Abstract
The ongoing debate on the EU’s economic security is creating a cautious attitude towards cooperation with third countries, including joint innovation. Yet, in particular for technologies considered critical, a regular cross-border exchange of knowledge and ideas is indispensable for innovation success. By drawing on comprehensive global patent data, this article investigates patterns of EU research cooperation for six critical technology fields: advanced materials, AI, biotechnologies, connectivity, energy and semiconductor technologies. In terms of the extent of patenting activity, the EU does not possess comparative technological advantages in any of the technology fields investigated. At the same time, EU patents resulting from research cooperations with third countries received a significantly higher number of citations than those with purely domestic inventors. To optimally exploit the benefits of international research collaboration, the EU should develop a dedicated technology cooperation strategy. It should involve a smart diversification of research partners with focus on Japan and South Korea, the integration of cooperation partners into internal research support schemes and the merging of bilateral partnerships to plurilateral technology clubs.
Literatur
ATI (2021), Advanced Technologies for Industry – Methodological report, Indicator framework and data calculations, September 2021.Search in Google Scholar
Australien/Europäische Union (1994), Agreement relating to scientific and technical cooperation between the European Community and Australia, OJ L 188, 22.7.1994, S. 18 – 25.Search in Google Scholar
Caloghirou, Yannis, Hondroyiannis, George und Nicholas S. Vonortas (2003), „The performance of research partnerships“, Managerial and Decision Economics, Jg. 24, Heft 2, S. 85–99.10.1002/mde.1087Search in Google Scholar
COST (2024), Growing ideas through networks, European Cooperation in Science and Technology.Search in Google Scholar
Edler, Jakob, Blind, Knut, Kroll, Henning und Torben Schubert (2023), „Technology sovereignty as an emerging frame for innovation policy“, Research Policy, Jg. 52, Heft 6, S. 104765.10.1016/j.respol.2023.104765Search in Google Scholar
EPO (2024), PATSTAT – Backbone dataset for statistical analysis, European Patent Office.Search in Google Scholar
Europäische Kommission (2021), EU-US launch Trade and Technology Council to lead values-based global digital transformation, Press Release, 15 June 2021.Search in Google Scholar
Europäische Kommission (2023a), Joint Communication to the European Parliament, the European Council and the Council on „European Economic Security Strategy“, JOIN(2023) 20 final.Search in Google Scholar
Europäische Kommission (2023b), Commission Recommendation of 3.10.2023 on critical technology areas for the EU’s economic security for further risk assessment with Member States, COM(2023) 6689 final.Search in Google Scholar
Europäische Kommission (2024a), Proposal for a Council Recommendation on enhancing research security, COM(2024) 26 final.Search in Google Scholar
Europäische Kommission (2024b), Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the screening of foreign investments in the Union and repealing Regulation (EU) 2019/452 of the European Parliament and of the Council, COM(2024) 23 final.Search in Google Scholar
Europäische Kommission (2024c), Horizon Europe, Research and Innovation.Search in Google Scholar
Europäische Union (2011), Agreement between the European Community and the Government of Japan on cooperation in science and technology, OJ L 90, 06.04.2011, S. 2–7.Search in Google Scholar
Europäische Union (2024), EU-US Trade and Technology Council 2021–24. Factsheet.Search in Google Scholar
Europäische Union/Japan (2018), Strategic Partnership Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Japan, of the other part, OJ L 216, 24.8.2018, S. 4–22.Search in Google Scholar
Europäische Union/Kanada (2016), Strategic Partnership Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Canada, of the other part, OJ L 329, 03.12.2016, S. 45–65.Search in Google Scholar
Europäische Union/Republik Korea (2022), European Union-Republic of Korea Digital Partnership.Search in Google Scholar
Friedrichs, Steffi und Brigitte van Beuzekom (2018), Revised proposal for the revision of the statistical definitions of biotechnology and nanotechnology, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, 2018/01, OECD Publishing, Paris.Search in Google Scholar
Georghiou, Luke (1998), „Global cooperation in research“, Research Policy, Jg. 27, Heft 6, S. 611–626.10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00054-7Search in Google Scholar
