Comparing nanotechnology landscapes in the US and China: a patent analysis perspective

The United States (US) and the People’s Republic of China (China) have the most patents in nanotechnology in their own depositories and overall in the international depositories. This paper compares nanotechnology landscapes between 2001 and 2017 as reflected in the United States Patent and Trademar...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of nanoparticle research : an interdisciplinary forum for nanoscale science and technology 2019-08, Vol.21 (8), p.1-20, Article 180
Main Authors: Wu, Lanfen, Zhu, Hongyi, Chen, Hsinchun, Roco, Mihail C.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Characterization and Evaluation of Materials
Chemistry and Materials Science
Collaboration
Inorganic Chemistry
Intellectual property
International trade
Landscape
Lasers
Longitude
Marketing
Markets
Materials Science
Nanotechnology
Optical Devices
Optics
Parameter identification
Perspectives
Photonics
Physical Chemistry
Players
Research facilities
Social networks
Social organization
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The United States (US) and the People’s Republic of China (China) have the most patents in nanotechnology in their own depositories and overall in the international depositories. This paper compares nanotechnology landscapes between 2001 and 2017 as reflected in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA). It presents the evolution of nanotechnology patent development in the US and China, the differences between nanotechnology topics addressed in the USPTO and CNIPA patents, key players in nanotechnology fields in both domestic and foreign markets, and the player collaboration patterns. Bibliographic, content, and social network analyses are used. The longitudinal changes of granted patents and ranked countries, patent families, technology fields, and key players in domestic and overseas markets are outlined. Collaboration networks of assignees and the influential players have been identified based on network parameters. Results show that the US market attracts more international collaborations and has a higher level of knowledge exchange and resource sharing than the Chinese market. Companies play a vital role with regard to US nanotechnology development, resulting in more within-industry collaborations. In contrast, universities and research institutes are the dominant contributors to China’s nanotechnology development, leading to more academia-industry collaborations in China’s market.
ISSN:1388-0764
1572-896X
DOI:10.1007/s11051-019-4608-0