Difference Across Indutries of Innovation Appropriability Mechanism's Effectiveness and Classification

기술혁신 보상확보 메커니즘 효과성의 산업별 차이와 유형

  • 박성택 (충북대학교 경영정보학과 BK21 플러스 사업팀) ;
  • 김영기 (충북대학교 경영정보학과)
  • Received : 2014.03.20
  • Accepted : 2014.06.20
  • Published : 2014.06.28


In devising technological innovation strategies and implementing successful technological innovation, some of the most important factors may be to determine whether to protect technological innovation and to choose how to protect it. Traditionally, technological innovation has been emphasized to obtain compensation as much as possible for innovation in terms of economics and strategy. However, it can be regarded as a very complicated problem to determine such a protection and its level. Generally speaking, enterprises have some common mechanisms to secure compensation for technological innovation, which are known to be patents, secrecy and lead time advantage. From the standpoint of enterprises, it is very important what strategies should be devised to secure profits for technological innovation. According to some domestic and oversea research results revealed that specific patents are not the best way to Appropriability for technological innovation, while also implying that there exist several different kinds of mechanisms to Appropriability for technological innovation in each industry. Nevertheless, since it shouldn't be ignored that most of the researches have overlooked the characteristics of Korean enterprises and industrial differences, this study intends to clarify the effectiveness of technological innovation Appropriability mechanisms reflecting actual circumstances and industrial characteristics in Korea while classifying them. Also The questionnaires and delphi method used in this study. As the result of analysis, in the entire industries, the priorities turned out to be in the order of Superior sales and service efforts, Leadtime advantage, Complementary manufacturing.


Appropriability Mechanism;Innovation;Industry;Patent;R&D


Supported by : 한국연구재단


  1. Miller, W.L., Morris, L., Fourth Generation R&D: Managing Knowledge, Technology and Innovation. 1st Edition. John Wiley and Sons, New York, USA, 1999.
  2. Hwan Joo Seo, Do Stronger Patents Induce More Innovation? Evidence from the EU Countries, Journal of EU Studies, Vol 9, No 2, EUSA-Korea, pp. 1-19, 2004.
  3. Jaffe, A. B., The U.S. Patent System in Transition: Policy Innovation and the Innovation Process, Working Paper, No. 7280, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1999.
  4. Mansfield, E., S. Mark and W. Samuel, Imitation Costs and Patents: An Empirical Study, The Economic Journal, Vol. 91, pp. 907-918, 1981.
  5. Schewe, G. Kein Schutz vor Imitation: Eine empirische Untersuchung zum Paradigma des Markteintrittsbarrieren-Konzeptes unter besonderer Beachtung des Patentschutzes', in: Schmalenbachs Zeitschrift fur betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung, Vol. 45, pp. 344-360, 1993.
  6. Levin, R.C., A.K. Klevorick, R.R. Nelsonand S.G. Winter, Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Vol. 3, pp. 783-820, 1987.
  7. Wyatt, S., G. Bertinand K. Pavitt, Patents and Multinational corporations : Results from Questionnaires, World Patent Information, Vol. 7, No 3, pp. 196-212, 1985.
  8. Konig, H. and G. Licht, Patens, R&D and Innovation. Evidence from the Manheim Innovation Panel, Ifo-Studien, Vol. 41, 1995, pp. 521-545.
  9. Arundel, The Relative Effectiveness of Patents and Secrecy for Appropriation, Research Policy, Vol. 30, pp. 611-624, 2001.
  10. Cohen, Wesley M., Richard R. Nelson and John P. Walsh, Protecting their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability conditions and why U.S. Manufacturing firms patent(or Not), Working Paper, No. 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2000.
  11. S. J Lee, S.T Park, Y.K Kim, Appropriability Mechanism strategy for Domestic IT Manufacturing Companies, Vol 11, No 11, pp. 233-242, 2013.
  12. S.T Park, S.J Lee, S.H Jung Y.K Kim., A Study of the Secure Plan of Profit in R&D: Focusing on Cellular Phone Parts Industry, 28, IHSS, pp. 139-162, 2010.
  13. Thumm, N. Research and Patenting in Biotechnology: A Survey in Switzerland, Bern: Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property, Report No. 1, 2003.
  14. Hussinger, K. Is Silence Golden? Patents versus Secrecy at the Firm Level, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Vol 15, No 8, pp. 735-752, 2006.
  15. Gonzalez-Alvarez, Mariano Nieto-Antolin. Appropriability of innovation results: An empirical study in Spanish manufacturing firm, Technovation, Vol 27, No 5, pp. 280-295, 2007.
  16. Sungung Lee, A Study on the usefulness of Delphi method in technological forecasting, doctorate thesis, Chonbuk National University, 1987.
  17. HyeJin Bae, Study on the Priority of Virtual Reality game elements using Delphi and AHP : Focused on the FPS games, master's thesis, Inje University, 2003.
  18. Youngki Kim, Seongtaek Park, Seungjun Lee. Selection of important factors for Patent Valuation using Delphi Method, Entrue Journal of Information Technology, Vol 9 No 1, pp. 7-17, 2010

Cited by

  1. Establishing the importance weight of appropriability mechanism by using AHP: the case of the China’s electronic industry vol.19, pp.3, 2016,