016. https://www.iriweb.org/sites/default/files/2016GlobalR%26DFundingForecast_2.pdf.

Articles

All articles