Grammes, Nadja, Millenaar, Dominic, Fehlmann, Tobias, Kern, Fabian, Böhm, Michael, Mahfoud, Felix und Andreas Keller (2020), „Research output and international cooperation among countries during the COVID-19 pandemic: scientometric analysis“, Journal of Medical Internet Research, Jg. 22, Heft 12, S. e24514.10.2196/24514Search in Google Scholar
Hall, Brownyn H., Link, Abert N. und John T. Scott (2003), „Universities as research partners“, Review of Economics and Statistics, Jg. 85, Heft 2, S. 485–491.10.1162/rest.2003.85.2.485Search in Google Scholar
Hagedoorn, John, Link, Albert N. und Nicholas S. Vonortas (2000), „Research partnerships“, Research Policy, Jg. 29, Heft 4, S. 567–586.10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00090-6Search in Google Scholar
Harrison, Jeffrey S., Hitt, Michael A., Hoskisson, Robert E. und R. Duane Ireland (2001), „Resource complementarity in business combinations: Extending the logic to organizational alliances“, Journal of Management, Jg. 27, Heft 6, S. 679–690.10.1177/014920630102700605Search in Google Scholar
Katz, Michael L. (1986), „An analysis of cooperative research and development“, The RAND Journal of Economics, Jg. 17, Heft 4, S. 527–543.10.2307/2555479Search in Google Scholar
Laursen, Keld (2015), „Revealed comparative advantage and the alternatives as measures of international specialization“, Eurasian Business Review, Jg. 5, Heft 1, S. 99–115.10.1007/s40821-015-0017-1Search in Google Scholar
Mascarenhas, Carla, Ferreira, João J. und Carla Marques (2018), „University–industry cooperation: A systematic literature review and research agenda“, Science and Public Policy, Jg. 45, Heft 5, S. 708–718.10.1093/scipol/scy003Search in Google Scholar
Noseleit, Florian und Pedro de Faria (2013), „Complementarities of internal R&D and alliances with different partner types“, Journal of Business Research, Jg. 66, Heft 10, S. 2000–2006.10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.025Search in Google Scholar
OECD (2024), Intellectual property (IP) statistics and analysis, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.Search in Google Scholar
Regalo, Steven (2024), Deepening EU-Japan-US Cooperation on Critical and Emerging Technologies, Commentary, 7 May 2024.Search in Google Scholar
Rhoades, Stephen A. (1993), „The Herfindahl-Hirschman index“, Federal Reserve Bulletin, Jg. 79, Heft 3, S. 188–189.Search in Google Scholar
ScienceBusiness (2024), South Korea joins Horizon Europe in multi-billion euro push to globalise science, News, 25 March 2024.Search in Google Scholar
Squicciarini, Mariagrazia, Dernis, Hélène und Chiara Criscuolo (2013), „Measuring patent quality: Indicators of technological and economic value“, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, Nr. 2013(3).Search in Google Scholar
Vonortas, Nicholas S. (2012), Cooperation in research and development, Springer Science & Business Media.Search in Google Scholar
Williamson, Oliver E. (1996), The mechanisms of governance, Oxford university press.10.1093/oso/9780195078244.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
WIPO (2024), International Patent Classification (IPC), World Intellectual Property Organization.Search in Google Scholar
Wydra, Sven (2020), „Measuring innovation in the bioeconomy–Conceptual discussion and empirical experiences“, Technology in Society, Jg. 61, Heft 5, S. 101242.10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101242Search in Google Scholar
© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Titelseiten
- Artikel
- Forschungskooperationen bei kritischen Technologien: Europas strategischer Balanceakt
- Vorwort Forum
- „Wie sieht die Zukunft der internationalen Klimapolitik aus?“
- Wirtschaftspolitisches Forum
- Das Pariser Abkommen droht zu scheitern. Was jetzt?
- Neue Kräfteverhältnisse auf der 29. Weltklimakonferenz. Die Zukunft der internationalen Klimapolitik nach den US-Wahlen
- Eine neue Zeitrechnung in der Klimafinanzierung
- Artikel
- Variable Sperrklauseln in Parlamenten am Beispiel der Bundestagswahl 2021
- Wachstumsbooster Arbeitsmarkt: Welchen Effekt hätte die Aktivierung des ungenutzten Arbeitskräftepotenzials in Deutschland?
Articles in the same Issue
- Titelseiten
- Artikel
- Forschungskooperationen bei kritischen Technologien: Europas strategischer Balanceakt
- Vorwort Forum
- „Wie sieht die Zukunft der internationalen Klimapolitik aus?“
- Wirtschaftspolitisches Forum
- Das Pariser Abkommen droht zu scheitern. Was jetzt?
- Neue Kräfteverhältnisse auf der 29. Weltklimakonferenz. Die Zukunft der internationalen Klimapolitik nach den US-Wahlen
- Eine neue Zeitrechnung in der Klimafinanzierung
- Artikel
- Variable Sperrklauseln in Parlamenten am Beispiel der Bundestagswahl 2021
- Wachstumsbooster Arbeitsmarkt: Welchen Effekt hätte die Aktivierung des ungenutzten Arbeitskräftepotenzials in Deutschland?