跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(35.175.191.36) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/07/31 23:54
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:徐毓伶
研究生(外文):Yu-Ling Hsu
論文名稱:不同專利來源地區的經濟效益分析
論文名稱(外文):Comparison of different sources of patent granted on economic effect
指導教授:曾俊堯曾俊堯引用關係
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:東海大學
系所名稱:企業管理學系碩士班
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:企業管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2007
畢業學年度:95
語文別:中文
論文頁數:72
中文關鍵詞:專利專利數專利權Tobin’s Q美國專利商標局歐洲專利局日本專利局
外文關鍵詞:patentnumber of patentspatent rightTobin’s QUSPTOEPOJPO
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:497
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
隨著知識經濟的來臨,創新的角色在知識經濟日亦重要,像專利權、研究發展等有關創新資本的研究,也漸逐漸受到學術界所重視。然而國內相關研究都只著重於國內企業專利數對經濟效益及公司價值的影響。國外少數針對企業不同專利地區來源之經濟效益的影響;由於專利權的保護是有受限於區域性及付費機制考量,因此本研究針對不同跨國地區的專利進行經濟效益之探討。主要目的為找出企業可以僅對於效益最高的地區申請專利,以達企業之成本效益原則。
本研究主要研究範圍選至美國、日本及歐洲地區這三大具有專利權威來源地區之企業專利獲取數,並且針對這三大地區專利來源的經濟效益之研究。研究對象採用美國工業雜誌(Industry Week, IW)的2005年全球製造業1000大排名之企業。其中企業母國是屬於美國、日本及歐洲地區共749家。針對749家蒐集專利與相關財務資料。
研究模式以知識生產函數建立,探討不同地區專利來源之經濟效益的影響。利用固定效果模式對追蹤資料作相關的估計,其實證結果可以發現1.全部公司在美國地區及歐洲地區的專利獲得之經濟效益有正向顯著性的影響。2.全部公司在歐洲地區所獲專利的經濟效益都有顯著性大於美國地區及日本地區。3.美國公司或日本公司在國內所取得之專利產生之的經濟效益以銷貨收入衡量都有正向與顯著影響。而歐洲公司在國內所取得之專利產生之經濟效益;在銷貨收入無法張顯出其效益;但以衡量無形資產的指標為市價淨值比及Tobin’s Q的經濟效益有顯著性關係。4.美國公司及歐洲公司在不同地區所獲專利的經濟效益可以發現,在歐洲地區所獲專利的經濟效益都有顯著性大於美國地區及日本地區。
關鍵詞:專利、專利數、專利權、Tobin’s Q、美國專利商標局、歐洲專利局及日本專利局。
Innovation has played an important role since knowledge economy came to the world, and the academic world has also paid much attention to the research about innovation capital, such as patent and research development. However, the researches in our nation only emphasize on the influence of the number of patents in domestic industries on economic utility and company value. In foreign countries, there are only some researches about the influences of the patents from different areas on economic utility. The protection of patent is limited to regionalism and the mechanism of payment, so the study focuses on the patents from different areas to explore the level of economic utility. The purpose of the study is to help companies find some area to apply for patents which could produce the highest utility, and this way corresponds to the cost utility.
The boundary of the study contains the United States, Japan, and Europe, which are the authorities of the field of patent. The study retrieves the number of patents that the companies have gained and then explores the economic utility. The participants are taken from the top 1000 global manufacturers in Industry Week in America. There are 749 companies which belong to the United States, Japan, and Europe, so the study collects the information about patent and finance related to those companies.
The research model is built by knowledge production function to study the influence of the patents from different areas on economic utility. The study uses fixed effect model to estimate the panel data, and it discovers that: Firstly. All the companies which have patents in the United States and Europe have positive significant economic utility. Secondly, the economic utility gained from the patents in Europe is significantly higher than those in the United States and Japan. Thirdly, the economic utility measured by sales revenue in American and Japanese company which gained patents in their own countries has positive significant effect, except for Europe, but the measures of price-to-book ratio and Tobin’s Q that are indicators of intangible assets significantly have results. Fourthly, in the point of American and European companies’ patents gained from different areas, the patents gained from Europe could produce significantly higher economic utility than those in the United States and Japan.
Key word: patent, number of patents, patent right, Tobin’s Q USPTO EPO and JPO.
