No abstract

Previous studies have found that importing goods from R&D-intensive countries raises a country's productivity. In this paper, we investigate econometrically whether foreign direct investment (FDI) also transfers technology across borders. The data indicates that FDI transfers technology, but only in one direction: a country's productivity is increased if it invests in R&D-intensive foreign countries-particularly in recent years-but not if foreign R&D-intensive countries invest in it. Other findings of the paper are that the ratio of foreign-R&D benefits conveyed by outward FDI to foreign R&D benefits conveyed by imports is higher for large countries than it is for small ones, that failure to account for international R&D spillovers leads to upwardly biased estimates of the output elasticity of the domestic R&D capital stock, and that there are much larger transfers of technology from the United States to Japan than there are from Japan to the United States. © 2001 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Contrary to an accepted wisdom, this paper shows that cross-country variations in the number of patents per researcher do not only reflect differences in the propensity to patent but also signals differences in research productivity. We put forward and test an empirical model that formally accounts for the productivity and the propensity component of the R&D-patent relationship. The two components play an important role, as witnessed by the impact of several policies, including education, intellectual property and science and technology policies. Indicators based on domestic priority filings reflect research efforts and are primarily affected by varying propensities to patent. In contrast, international filings, especially triadic patents, rather capture variations in research productivity.Keywords: patent system; Patstat; priority filing, propensity to patent; R&D; research productivity; triadic Abstract Contrary to an accepted wisdom, this paper shows that cross-country variations in the number of patents per researcher do not only reflect differences in the propensity to patent but also signals differences in research productivity. We put forward and test an empirical model that formally accounts for the productivity and the propensity component of the R&D-patent relationship. The two components play an important role, as witnessed by the impact of several policies, including education, intellectual property and science and technology policies. Indicators based on domestic priority filings reflect research efforts and are primarily affected by varying propensities to patent. In contrast, international filings, especially triadic patents, rather capture variations in research productivity.