首页> 外文期刊>Scientometrics >Mapping inventive activity and technological change through patent analysis: A case study of India and China
【24h】

Mapping inventive activity and technological change through patent analysis: A case study of India and China

机译:通过专利分析绘制发明活动和技术变化图:以印度和中国为例

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The characteristics of Indian and Chinese patenting activity in the US patent system are examined by delineating two categories of patents; ‘nationally assigned’, and ‘invented not nationally assigned’ patents (not-nationally assigned patents in short). Further within the above two categories, patents are distinguished and analysed in terms of patent types: utility, design, and plant patents. Indian patents are mainly of utility type whereas China's activity falls in both utility and design.In the ‘nationally assigned’ patents, the different types of institutions involved and linkages are much higher for China. However, ‘not-nationally assigned’ patents of both the countries are dominated by industry and inter-institutional collaborations are sparse. Patents addressing technology sectors (analysis based on utility patents) do not exhibit major differences between the two categories in Chinese patents and address with varying degree all technology sectors. Unlike China, India's ‘nationally assigned’ patents are concentrated in chemical and drugs & medical whereas their ‘not-nationally assigned’ patents are similar to that of China in addressing technology sectors. In design patents, Chinese ‘nationally assigned’ patents mainly cover ornamental design of lighting equipments whereas their ‘not-nationally assigned’ patents are mainly in design equipment for production, distribution or transformation of energy. Further, few firms are active in design patents in both the categories. India's design activity is insignificant in both the categories. The paper concludes by examining the results in the policy context.
机译:通过划定两类专利,考察了印度和中国在美国专利制度中的专利活动特征。 “国家转让”和“发明未国家转让”专利(简称非国家转让专利)。此外,在上述两个类别中,根据专利类型对专利进行区分和分析:实用新型,外观设计和植物专利。印度的专利主要是实用新型的,而中国的活动既属于实用新型的,也属于外观设计的专利。在“国家分配”专利中,涉及的不同类型的机构和联系对中国来说要高得多。但是,这两个国家的“非国家分配”专利都由行业主导,机构间的合作稀疏。涉及技术领域的专利(基于实用专利的分析)在中国专利的两类专利之间并没有表现出主要差异,而是对所有技术领域都进行了不同程度的处理。与中国不同,印度的“国家分配”专利集中在化学,药品和医疗领域,而印度的“非国家分配”专利在技术领域与中国相似。在设计专利中,中国的“国家分配”专利主要涵盖照明设备的装饰设计,而其“非国家分配”专利则主要涉及用于生产,分配或转化能源的设计设备。此外,在这两个类别中,很少有公司活跃于外观设计专利中。印度的设计活动在这两个类别中都是微不足道的。本文的结论是在政策背景下研究结果。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Scientometrics》 |2004年第3期|361-381|共21页
  • 作者

    Sujit Bhattacharya;

  • 作者单位

    NISTADS National Institute of Science, Technology and Development Studies, New Delhi, (India);

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《化学文摘》(CA);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号