Technology development in China
and India-a comparative evaluation
We found that both China and India have
achieved very high growth rates in patents granted with some resident research
between 1992 and 2007 (24.93 and 22.18 percent per annum, respectively). Among
such patents, both these countries had a high percentage of foreign-owned and
low percentage of joint ownership of patents. Also, we detected a clear
polarization in the composition of research teams in both China and India –
all-Chinese researcher teams used mostly for China-owned and similarly all-Indian
researcher teams used mostly for India-owned patents. In both countries international
researcher teams have largely been used only for foreign and jointly owned
patents. We detect that corporations have become much more active in recent years
in patenting and MNCs have led the local companies in patent development across
many sectors.
Although there are some similarities as
mentioned above, we also detected some significant differences in the Chinese
and Indian pursuit of patent development. About 30 to 35 percent of all patents
developed with some Chinese research input are design patents – the rest being
utility patents. For India almost all such patents – more than 95 percent – are
utility patents. In general, utility patents could be considered more valuable
as they represent knowledge enhancements and process enhancements vis-a` -vis works of art, part design, module design and product
design having possible commercial value that are registered as design patents.
Design patents are generally
relevant only for manufacturing
organizations and can be developed by designers and others with hands-on
experience with the part, module or product. These may not require huge investments
in R&D but represent codification of the work of designers for immediate or
future use. However, if utility patents are considered and particularly company
owned utility patents, then India’s performance looks much better than revealed
by the trend in total patents.
The composition of the patents granted
among the different technology trajectories is also quite different. We divided
all the patents granted into four major technology trajectories – namely
mechanical, electrical, chemical and ICT. We found a clear dominance along the
mechanical trajectory among the patents developed in China, while for India a similar dominance has
been along the chemical trajectory that includes pharmaceuticals and
biotechnology. Another interesting finding is the growing importance of patents
developed along the ICT trajectory in both China and India, particularly in the
last few years. This convergence along the ICT trajectory is likely to
strengthen further as it rides over the offshoring trend. Overall, China has a wider
coverage of all four technology trajectories and particularly has done very
well in ICT patents in recent years.
While companies have been the major drivers
of patent development in both China and India, the second largest segment is
constituted by individuals in China and by institutes in India. Universities
seem to have had rather low involvement in the patent development process in
both China and India. All-Chinese research teams have been very common in China
while all-Indian teams have been less common in India. Although international
research teams have been relatively less common in China, China has been able
to establish links with researchers from a larger range of collaborating
countries – both developed and developing. USA has been a major assignee
country for all patents developed in China and India. China has developed a
wider research network in terms of links with other countries although its strongest links are
with US and lately with Taiwan. India has strong links with US. We also found
that China has recently become a major beneficiary from Taiwanese offshoring of
patent development. An important finding of this study is that in both China
and India, a greater percentage of foreign-owned patents are being developed by
all-resident researcher teams. Although the trends are similar for India, the
percentages are much smaller. Chinese researchers seem to have matured more than
their Indian counterparts. This portrays a gradual maturing of resident
researcher capability and an important benefit for the host countries. China
has emerged ahead of India in terms of its patent development as well as in the
internationalization of its patent development in terms of the range of
countries that have used Chinese researchers. Simultaneously, its researchers
have matured more and all-Chinese researcher teams develop currently more than
two-thirds of its foreign and jointly owned patents. There are major cultural,
political, societal and economic differences between China and India and some
of these may have contributed to the observed differences in patent development
in these two countries. For example, strong preference for personal and avoidance
of impersonal ties to contain transaction costs flows from specific Confucian values
and is a common feature of many Chinese firms’ behavior. This cultural trait may have been instrumental in some
Taiwanese firms establishing their R&D facilities in China. Apparently, the
integration of Hong Kong SAR into China has also benefited it immensely in
patent development, particularly in the last decade of the previous century. In
India’s case the democratic safety valves have quite often weakened as well
as slowed down the implementation of many a
new policy.
