Keywords
patent analysis
Russia
technological development
technological specialization
technological resilience
How to Cite
Abstract
The paper discusses the technological specialization and patent portfolios of the Russian ‘technograds’ — the cities which are the key actors in contributing to the development of new technologies in the country.
A patent analysis used for the study allowed us to identify technological domains where these cities have a significant competitive advantage and high potential for further growth. According to the research-intensity of the domains prevailing in their technological specialization, the technograds might be divided into three categories: oriented towards mostly high technologies (Moscow, St Petersburg, Tomsk), low technologies (Krasnodar, Perm), and those with mixed specialization including both high and low tech (Voronezh, Ufa, Kazan, Novosibirsk, Ekaterinburg, and Samara).
To achieve the aim of the research, a new methodological approach was elaborated upon to analyze patent data for individual cities and other smaller geographical units. As a result, the paper might be of interest not only for practitioners and decision makers on the regional and municipal levels, but also for researchers in the fields of regional economics, economic geography, and economics of science, technology, and innovation.
References
Andersson R., Quigley J.M., Wilhelmsson M. (2005) Agglomeration and the special distribution of creativity // Regional Science. Vol. 84. № 3. Р. 445-464.
Archibugi D., Pianta M. (1992) Specialization and size of technological activities in industrial countries: The analysis of patent data // Research Policy. Vol. 21. № 1. P. 79-93.
Balland P.-A., Boschma R., Frenken K. (2015a) Proximity and Innovation: From Statics to Dynamics // Regional Studies. Vol. 49. № 6. P. 907-920.
Balland P.-A., Rigby D., Boschma R. (2015b) The technological resilience of US cities // Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society. Vol. 9. P. 167-184.
Boschma R. (2015) Towards an Evolutionary Perspective on Regional Resilience // Regional Studies. Vol. 49. № 5. P. 733-751.
Boschma R., Balland P.-A., Kogler D.F. (2014) Relatedness and technological change in cities: The rise and fall of technological knowledge in US metropolitan areas from 1981 to 2010 // Industrial and Corporate Change. Vol. 24. № 1. P. 223-250.
Cantwell J., Vertova G. (2004) Historical evolution of technological diversification // Research Policy. Vol. 33. P. 511-529.
Carlino G., Kerr W. (2014) Agglomeration and Innovation. Working Paper 15-007. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School. Режим доступа: http://real.wharton.upenn.edu/~duranton/Duranton_Papers/Handbook/Agglomeration_and_innovation.pdf, дата обращения 15.11.2018.
Cortright J., Mayer H. (2001) High Tech Specialization: A Comparison of High Technology Centers // Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution. Режим доступа: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/specialization.pdf, дата обращения 15.11.2018.
Dachs B., Mahlich J., Zahradnik G. (2007) The Technological Competencies of Korea's Firms: A Patent Analysis // Innovation and Technology in Korea: Challenges of a Newly Advanced Economy / Eds. J. Mahlich, W. Pascha. Heidelberg, NY: Physica-Verlag. P. 127-146.
Ejermo O. (2005) Technological diversity and Jacob's externality hypothesis revisited // Growth and Change. Vol. 36. № 2. P. 167-195.
Fleming L., Sorenson O. (2001) Technology as a complex adaptive system: Evidence from patent data // Research Policy. Vol. 30. P. 117-132.
Galindo-Rueda F., Verger F. (2016) OECD Taxonomy of Economic Activities Based on R&D Intensity. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Paper 2016/04. Paris: OECD.
Giannitsis T., Kager M. (2009) Technology and Specialization: Dilemmas, Options, Risks? Brussels: European Commission.
Glaeser E., Kallal H., Scheinkman J., Shleifer A. (1992) Growth in Cities // The Journal of Political Economy. Vol. 100. № 6. P. 1126-1152.
Grilliches Z. (1990) Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey // Journal of Economic Literature. Vol. 28. P. 1661-1707.
Ha S.H., Liu W., Cho H., Kim S.H. (2015) Technological advances in the fuel cell vehicle: Patent portfolio management // Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Vol. 100. P. 277-289.
Jacobs J. (1969) The Economy of Cities. New York: Random House.
Jacobs J. (1984) Cities and the Wealth of Nations: Principles of Economic Life. New York: Random House.
Jaffe A., Trajtenberg M., Henderson R. (1993) Geographical localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations // The Quarterly Journal of Economics. Vol. 108. № 3. P. 577-598.
Khramova E., Meissner D., Sagieva G. (2013) Statistical patent analysis indicators as a means of determining country technological specialization. HSE Working Paper. Series: Science, Technology and Innovation, WP BRP 09/STI/2013. Moscow: HSE. Режим доступа: https://www.hse.ru/data/2013/04/10/1297571825/09STI2013.pdf, дата обращения 10.11.2018.
Kogler D.F., Heimeriks G., Leydesdorff L. (2018) Patent portfolio analysis of cities: Statistics and maps of technological inventiveness // European Planning Studies. Vol. 26. № 11. P. 2256-2278.
Kogler D.F., Rigby D., Tucker I. (2013) Mapping Knowledge Space and Technological Relatedness in US Cities // European Planning Studies. Vol. 21. № 9. P. 1374-1391.
O'hUallachain B. (1999) Patent places: Size matters // Journal of Regional Science. Vol. 39. № 4. P. 613-636.
Patel P., Pavitt K. (1997) The technological competencies in the world's largest firms: Сomplex and path dependent, but not too much variety // Research Policy. Vol. 26. P. 141-156.
Pianta M., Meliciani V. (1996) Technological specialization and economic performance in OECD countries // Technology Analysis.
Rigby D. (2015) Technological relatedness and knowledge space: Entry and exit of US cities from patent classes // Regional Studies. Vol. 29. № 11. P. 1922-1937.
Schmoch U. (2008). Concept of a technology classification for country comparisons. Final Report to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research.
Strumsky D., Lobo J., van der Leeuw S. (2012) Using patent technology codes to study technological change // Economics of Innovation and New Technology. Vol. 21. № 3. P. 267-286.
Van Looy B., Vereyen C., Schmoch U. (2014) Patent Statistics: Concordance IPC V8 P. NACE Rev.2. Paris: Eurostat.
Vlckova J., Kasprikova N., Vlckova M. (2018) Technological relatedness, knowledge space and smart specialization: The case of Germany // Moravian Geographical Reports. Vol. 26. № 2. P. 95-108.
Xia L., Hu J.-Y. (2014) Analysis of the relationship between specialization and innovation of technology in Chinese cities // Applied Mechanics and Materials. Vol. 522-524. P. 1577-1580.
Гохберг Л.М. (2003) Статистика науки. М.: ТЕИС.
Роспатент (2018) Отчет о деятельности Роспатента за 2017 г. M.: Роспатент.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.