This paper offers a framework for examining technology spillovers extant between research teams. A policy-relevant finding is that firms' research organizations must strive to absorb foreign technology. The result of a technology spillover imbalance or asymmetry is that from a country or policy perspective, even for countries sustaining a superior number of world-class research teams, a comparative technological advantage may be lost if the domestic R/D teams fail to absorb and exploit technology as aggressively as foreign rivals.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BasbergB. J., 1987, “Patents and the Measurement of Technological Change: A Survey of the Literature,”Research Policy, 16, pp. 131–141.
2.
BrandinD. H. and HarrisonM. A., 1987, The Technology War: A Case for Competitiveness (John Wiley and Sons, New York) p. 24.
3.
CharlesD., 1989, “Congress Attacks Foreign Research Ties,” in Perspectives, Research-Technology Management, Sept-Oct, p. 4.
4.
CormanorW. S. and SchererF. M., 1969, “Patents Statistics as a Measure of Technical Change,”Journal of Political Economy, 77, pp. 392–398.
5.
CutlerR. S., 1989, “A Survey of High-Technology Transfer Practices in Japan and in the United States,”Interfaces, 19, pp. 67–77.
6.
GoldB., 1981, “Technological Diffusion in Industry: Research Needs and Shortcomings,”The Journal of Industrial Economics, 29, pp. 247–269.
7.
GruberW. Mehta D. and VernonR., 1966, “The R/D Factor in International Trade and Investment of United States Industries,”Journal of Political Economy.
8.
HerbertE., 1989, “Japanese R and D in the United States,”Research-Technology Management, 32, pp. 11–20.
9.
JaffeA., 1985, “Quantifying the Effects of Technological Opportunity and Research Spillovers in Industrial Innovation,”Ph.D. Thesis, Harvard University.
10.
JaffeA., 1986, “Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R/D: Evidence for Firms Patents, Profits and Market Value,”American Economic Review, 76, pp. 984–1001.
11.
KackerR. N. and TsuiK. L., 1990, “Interaction Graphs: Graphical Aids for Planning Experiments,”Journal of Quality Technology, 22, pp. 1–14.
12.
MansfieldE., 1988a, “Industrial R/D in Japan and the United States: A Comparative Study,”American Economic Review, 78, pp. 223–228.
13.
MansfieldE., 1988b, “The Speed and Cost of Industrial Innovations in Japan and the United States: External vs Internal Technology,”Management Science, October, pp. 1157–1168.
14.
MansfieldE., 1988b, “Industrial Innovation in Japan and the United Stats,”Science, 241, pp. 1769–1774.
15.
MIT Commission in Industrial Productivity, 1989, Made in America: Regaining the Productive Edge, (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.).
16.
NarinF., 1976, Evaluation Bibliometrics: The Use of Patent Statistics and Citation Analysis in the Evaluation of Scientific Activity) Contract NSF C-627, National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C.).
17.
National Academy of Engineers, 1987, Strengthening U.S. Engineering Through International Cooperation (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.).
18.
PosnerM. V., 1961, “International Trade and Technical Change,”Oxford Economic Papers.
19.
SteeleM. J., 1989, “Models for Managing Secrets,”Management Science, 35, pp. 240–248.
20.
VernonR., 1966, “International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle,”Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80.
