創新活動與市場價值-以台灣及南韓電子產業為例

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：243

、訪客IP：3.144.244.117

姓名

陳奐伃(Huan-Yu Chen) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

產業經濟研究所

論文名稱

創新活動與市場價值-以台灣及南韓電子產業為例
(Innovation and market value –Evidences from Taiwan and South Korea Electronic industry)

相關論文

★ 期間利差與經濟衰退之預測模型-理性預期假設之驗證	★ 台灣、美國總經月數據與台股股價指數之關聯性
★ 台灣資訊電子產業異質性及利潤率之探討	★ 中小企業案件逾期放款之預測
★ 台灣半導體產業經營效率分析－三階段資料包絡分析法之應用	★ 台灣車輛產業經濟附加價值之研究－兼論影響信通交通器材公司經濟附加價值之因素
★ 外人直接投資與研發活動之關聯性-台灣電子相關產業之實證研究	★ 消費性信用貸款授信評量模式之研究
★ 二順位房貸產品風險預警分析	★ 新產品商業化流程之個案研究–以美商3M公司為例
★ 高淨值客戶風險屬性與共同基金投資報酬率之實證研究	★ 台灣加權指數與指數股票型基金風險值之歷史模擬法分析
★ 國際油價、匯率與利率之動態關聯—VECM與VECM-GARCH之應用	★ 主流記憶體之二十年價格模式研究與驗證
★ 以DEA模型分析桃園郵局之營運績效	★ 奢侈稅實施對都會地區房價之衝擊反應分析

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

面對知識經濟的來臨，台韓兩國電子廠商為了增加自身的競爭能力，莫不增加對創新活動的投入，以獲取更高的市場經濟價值。而由相關資料可以發現，台韓兩國電子廠商對於創新活動的投入、研發與專利產出皆快速地逐年增長，可見其對技術創新的重視，故本研究將以研發費用、專利權以及專利引證數等指標，分別衡量台韓兩國廠商投入創新活動所增加的市場價值。
本研究以台韓兩國有公開交易之電子產業廠商為研究對象，採用自2000年1月1日至2008年12月31日為觀察期間。結合美國專利暨商標局(United States Patent and Trademark Office, USPTO)與Data Stream資料庫，再將所得資料，分為流量與存量變數，分別探討兩國創新活動對其公司價值的影響。
研究結果顯示，以流量變數衡量兩國廠商的市場價值，其解釋能力較存量變數為高，而南韓廠商在其規模越大時，其相對的市場價值也會越高，而台灣廠商並無這種明顯的區別，且由模型中指出，以高科技著稱的台韓兩國電子廠商，在投入創新活動後，的確會增加廠商自身的價值。

摘要(英)

Facing the era of knowledge-based economy, Taiwan and South Korea electronics manufacturers all increase the investment in innovation activities, in order to obtain a higher market value and increase their competitive ability.
According to relevant researches, the electronic manufacturers in both Taiwan and South Korea are increasing their investment in innovation activities, R&D and patent output rapidly in recent years. This phenomenon shows the importance of technology innovation. In this study, we use the R&D expense, the number of patents and patent citations as innovation indicators. By using these indicators, we measure the market value that creates from the investment in innovation activities in Taiwan and Korean firms.
In this study, we select the electronic firms that offer publicly trading system in Taiwan and South Korea as research sample. And the observation period is from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2008. We combined the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the Data Stream database to obtain our raw data. Then we divided these data into flow and stock variables to compare the market value between Taiwan and South Korea.
The results show that the explanatory power of flow variables is higher than the stock variable when measuring the market value in Taiwan and South Korea. The empirical result also indicates that the bigger firms will have higher market value in South Korea; whereas, Taiwanese firms did not show this tendency. From the model, we find that the investment in innovation will certainly leads to higher market value in electronic firms in Taiwan and South Korea.

關鍵字(中)

★ 市場價值
★ 研究發展
★ 專利

關鍵字(英)

★ R&
★ D
★ Patent
★ Market Value

論文目次

中文摘要……………………………………………………………i
Abstract………………………………………………………ii
謝辭……………………………………………………………iii
目錄……………………………………………………………iv
表目錄……………………………………………………………vi
圖目錄……………………………………………………………vii
第一章緒論……………………………………………………………1
1-1研究背景及動機………………………………………………………………………1
1-2研究目的………………………………………………………………………………4
1-3研究架構與流程…………………………………………………………… 5
第二章文獻回顧與理論基礎……………………………………………………………7
2-1 公司市場價值的估算……………………………………………………………7
2-2 有關專利權的研究文獻 …………………………………………………………8
2-2-1 以不同專利系統或不同的國家做為研究的標的……………………8
2-2-2 以不同的專利政策做為研究的標的………………………………………9
2-2-3 以不同的時間點做為研究的標的………………………………………10
2-2-4 探討專利引證數之相關研究………………………………………11
第三章理論與實證模型………………………………………………………14
3-1廠商市場價值估計之理論模型………………………………………14
3-2 建構知識資本的存量………………………………………………………16
3-3 計算修正後的專利引證數………………………………………………18
第四章資料來源與變數說明…………………………………………………20
4-1 資料來源 …………………………………………………………………20
4-2 變數定義與資料基本統計量 ……………………………………………22
4-2-1 台韓兩國變數定義與預期影響……………………………………22
4-2-2 台韓兩國資料狀態………………………………………………………30
4-3 變數交叉分析後的基本統計量………………………………………33
第五章實證結果………………………………………38
5-1 流量估計模型………………………………………38
5-2 存量估計模型………………………………………46
5-3 效率評估模型 ……………………………………61
第六章結論……………………………………………………70
6-1 結論與意義……………………………………………70
6-2 研究限制與未來展望……………………………71
參考文獻……………………………………………………………………72
(一) 英文部份………………………………………………72
(二) 中文部份………………………………………………75
(三) 網站部份………………………………………………76
附錄……………………………………………………………77