目錄
摘要 I
ABSTRACT II
目錄 III
圖次 V
表次 VI
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與研究動機 1
第二節 研究問題與研究目的 3
第三節 研究範圍與研究對象 4
第四節 研究流程 5
第二章 文獻探討 6
第一節 專利權定義、概念及用途 6
第二節 專利指標 9
第三節 專利權經濟效益的衡量 17
第四節 專利指標與公司經濟效益之間的關係 19
第五節 各國專利權制度的比較 27
第三章 研究設計 29
第一節 研究架構 29
第二節 研究假設 30
第三節 樣本設計與資料結構 34
第四節 研究模式 36
第五節 統計方法 37
第六節 研究變數的定義與資料來源 40
第四章 實證結果 42
第一節 全體公司基本敘述統計分析 42
第三節 公司所屬國不同從不同地區所獲得專利之比較分析 44
第三節 企業從美國、日本及歐洲地區所獲得之專利之間的關係 46
第四節 全部公司由不同地區所獲取得專利之經濟效益的比較 47
第五節 相同地區公司在不同地區所獲專利經濟效益之比較分析 50
第五章 結論與建議 56
第一節 研究結論 56
第二節 理論貢獻與實務意涵 60
第三節 研究限制與後續研究的建議 61
參考文獻 62
附錄一 樣本公司 66
參考文獻
中文部份:
1.何孝元(1971),「民法概要」,三民書局。
2.吳美娟(2002),「台灣IC製造業製程技術能力、專利權與績效關係之研究」,國立雲林科技大學企業管理系碩士論文。
3.吳惠芬(2005),「研發支出及專利質量與公司市場價值關聯性之研究-產業間之比較觀點」,中原大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
4.巫嘉哲(2004),「專利指標與公司無形資產價值關係之研究-以生技製藥產業為例」,元智大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
5.張愛萍(1999),「研究發展與技術引進-上市電子公司panel data之實證研究」,國立中央大學產業經濟研究所碩士論文。
6.陳哲宏、陳逸南、謝銘洋、徐宏昇(1994),「專利法解讀」,月旦出版社。
7.陳達仁、黃慕萱、蔣禮芸及李秀朗(May 2003),「各國專利公報比較之研究」,圖書與資訊學刊,第45期,頁24-36 ISSN1023-2125。
8.曾俊堯(2003),「創新資本對經營績效與公司價值影響之研究」,國立臺北大學企業管理學系博士論文。
9.曾俊堯與古永嘉(2004),「智慧資本與公司無形價值關係之研究─以台灣製造業為例」,管理與系統,第11卷,第1期。
10.黃秉鈞、葉忠福(2005),創新管理:創意發明與專利保實務,台北:揚智文化。
11.黃淑娟(2004),「影響台灣地產險公司現金持有之決定因素:動態現金持有模型之實證研究」,真理大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
12.葉玉慧(2003),「專利權、創新投資與公司價值創造關係之研究─以研發投資宣告為例」,國立成功大學國際企業研究所碩士論文。
13.劉昭志(2004),「智慧資產評價、融資彈性與降低銀行放款風險之研究-以中小企業為例」,國立中正大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。

英文部份:
1.Amir, Eli; Lev, Baruch. (1996) “Value-relevance of nonfinancial information: The wireless communications industry”, Journal of Accounting & Economics, Vol. 22, No. 1-3, pp.3-30.
2.Austin, D.H., (1993) “An event-study approach to measuring innovative output: the case of biotechnology”, American Economic Review, Vol. 83, No. 2, pp.253–258.
3.Austin, D.H., (1995) “The power of patents.”, Resources, Vol. 119, pp.2–5.
4.Bierly, P. and Chakrabarti, A. (1996) “Generic knowledge strategies in the U.S pharmaceutical industry”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17, pp.123-135.
5.Chih-Hai Yang and Jong-Rong Chen (2003) “Innovation and Market Value in Newly-Industrialized Countries: The Case of Taiwanese Electronics Firms.” Asian Economic Journal, Vol. 17, No.2, pp.205-220.
6.Chung, K. H. and Pruitt, S. W., (1994)“A Simple Approximation of Tobin’s q” , Financial Management, Vol.23, pp.70-74.
7.Chun-Yao Tseng (2007) “Innovation Quality in the Automobile Industry – Measurement Indicators and Performance Implications. ”, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol37, No. 1-2, pp162-177..
8.Comanor, W.S., Scherer, F.M., (1969). “Patent statistics as a measure of technical change.”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 77, pp.392–398.
9.Deng, Z. and Lev, B. and Narin, F.(1999) “Science and Technology and Predictors of Stock Performance? ” Financial Analysts Journal, May/June, pp.20-32.
10.Edvinsson, L. and Malone, M.S., Intellectual Capital, London: Piatkus, 1997.
