中國大學持有專利之合著研究

Abstract

本研究以1987至2014年期間收錄於USPTO資料庫之中國大學持有專利為研究樣本，展開專利權人合著分析與發明人合著分析，以全面瞭解中國大學之創新商業化合作與技術研發合作趨勢。合著分析從總體、地域層級和機構層級三個層面展開：透過整體層面之分析，據以了解合著強度、規模、品質及其趨勢變化；透過地域層級之分析，掌握合著專利涉及之地域合著類型、合著專利之省份分佈以及主要大學之地域合著模式；透過機構層面之分析，了解大學之機構合著類型、合著機構以及大學學術發明人在研發團隊中扮演之角色。最後，本研究對專利權人合著及發明人合著進行對比分析，并將兩個合著維度相結合，提出大學專利技術合作類型模型，以探究大學之技術合作模式。 研究結果顯示1987年至2014年期間，中國大學專利權人合著與發明人合著專利呈現增長，參與合著的大學數增加，顯示大學愈加積極參與技術合作。大學專利權人合著專利數共計1134件，合著率為63%，平均專利權人數為2.049；大學發明人合著專利共計1715件，合著率為95.28%，平均發明人數為4.777，顯示大學發明人合著強度與規模高於專利權人合著。中國大學持有專利之被引次數顯著高於非大學持有專利，而兩類大學合著專利被引次數均低於對應的非合著專利，但差異並未達到顯著。 地域合著分析顯示，大學專利權人合著專利中超過70%是國際合著專利，約有20%是省內合著專利，而跨省合著專利不足10%。進一步檢視發現清華大學國際專利權人合著專利數與國際合著率相當高，而其他大學則是以省內合著與跨省合著為主。大學發明人合著專利中超過90%是省內合著專利，且清華大學與其他大學均以省內合著為主。這顯示中國大學之技術研發合作相當在地化，易受地理距離之限制，而大學技術商業化合作則受地理距離限制相對較小。在省份分佈方面，北京是大學專利權人合著與發明人合著之地域中心，江蘇與上海是活躍省份。 機構合著分析顯示，大學專利權人合著專利中超過98%是大學與非大學機構共同持有的跨類機構合著專利，其中以產學專利權人合著專利佔絕大多數，說明企業是中國大學技術商業化合作最主要的對象。對合著企業之屬性進行細分，發現產學合著專利中大學與外資企業合著專利佔73.73%，其次是大學衍生企業（14.47%）與私營企業（9.68%）。進一步分析發現大學之企業合著者類型存在很大差異，清華大學以外資企業為主要合著對象，北京大學以大學衍生企業為主要合著對象，而其他大學多以私營企業為主要合著對象。大學發明人合著方面，約有80%為組織內合著專利，約20%為跨類機構合著專利，同類機構合著專利相當少，清華大學與其他大學均以組織內合著為主，顯示大學之技術合作主要發生於大學內部學術發明人之間。對學術發明人進行分析，發現大學發明人合著專利研發團隊中學術發明人佔比超過90%，學術發明人為第一發明人的專利佔總發明人合著專利之比接近95%，顯示學術發明人在大學專利合作研發團隊中參與程度高，佔居重要領導地位。 將專利權人合著與發明人合著兩個維度相結合，本研究提出將大學持有專利分為：深度合作專利、純技術商業化合作專利、純技術研發合作專利、純大學專利四類。統計大學持有專利中超過40%為純商業合作專利，超過35%為純大學專利，約有20%為深度合作專利，而純技術合作專利僅有2件。進一步檢視發現，清華大學超過70%的專利均是純商業化合作關係，其最主要的純商業化合作對象是台灣鴻海科技。而其他大學超過70%是純大學專利，自主研發利用技術的傾向較高。

The primary purpose of this study is to investigate the innovation collaboration of Chinese universities by patent co-authorship analysis. Chinese university-owned patents issued between 1987 and 2014 in USPTO were retrieved as studying subjects. The assignee and inventor fields of patent were used for co-authorship analysis, with the former one reflect technological commercial collaboration and the later one reflect technological inventive collaboration. The study conducted co-assigneement and co-inventorship analysis from broad level, the geographic level and the institution level. In addition, it made a comparative analysis of university co-assigned patent and co-invented patent, and proposed a model of technical cooperation to discuss the cooperate patterns of Chinese universities. The major findings of the study are summarized as follows. The period of 1987 to 2014 has seen a surge in the number of university co-assigneed patents and co-invented patents, as well as the number of universities which took part in co-patenting. There were 1134 university co-assigneed patents and 1715 university co-invented patents in total, accounting for 63% and 95.28% of Chinese university-owned patents respectively. The average number of assignees of university co-assignee patents was 2.049 while the average number of inventors of university co-invented patents was 4.477. It showed that the collaboration intensity and size of co-inventorship were larger than those of co-assigneement. The cited times of Chinese university-owned patents was significantly higher than that of non-university-owned patents, however the cited times of co-assigneed patents and co-invented patents were lower than that of non-co-assigneed patents and non-co-invented patents. More than 70% of university co-assigneed patents were international collaborative patents, about 20% were intra-regional collaborative patents and less than 10% were inter-regional collaborative patents. The results showed that most co-assigneed patents of Tsinghua University were international co-assigneed patents, while most co-assigneed patents of other universities were intra-regional or inter-regional co-assigneed patents. More than 90% of university co-invented patents were intra-regional collaborative patent, and both of Tsinghua University and other university had considerable propensity of intra-regional co-invention. It means that technical inventive collaboration of universities was more likely to be restricted by distance than technical commercial collaboration. Beijing was the center of university co-patenting network; Jiangsu and Shanghai were active provinces in the network. More than 98% of university co-assigneed patents were cross-institutional collaborative patents, nearly all of which were university-industry co-assigneed patents. Patents co-assigneed by university and foreign company made up the highest percentage of university-industry co-assigneed patents (73.73%). Further analysis indicated that different universities have diverse industry collaborators: Tsinghua University had a close co-assignee relationship with foreign companies, Peking University with university spin-offs, and most other universities with personal companies. More than 80% of university co-invented patents were within-institutional collaborative patents, and both of Tsinghua University and the other universities had considerable propensity of within-institutional co-invention. Academic inventors played a significant role in university innovative team since more than 90% of inventors of university co-invented patents were academic inventors, and more than 95% of university co-invented patents list academic inventor as the first inventor. Combing co-assignment analysis and co-inventship analysis, the study proposed a technical collaboration model and classify university patents into four groups: deep collaborative patent, commercial collaborative patent, inventive collaborative patent and pure university patent. Statistics illustrated that more than 40% of university-owned patents were commercial collaborative patents, more than 35% were pure university patents, and nearly 20% were deep collaborative patents. More than 70% of patents owned by Tsinghua University were commercial collaborative patent, most of which were collaborated with Hon Hai Technology Group. On the other hand, more than 70% of patents owned by the other universities were pure university patents, indicating that they tended to invent and utilize patent by themselves.