參考文獻

(1) Choung, J. Y. (1998) “ Patterns of innovation in Korea and Taiwan. ”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, VOL. 45, NO. 4.
(2) Cockburn, I. and Zvi G. (1988). “ Industry Effects and Appropriability Measures in the Stock Market's Valuation of R&D and Patents, ”The American Economic Review, Vol. 78, No. 2.
(3) Gold, B. , (1977), Research, Technological Change and Economic Analysis, Lexington Books, Lexington, Mass.
(4) Goto, A. and K Motohashi, 2007. "Construction of a Japanese Patent Database and a first look at Japanese patenting activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1431-1442, November.
(5) Greenhalgh , C. and M. Rogers, (2006). “The value of innovation: The interaction of competition, R&D and IP.” Research Policy, 35, 562-580
(6) Griliches, Z. ,(1980), “Returns to Research and Development Expenditures in the Private Sector.”In Kendrick, J. W., and B. N. Vaccara (eds.), New Developments in ProductivityMeasurement and Analysis, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 419-454.
(7) Griliches, Z. ,(1981), "Market value, R&D, and patents", Economic Letters, Vol. 7 pp.183-7.
(8) Hall, B. H, G. Thoma. and S. Torrisi, (2006)” The market value of patents and R&D: Evidence from European firms”
(9) Hall, B. H. , (1993), “The Stock Market Valuation of R&D Investment during the 1980s. ”American Economic Review 83: 259-64.
(10) Hall, B. H. , (2000), “ Innovation and market value.” In R. Barrell, G. Mason and M.O’Mahoney (eds.), Productivity, Innovation, and Economic Performance.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 177-198.
(11) Hall, B. H. , “The Use and Value of IP Rights. ”,(2009)Prepared for the UK IP Ministerial Forum on the Economic Value of Intellectual Property,.
(12) Hall, B. H. and M. MacGarvie. , (2006). “The Private Value of Software Patents,” Cambridge,MA: NBER Working Paper No. 12195, revised 2008.
(13) Hall, B. H. and. R. Oriani (2006), “Does the market value R&D investment by European firms? Evidence from a panel of manufacturing firms in France, Germany.” International Journal of Industrial Organization 24: 971-993.
(14) Hall, B. H., A. B. Jaffe, and M. Trajtenberg (2000). "Market Value and Patent Citations: A First Look," NBER Working Papers 7741.
(15) Hall, B. H., A. B. Jaffe, and M. Trajtenberg (2005), “Market Value and Patent Citations”.Rand Journal of Economics 36, 16-38.
(16) Hall, B. H., G. L. D. Thoma and S. Torrisi, (2007). “ The Market Value of Patents and R&D: Evidence from European Firms . ” Cambridge, MA: NBER Working Paper No.13428.
(17) Hall, B. H.,. A. B. Jaffe, and. M Trajtenberg , (2001), “The NBER Patent Citations Data File:Lessons, Insights, and Methodological Tools.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 8498 (October).
(18) Hirschey, M. (1982). “Intangible Capital Aspects of Advertising and R & D Expenditures. ” The Journal of Industrial Economics, 30(4), 375-390.
(19) Hu, A.G.Z. and A. B. Jaffe (2001) “Patent citations and international knowledge flow : the cases of Korea and Taiwan”. NBER Working Paper 8528.
(20) Jaffe, A. B. (1986). "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
(21) Janis, M. D. (2002) “Patent Abolitionism,” Berkeley Technology Law Journal 899.
(22) Lo, S. and D. Sutthiphisal (2009), “Does it Matter Who Has the Right to Patent: First-to-inventor First-to-file? Lessons From Canada. ” NBER Working Paper No. 14926.
(23) Mairesse, J. (1991), “R&D and productivity: a survey of econometric studies at the firm level.” STI Review (OECD) 8: 9-46.
(24) Nagaoka, S. (2006), “R&D and market value of Japanese firms in the 1990s” J. Japanese Int. Economies 20, P155–176.
(25) Salinger, M. A. (1984) “Tobin's q, Unionization, and the Concentration Profits Relationship ,” The RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 159-170.
(26) Trajtenberg, M. (1990). "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," The RAND Journal of Economics ,vol. 21(1), pages 172-187.
(27) Wernerfelt, B. and C. A. Montgomery (1988) “Tobin's q and the Importance of Focus in Firm Performance, ” The American Economic Review, Vol. 78, No. 1, pp. 246-250.
(28) Wildasin, DE. ,(1984), “The q Theory of Investment with Many Capital Goods. ”, The American Economic Review, Vol. 74, No. 1, pp. 203-210.
(29) Yang CH, JR Chen (2003) “Innovation and Market Value in Newly-Industrialized Countries: The Case of Taiwanese Electronics Firms”, Asian Economic Journal , Vol.17 No. 2, pp 205-220
(30) 謝中琮，2002年12月，「台灣、日本、南韓產業科技競爭力之比較探討」，行政院經濟建設委員會研究報告。
(31) 吳家興、李秋錦、陳之華、陳美菊、謝學如， 2004年，「亞洲金融風暴後台韓經濟表現之比較」，經濟研究期刊第6期頁129-160。
(32) 鄭秀玲、張淑卿，2005年，「專利引證和國際知識外溢：以電子業爲例」，經濟論文叢刊33卷第1期。
(33) 洪志勳，「美國專利法修法趨勢及現況」，科技法律透析，2007年4月，第14～19頁。

指導教授

陳忠榮(Jong-Rong Chen)

審核日期

2010-7-13

推文