11.Ernst, H. (1998) “Patent portfolios for strategic R&D planning? ”, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, Vol. 15, pp.279-308.
12.Ernst, H. (2001) “Patent applications and subsequent changes of performance: evidence from time-series cross-section analyses on the firm level”, Research Policy, Vol. 30, pp.143-157.
13.Ernst, H. (2003) “Patent Information for Strategic Technology Management”, World Patent Information, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp.233-242.
14.Ernst, H., (1995) “Patenting strategies in the German mechanical engineering industry and their relationship to firm performance.”, Technovation, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp.225–240.
15.Fung, M. K. and Chow, W. W. (2003) “Identification of technological structures using patent statistics”, Economic Innovation and New Technology, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp.293-313.
16.Griliches, Z., (1990) “Patent statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey. “ Journal of accounting Research, Vol. 37, pp.319-352.
17.Griliches, Z., Hall, B.H., Pakes, A., (1991) “R&D, patents, and market value revisited: is there a second _technological opportunity_ factor?”, Economies of Innovation and New Technology, Vol. 1, pp.183–201.
18.Grupp, H. and Schmooh, U. (1999),. “Patent statistics in the age of globalization: new legal procedures, new analytical methods, new economic interpretation,” Research policy, Vol. 28, pp.377-396.
19.Guthrie, J. and Petty, R., “Intellectual Capital: Australian Annual Reporting Practices,” Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol.1, No.3, 2000, pp.241-251.
20.Hall B. H. (1999) Innovation and market value, NBER Working Paper (# 6984, Cambridge, MA.
21.Hall B. H., Jaffe A., Trajtenberg M. (2000), Market value and patent citations: A First Look, University of California at Berekeley, Department of Economics Working Paper # 00-277, Berkeley, CA
22.Hall, B.H., Jaffe, A., Trajtenberg, M., (2005). “Market value and patent citations.RAND” Journal of Economics 36(1), pp.16-38.
23.Hicks, D. Bl, Breitzman, T., Olivastro, D. and Hamilton, K.(2001), “The changing composition of innovative activity in the US-a portrait based on patent analysis”, Research policy, 30, pp.681-703.
24.Hirschey, M. and Richardson, V.J. (2001),”Valuation effects of patent quality: a comparison for Japanese and U.S. firms”, Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Vol. 9, No.1, pp.65-82.
25.James Tobin (1981) “The monetarist counter-revolution today- an appraisal.”, The Economic Journal, Vol. 91, No. 361, pp.29-42.
26.Lerner, J. (1994) “The importance of patent scope: an empirical analysis”, The Rand Journal of Economics, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp.319-333.
27.Narin, F., Noma, E., Perry, R., (1987) “Patents as indicators of corporate technological strength.”, Research Policy, Vol. 16, pp.143–155.
28.Pike, S., Rylander, A. and Ross, G., (2002)“Intellectual Capital Management and Disclosure,” In Choo, C.w. and Bontis, N.(Eds)The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge, Oxford University Press, New Youk.
29.Pulic, A., (1998) “Measuring the Performance of Intellectual Potential in Knowledge Economy.” Available online:http://www.measuring-ip.at/Opapers/Pulic/Vaictxt.vaictxt.html,.
30.Roos, G., Roos, J., Dragonetti, N. and Edvinsson, L. (1997) Intellectual Capital; Navigating in the New Business Landscape, New York University Press, New York, NY.
31.Scherer, F.M., (1965) “Corporate inventive output, profits and growth.”, The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 73, No. 3, pp.290–297.
32.Schneider, U., “The Austrian Approach to the Measurement of Intellectual Potential,” available online: http://www.measuirng-ip.at/opapers/Schneider/Canada/theoreticalframework.htm 1999.
33.Schoenecker, T. and Swanson, L.(2002) “Indicators of Firm Technological Capability:Validity and Performance Implications”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 49, No. 1, pp.36-44.
34.Shane, H, (1993) “Patent citations as an indicator of the value of intangible assets in the semiconductor ndustry.” Disseration, Universitiy of Pennsylvania.
35.Stewart, T.A. (1997), Intellectual Capital; The New Wealth of Organizations, Doubleday/Currency, New York, NY.
36.Sveiby, K., (2001) “Methods for measuring Intangible Assets,” available online: http://www.sveiby.com.au/BookContents.html.
37.Sveiby, K.E. (1997), The New Organizational Wealth: Managing & Measuring Knowledge-Based Assets, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco, CA.
38.Thomas, P. and McMillan, G. S. (2001) “Using science and technology indicators to manage R&D as a business”, Engineering Management Journal, Sep, pp.9-14.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top